Appendix A
Detailed guidelines on proper use of source material

Many examples in this section are adapted from the guidelines developed and published by the Department of Sociology, CUHK. See http://www.cuhk.edu.hk/soc/citation.pdf

Mild cases of failure to acknowledge would be regarded as poor academic writing. Serious cases of failure to acknowledge, especially where there appears to be the intention to mislead the reader, would constitute plagiarism.

1. Verbatim use of source material
2. Paraphrase and translation
3. Change of order and/or conversion to/from point form
4. Use of special terms or concepts
5. Attribution of key concepts
6. Citing facts or research findings of others
7. Data for tables and graphs

 

1. Verbatim use of source material

    Original source (Example 1): Peter Berger, Invitation to Sociology (London: Penguin, 1991), p 87
    Where human beings live or work in compact groups, in which they are personally known and to which they are tied by feeling of personal loyalty (the kind that sociologists call primary groups), very potent and simultaneously very subtle mechanisms of control are constantly brought to bear upon the actual or potential deviant. These are the mechanisms of persuasion, ridicule, gossip and opprobrium.

    Improper use (Example 1): Except for the first sentence, the rest is a verbatim copy of the original, without quotation marks and without acknowledgement. This is a clear case of plagiarism.
    Social members experience various modes of control exerted over them. Where human beings live or work in compact groups, in which they are personally known and to which they are tied by feeling of personal loyalty (the kind that sociologists call primary groups), very potent and simultaneously very subtle mechanisms of control are constantly brought to bear upon the actual or potential deviant. These are the mechanisms of persuasion, ridicule, gossip and opprobrium.

    Improper use (Example 1): The following extract, again without quotation marks and without acknowledgement, also constitutes plagiarism.
    Where human beings live or work in primary groups, very potent and subtle mechanisms of control are brought to bear upon the deviant members. These are the mechanisms of persuasion, ridicule and gossip.

    Proper use (Example 1): The material used word for word should be enclosed in quotes, and the source should be specified by a bibliographic reference such as [1].
    Social members experience various modes of control exerted over them. Where human beings live or work in compact groups, in which they are personally known and to which they are tied by feeling of personal loyalty (the kind that sociologists call primary groups), very potent and simultaneously very subtle mechanisms of control are constantly brought to bear upon the actual or potential deviant. These are the mechanisms of persuasion, ridicule, gossip and opprobrium” [1].

    Proper use (Example 1): If only an extract is quoted, the omitted portion should be indicated by ellipsis (i.e., a series of dots). The material quoted should still be enclosed in quotes, and the source should be specified by a bibliographic reference such as [1].
    Where human beings live or work in ... primary groups, ... very potent and simultaneously very subtle mechanisms of control are constantly brought to bear upon the ... deviant. These are the mechanisms of persuasion, ridicule, gossip and opprobrium” [1].

    原著(例2): 费孝通《乡土中国》(香港:三联 。1986),第28页
    在西洋社会里,国家这个团体是一个明显的也是唯一特出的群己界线。在国家里做人民的无所逃于这团体之外,像一根柴捆在一束里,他们不能不把国家弄成个为每个分子谋利益的机构,于是他们有革命、有宪法、有法律、有国会等等。在我们传统里群的极限是模糊不清的天下,国是皇帝之家,界线从来就是不清不楚的。不过是从自己这个中心里推出去的社会势力里的一圈而已。所以可以着手的,具体的只有己,克己就成了社会生活中最重要的德性,他们不会去克群,使群不致侵略个人的权利。

    不正确引用(例2): 以下是逐字抄录上文的例子,属于抄袭。
    西洋社会及中国传统社会中的群己关系截然不同。在西洋社会里,国家这个团体是一个明显的也是唯一特出的群己界线。在国家里做人民的无所逃于这团体之外,像一根柴捆在一束里,他们不能不把国家弄成个为每个分子谋利益的机构,于是他们有革命、有宪法、有法律、有国会等等。在我们传统里群的极限是模糊不清的天下,国是皇帝之家,界线从来就是不清不楚的。不过是从自己这个中心推出去的社会势力里的一圈而已。所以可以着手的,具体的只有己,克己就成了社会生活中最重要的德性,他们不会去克群,使群不致侵略个人的权利。

    不正确引用(例2): 以下是摘录的例子,也属于抄袭。
    在西洋社会里,国家这个团体是一个明显的也是唯一特出的群己界线。在国家里做人民的无所逃于这团体之外。在我们传统里群的极限是模糊不清的天下,界线从来就是不清不楚的,所以可以着手的,具体的只有己。

