Accessibility View

[LLA] Set 19 —
Paraphrasing
Definition
Paraphrasing is the use of another’s ideas to enhance your own work. In a
paraphrase, you rewrite in your own words the ideas taken from the source.
Paraphrases avoid excessive reliance on quotations and demonstrate that you
understand the source author’s argument. A paraphrase always has a different
sentence structure and word choice. When done well, it is much more concise than
the original.

Good writers signal paraphrases through clauses such as “Werner Sollors, in

Beyond Ethnicity, argues that….” These phrases indicate the source of the
paraphrase and help integrate the borrowed ideas into your own work. Because a
paraphrase is your restatement of a borrowed idea, it is not set within quotation
marks. Though the ideas may be borrowed, your writing must be original; simply
changing a few words or rearranging words or sentences is not paraphrasing. In
fact, it is plagiarism, a severe academic offense that can result in expulsion from
the university.

How do I paraphrase?
Summary moves much further than paraphrase from point-by-point translation.
When you summarize a passage, you need first to absorb the meaning and then to
capture in your own words the most important elements from the original passage.
A summary is necessarily shorter than a paraphrase. Whenever you paraphrase,
remember these two points:

 You must provide a reference.

 The paraphrase must be entirely in your own words. You must do more than
merely substitute phrases here and there. You must also completely alter the
sentence structure.

It can be difficult to find new words for an idea that is already well expressed. The
following strategy will make the job of paraphrasing a lot easier:

• When you are at the note-taking stage, and you come across a passage that may
be useful for your essay, do not copy the passage verbatim unless you think you
will want to quote it.

• If you think you will want to paraphrase the passage, make a note only of the
author's basic point. You do not even need to use full sentences.

• In your note, you should already be translating the language of the original into
your own words. What matters is that you capture the original idea.

• Make sure to include the page number of the original passage so that you can
make a proper reference later on.

When it comes time to write the paper, rely on your notes rather than on the
author's work. You will find it much easier to avoid borrowing from the original
passage because you will not have recently seen it. Follow this simple sequence:

• Convert the ideas from your notes into full sentences.

• Provide a reference.

• Go back to the original to ensure that (a) your paraphrase is accurate and (b) you
have truly said things in your own words.

Examples
Let us look at examples of illegitimate and legitimate paraphrase. The original
passage is from Oliver Sacks' essay "An Anthropologist on Mars":

The cause of autism has also been a matter of dispute. Its incidence is about
one in a thousand, and it occurs throughout the world, its features
remarkably consistent even in extremely different cultures. It is often not
recognized in the first year of life, but tends to become obvious in the second
or third year. Though Asperger regarded it as a biological defect of affective
contact—innate, inborn, analogous to a physical or intellectual defect—
Kanner tended to view it as a psychogenic disorder, a reflection of bad
parenting, and most especially of a chillingly remote, often professional,
"refrigerator mother." At this time, autism was often regarded as "defensive"
in nature, or confused with childhood schizophrenia. A whole generation of
parents—mothers, particularly—were made to feel guilty for the autism of
their children.

What follows is an example of illegitimate paraphrase:

The cause of the condition autism has been disputed. It occurs in

approximately one in a thousand children, and it exists in all parts of the
world, its characteristics strikingly similar in vastly differing cultures. The
condition is often not noticeable in the child's first year, yet it becomes more
apparent as the child reaches the ages of two or three. Although Asperger saw
the condition as a biological defect of the emotions that was inborn and
therefore similar to a physical defect, Kanner saw it as psychological in origin,
as reflecting poor parenting and particularly a frigidly distant mother. During
this period, autism was often seen as a defense mechanism, or it was
misdiagnosed as childhood schizophrenia. An entire generation of mothers
and fathers (but especially mothers) were made to feel responsible for their
offspring's autism (Sacks 247-48).

Most of these sentences do little more than substitute one phrase for another.
An additional problem with this passage is that the only citation occurs at the
very end of the last sentence in the paragraph. The reader might be misled
into thinking that the earlier sentences were not also indebted to Sacks' essay.

The following represents a legitimate paraphrase of the original passage:

In "An Anthropologist on Mars," Sacks lists some of the known facts about
autism. We know, for example, that the condition occurs in roughly one out of
every thousand children. We also know that the characteristics of autism do
not vary from one culture to the next. And we know that the condition is
difficult to diagnose until the child has entered its second or third year of life.
As Sacks points out, often a child who goes on to develop autism will still
appear perfectly normal at the age of one (247).

Sacks observes, however, that researchers have had a hard time agreeing on
the causes of autism. He sketches the diametrically opposed positions of
Asperger and Kanner. On the one hand, Asperger saw the condition as
representing a constitutional defect in the child's ability to make meaningful
emotional contact with the external world. On the other hand, Kanner
regarded autism as a consequence of harmful childrearing practices. For
many years confusion about this condition reigned. One unfortunate
consequence of this confusion, Sacks suggests, was the burden of guilt imposed
on so many parents for their child's condition (247-448).

