The legitimate use of sources has some simple guidelines. First, all words taken from a sources must be set off in quotation marks or indented in block form (see the quotation cited below and the “Sample Literary Analysis Paper.” These words should be properly identified in a note and a “Works Cited” or “Footnotes” list. Second, all ideas and facts drawn from sources should be credited as well.

How to Incorporate Sources: Examples of Plagiarism

While simple in theory, these guidelines often confuse students. Some people mistakenly believe that changing the word order or substituting a few synonyms makes a borrowed passage their own. The following examples illustrate proper and improper use of source materials. Let's begin with the actual source text.

ORIGINAL SOURCE

Williams, Kathleen M. “Gulliver's Voyage to the Houyhnhnms.” Journal of English Literary History XVIII (December 1951): 275-286.

But if Swift did intend the Houyhnhnms to stand as an ideal contrast [to man], he has badly mismanaged the matter. The Houyhnhnms do not strike the reader as altogether admirable beings; indeed they are sometimes absurd, and even repellent, and we are disgusted by Gulliver's exaggerated devotion to them. The dispassionate arguments of the assembly, for instance, about the nature and future fate of Gulliver and the Yahoos, show the characteristic and unpleasant coldness of the Houyhnhnm race; while Gulliver's master displays their equally characteristic self-satisfaction, carried here to the point of absurdity, when he criticizes Gulliver's physical qualities (276).

Blatant Plagiarism

If Swift wanted the Houyhnhnms to represent an ideal, then he badly mismanaged things. Readers do not find the Houyhnhnms admirable; instead, they find them absurd and even repellent and consider Gulliver's exaggerated devotion to them disgusting. When the assembly argues about Gulliver and the Yahoos, their characteristic unpleasant coldness and self-satisfaction are carried to the point of absurdity—especially when the master criticizes Gulliver's physical qualities.

Despite some rearranging of the original sentences, the author has obviously lifted both words and ideas from the source without crediting Williams. Such blatant theft deserves the harshest penalty.

A More Subtle Plagiarism

Swift's Houyhnhnms are not completely admirable. They often appear foolish (for example, when Gulliver's master criticizes his physical qualities). Readers may also be repelled by their intellectual coldness and self-satisfaction.

While not so obvious as the first example, this still constitutes plagiarism. Though reorganized and largely reworded, the ideas (and some phrases) are recognizably Williams’.

Accidental Plagiarism through Sloppiness

Kathleen Williams contends that if Swift intended the Houyhnhnms to serve as an ideal contrast to man, he failed. She points out their negative qualities: coldness and self-satisfaction, as seen in the debates over Gulliver's future and the master's criticism of Gulliver's physical qualities. She concludes, “The Houyhnhnms do not strike the reader as altogether admirable beings; indeed, they are sometimes absurd, and even repellent, and we are disgusted by Gulliver's exaggerated devotion to them” (276).

Why might this still appear plagiarized (though on a much reduced level)? Though the writer carefully documented Williams’ ideas and “marked” the quoted sentence, other key words and phrases from Williams—“ideal contrast,” “coldness,” “self-satisfaction,” “Gulliver's physical qualities”—lie sprinkled throughout the passage. These should be enclosed in quotation marks or properly paraphrased. While some lecturers may take pity on a student who has conscientiously credited the source, others might deduct points for sloppiness.

On a more sophisticated level, note that the passage merely summarizes the source, not moving beyond Williams’ original hypothesis. If the writer intended only to use Williams as one supporting point in a much larger thesis, that would be fine. However, the writer should worry if the paper’s thesis strongly resembles Williams’ or if the paper consists entirely of critics’ ideas strung together. The example below not only avoids plagiarism but also goes beyond the source.

Effective Use of Source

Kathleen M. Williams contends that if Swift planned to present the Houyhnhnms as an “ideal contrast” to man, he failed. Instead, they strike us as “absurd” due to their exaggerated intellectual “coldness” and “self-satisfaction” (276). Perhaps Swift intends only to satirize pompous human rationalizations rather than to castigate humanity as a whole. For example, when Gulliver's master ridicules human form, pointing out our two-footed instability and lack of protection (Swift 20-21), we hear sarcastic echoes of thousands of human apologists who cite the perfection of the human form as evidence of divine instatement at the pinnacle of the food chain.

If you are confused about when to document your sources, ask your instructor for guidance. In general, it is better to err on the side of caution—to give the sources you used too much credit, rather than not enough.