    正确引用例2) : 以下是逐字抄录上文的例子,提及原作者原著, 并加上了引号「 」和附注,例如 〔1〕, 乃属正确引用。
    费孝通在《乡土中国》一文中指出在西洋社会里,国家这个团体是一个明显的也是唯一特出的群己界线。在国家里做人民的无所逃于这团体之外,像一根柴捆在一束里,他们不能不把国家弄成个为每个分子谋利益的机构,于是他们有革命、有宪法、有法律、有国会等等。在我们传统里群的极限是模糊不清的天下,国是皇帝之家,界线从来就是不清不楚的,不过是从自己这个中心推出去的社会势力里的一圈而已。所以可以着手的,具体的只有己,克己就成了社会生活中最重要的德性,他们不会去克群,使群不致侵略个人的权利。」〔1〕

    正确引用例2) : 以下是摘录的例子,加上了引 号「 」和附注,例如〔1〕, 乃属正确引用。
    在西洋社会里,国家社会这个团体是一个明显的也是唯一特出的群己界线。在国家里做人民的无所逃于这团体之外,..... 在我们传统里群的极限是模糊不清的‘天下’..... 界线从来就是不清不楚的,..... 所以可以着手的,具体的只有己 .....」〔1〕


    Back to top

 

 

2. Paraphrase and translation

    Original source (Example 1): Peter Berger, Invitation to Sociology (London: Penguin, 1991), p 87
    Where human beings live or work in compact groups, in which they are personally known and to which they are tied by feeling of personal loyalty (the kind that sociologists call primary groups), very potent and simultaneously very subtle mechanisms of control are constantly brought to bear upon the actual or potential deviant. These are the mechanisms of persuasion, ridicule, gossip and opprobrium.

    Improper use (Example 1): In the following example, the exact words are changed; even the sentence structure is changed, but the sense of the original is kept. This is called a paraphrase. If the original source is not acknowledged, this still constitutes plagiarism.
    In primary groups, in which people knows each other personally, deviants (actual or potential) are restrained by delicate mechanisms of social control, including persuasion, ridicule, gossip, opprobrium, etc.

    Improper use (Example 1) : In the following example, the source is paraphrased and also translated. If the original source is not acknowledged, this still constitutes plagiarism.
    在社会学家称为初级团体的群体中,越轨者承受着极细微但强而有力的社会控制,例如说服、嘲笑、闲话及侮辱等。

    Proper use (Example 1) : A paraphrase should be indicated by a bibliographic reference such as [1], but quotes are not required.
    In primary groups, in which people knows each other personally, deviants (actual and potential) are restrained by delicate mechanisms of social control, including persuasion, ridicule, gossip, opprobrium, etc. [1]

    原著例2): 费孝通《乡土中国》(香港:三联 。1986),第28页
    在西洋社会里,国家这个团体是一个明显的也是唯一特出的群己界线。在国家里做人民的无所逃于这团体之外,像一根柴捆在一束里,他们不能不把国家弄成个为每个分子谋利益的机构,于是他们有革命、有宪法、有法律、有国会等等。在我们传统里群的极限是模糊不清的天下,国是皇帝之家,界线从来就是不清不楚的。不过是从自己这个中心里推出去的社会势力里的一圈而已。所以可以着手的,具体的只有己,克己就成了社会生活中最重要的德性,他们不会去克群,使群不致侵略个人的权利。

    不正确引用例2): 以下是意译的例子,未有附注,属抄袭行为。
    西方社会中团体与个人之关系是清晰的,这尤其反映在国家这团体与个人的关系上。而中国传统社会中团体与个人的关系从来都是含糊不清的,国家是皇帝的家族的延伸,因此不存在西方所谓的个人从团体中解放的问题,孔子所称道的「克己」是唯一的社会道德。

    正确引用例2): 以下是意译的例子,加上附注,属正确引用。
    西方社会中团体与个人之关系是清晰的,这尤其反映在国家这团体与个人的关系上。而中国传统社会中团体与个人的关系从来都是含糊不清的,国家是皇帝的家族的延伸,因此不存在西方所谓的个人从团体中解放的问题,孔子所称道的「克己」是唯一的社会道德。〔1〕


    Back to top


3. Change of order and/or conversion to/from point form

Suppose the source material is in point form.

    Original source (Example 3): Anthony Giddens, Sociology (Cambridge: Polity Press. 2nd ed., 1993) p 529-30
    The European powers acquired colonies for a number of reasons:

    1. Colonial possessions added to the political influence and power of the parent country and provided sites for military bases.
    2. Most Westerners also saw colonialism as a civilizing enterprise, helping upgrade native peoples from their "primitive" conditions ...
    3. There was an important economic motive. From the early years of Western expansion, food, raw materials and other goods were taken from the colonized areas to full western economic development ...


