Hopefully my final 2-cents... at a roadside meeting with a state trooper, "Ignorance of the law does not excuse you from responsibility." Still, "innocent" plagiarism is an opportunity for education but does not absolve one from guilt nor responsibility.
Scott --- Scott Ruhren, Ph.D. Senior Director of Conservation Audubon Society of Rhode Island 12 Sanderson Road Smithfield, RI 02917-2600 401-949-5454 -----Original Message----- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Charles Welden Sent: Wednesday, October 04, 2006 12:36 PM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: On Plagiarism As I understand it, the reason for this is that in science the =20 precise words the original author used are not considered important, =20 but the ideas are. So you express the ideas in your own words and =20 give credit to their author. Often you can state the ideas in a way =20 more immediately relevant to the matter at hand, and perhaps more =20 economically. I don't think that one is trying to avoid plagiarism by =20= changing the wording; the important thing is to give credit where =20 credit is due. In the humanities, especially literature and drama =20 perhaps, the author's original words may be as important as, or more =20 important than, the idea expressed ("To be or not to be" - =20 Shakespeare). Indeed the wording may be the subject of discussion. So =20= one would quote verbatim, with attribution. Again, the crucial point =20 is to give due credit to the originator. Charles On Oct 4, 2006, at 9:04 AM, Amartya Saha wrote: > Hello all, > for quite some time i have had some confusion over quoting =20 > literature, and > perhaps this plagiarism thread could offer some ideas.. > > If one were to quote a paper, i have heard that one is NOT supposed =20= > to directly > lift a sentence or para or any parts thereof, even though the paper =20= > would be > quoted as a reference. Instead, one has to paraphrase the same in =20 > one's own > words. > Is this true ? If so, the logic fails me. How does it matter if one =20= > rephrases > the sentence, when the idea or result has been copied ( and =20 > referenced of > course ). > > Thanks for any views > amartya > > > > Quoting Abraham de Alba <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> Dear Ecologgers: >> >> It might seem odd to say this, but the problem is >> that in our education (as in yours) knowledge has been >> at the top, NOT values (or ethics for that matter). >> >> But then again, japanese (that supposebly do stress >> values before knowledge) also have been known to trip >> on plagiarism. >> >> So I guess a simple problem has complex social >> solutions (nothing new there). >> >> >> >> >> <P>Abraham de Alba Avila</P> >> <P>Terrestrial Plant Ecology</P> >> <P>INIFAP-Ags</P> >> <P> Ap. postal 20,</P> >> <P> Pabell=F3n Arteaga, 20660</P> >> <P> Aguascalientes, MEXICO</P> >> <P> Tel: (465) 95-801-67, & 801-86 ext. 118, FAX ext 102 >> alternate: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> cel: 449-157-7070</P> >> >> __________________________________________________ >> Do You Yahoo!? >> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >> http://mail.yahoo.com >> Charles Welden Department of Biology Southern Oregon University Ashland, OR 97520 USA 541-552-6868 (voice) 541-552-6415 (fax) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