Notice that this passage makes explicit right from the beginning that the ideas
belong to Sacks, and the passage's indebtedness to him is signaled in more than one
place. The single parenthetical note at the end of each paragraph is therefore all the
citation that is needed. The inclusion of explicit references to Sacks not only makes
the job of providing citations easier. It also strengthens the passage by clarifying
the source of its facts and ideas. And it adds an analytical dimension to the
paragraph: the passage doesn't just reiterate the points in Sacks' passage but lays
out the structure of his argument. Note that the paraphrase splits the original into
two separate paragraphs to accentuate the two-part structure of Sacks' argument.
Finally, notice that not all the details from the original passage are included in the
paraphrase.
The Wrong Way to
Paraphrase
#1: failure to cite source
Original Passage: “They desire, for example, virtue and the absence of vice, no
less really than pleasure and the absence of pain.”

Source: Mill, John Stuart. “Utilitarianism.” On Liberty and Other Essays. New
York: Oxford University Press, 1998. Quote is from page 169.

Paraphrase: People want morality just as much as they want happiness.

Explanation: This paraphrase is an accurate summary of the above passage, but is

incorrectly paraphrased because it does not cite the source of its main ideas. The
author of this paraphrase has plagiarized the ideas of another.

#2: lack of significant rewording

Original Passage: “To the young American architects who made the pilgrimage,
the most dazzling figure of all was Walter Gropius, founder of the Bauhaus School.
Gropius opened the Bauhaus in Weimar, the German capital, in 1919. It was more
than a school; it was a commune, a spiritual movement, a radical approach to art in
all its forms, a philosophical center comparable to the Garden of Epicurus.”

Source: Wolfe, Tom. From Bauhaus to Our House. New York: Farrar Straus
Giroux, 1981. Quote is from page 10.

Paraphrase: As Tom Wolfe notes, to young American architects who went to

Germany, the most dazzling figure was Walter Gropius, founder of the Bauhaus
School (10). Gropius opened the Bauhaus in the German capital of Weimar in
1919. It was, however, more than a school; it was a commune, a spiritual
movement, a philosophical center like the Garden of Epicurus.
Explanation: This excerpt is not a paraphrase at all; it is too similar to the source.
Rather than summarizing the ideas, it uses the same words and structure as the
original. This author has committed plagiarism by misrepresenting another’s work
as his own.

The Right Way to

Paraphrase
Original Passage: “The Republican Convention of 1860, which adopted planks
calling for a tariff, internal improvements, a Pacific railroad and a homestead law,
is sometimes seen as a symbol of Whig triumph within the party. A closer look,
however, indicates that the Whig’s triumph within the party was of a very tentative
nature.”

Source: Foner, Eric. Free Soil, Free Labor, Free Men: The Ideology of the
Republican Party Before the Civil War. New York: Oxford University Press, 1970.
Quote is from page 175.

Paraphrase: Contrary to many historians, Eric Foner argues that the Republican
platform of

1860 should not be understood as an indication of Whig dominance of the party

(175).

Explanation: This paraphrase is properly cited and represents an accurate and

concise summary of the source.

Proper citation
Remember that paraphrases, just like direct quotations, must be cited. While the
words may be your own, the ideas are still borrowed, and you must acknowledge
your source. Consult your instructor, a consultant, a handout on documentation, or
a relevant handbook if you have questions about how to cite your sources.

Note-taking and
paraphrasing
Good note-taking can improve your paraphrases. When taking notes, do not copy
words from a source unless you intend to quote that source. Rather, read carefully,
think, and then write, in your own words, the main ideas you have read. Be sure to
note the source for proper citation. Skipping the note-taking step and paraphrasing
directly from a source into your draft limits your ability to think through the ideas
and increases the risk that you will commit negligent plagiarism. Use note taking
to develop and organize your own ideas.

Paraphrase v. summary
When should I paraphrase, and when
should I summarize?
To paraphrase means to restate someone else’s ideas in your own language at
roughly the same level of detail. To summarize means to distill or reduce the most
essential points of someone else’s work into a shorter form. Along with quotation,
paraphrase and summary provide the main tools for integrating your sources into
your papers. When choosing which to use, consider first your discipline and the
type of writing in which you are engaged. For example, literature reviews in
science reports rely almost exclusively on summary. Argumentative essays, by
contrast, rely on all three tools.

Paraphrase and summary are indispensable tools in essay writing, argumentative

papers, etc. because they allow you to include other people's ideas without
cluttering up your essay with quotations. These techniques help you take greater
control of your writing. Consider using and relying on either tool when an idea
from one of your sources is important to your essay but the wording is not. Space
limitations may guide you in your choice. But above all, think about how much of
the detail from your source is relevant to your argument. If all your reader needs to
know is the bare bones, then summarize.

Allow yourself the space to develop ideas.

Ultimately, though paraphrase and summary are often preferable to quotation, do
not rely too heavily on them, either. Your ideas are what matter most. Allow
yourself the space to develop those ideas.