    Improper use (Example 3) : The following paraphrase which alters the orders of the three points constitutes plagiarism if the source is not acknowledged.
    The European powers acquired colonies for
    (1) economic expansion;
    (2) exercise of political influence;
    (3) civilization of the "native" people

    Improper use (Example 3) : The following paraphrase which converts the point form to running text still constitutes plagiarism if the source is not acknowledged.
    The colonization of "primitive" societies by Europe serves several purposes: economic expansion, exercise of political influence and civilization of the "native" peoples.


    Back to top

     

     

4. Use of special terms or concepts

    Original source (Example 4): Erving Goffman, Asylums: Essays on the Social Situation of Mental Patients and other Inmates. (1968, Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin), p 15-16
    Every institution captures something of the time and interest of its members and provides something of a world for them; in brief, every institution has encompassing tendencies. When we review the different institutions in our Western society, we find some that are encompassing to a degree discontinuously greater than the ones next in line. Their encompassing or total character is symbolized by the barrier to social intercourse with the outside and to departure that is often built right into the physical plant, such as locked doors, high walls, barbed wire, cliffs, water, forests, or moors. These establishments I am calling total institutions [italics original], and it is their general characteristics I want to explore.

    Improper use (Example 4): The following uses the special term "total institutions" without attribution, and constitutes plagiarism if the source is not acknowledged.
    Hospitals are total institutions, the public access to which is strictly denied.

    Proper use (Example 4): The special term should be acknowledged by naming the original author, adding quotation marks and a bibliographic reference such as [1].
    Hospitals are what Goffman calls "total institutions", which is "symbolized by the barrier to social intercourse with the outside…" [1].

    Proper use (Example 4): Another legitimate form could be as follows.
    Hospitals are, in Goffman's famous term, total institutions, the public access to which is strictly denied [1].


    Back to top

     

     

5. Attribution of key concepts

    Original source (Example 5): Lau, Siu-kai. Society and Politics in Hong Kong. (1982, Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press).
    (The original source first introduced some key concepts.)

    Improper use (Example 5): The following paragraph summarizes the key concepts from the original source, but gives the impression that the writer developed these concepts. This constitutes plagiarism.
    Hong Kong people can meet their economic needs mainly through supports from their familial groups. As such, they have no needs to press the government for provision of social welfare, and this accounts for the political apathy of Hong Kong people and thereby the political stability of Hong Kong.

    Proper use (Example 5): There should be an indication that the key concepts are taken from the original source.
    According to Lau [1], Hong Kong people can meet their economic needs mainly through supports from their familial groups. As such, they have no needs to press the government for provision of social welfare, and their accounts for the political apathy of Hong Kong people and thereby the political stability of Hong Kong.

    Proper use (Example 5): Here is another legitimate form; even though the author is not named in the text, the bibliographical reference already indicates that the idea is taken from somewhere else.
    Hong Kong people can meet their economic needs mainly through supports from their familial groups. As such, they have no needs to press the government for provision of social welfare, and their accounts for the political apathy of Hong Kong people and thereby the political stability of Hong Kong [1].


    Back to top

 

 

6. Citing facts or research findings of others

    Proper use (Example 6): When facts are cited (which are not obvious), the source should be indicated.
    A total of 58 agreements guaranteeing paid holidays had been signed by the unions in Britain in 1920. By the mid-20's there were 16-17 percent of the labour-force who received paid holidays [1].

    Original source (Example 7): Thomas T. P. Wong and Lui Tai-lok. From One Brand of Politics to One Brand of Political Culture. Hong Kong: occasional paper no. 10. (1992, Hong Kong Institute of Asia-Pacific Studies, Chinese University of Hong Kong). p 26
    When asked if they feel themselves belonging to a class, 79% of our respondents said 'yes'; 19 said 'no', and only 2% answered 'don't know'.

    Proper use (Example 7): The source should be given when this research finding is cited.
    Wong and Lui [1] demonstrate that nearly 80% of their respondents feel themselves belonging to a class.

    Proper use (Example 8): Even if the research finding does not involve quantitative data, the source should be acknowledged.
    In countries where the religiously orthodox differ from modernists in their economic beliefs, the orthodox are far more likely to be to the left of modernists than to be right [1].


    Back to top

     

     

7. Data for tables and graphs

When a table or a graph contains data that are not collected by the writer himself/herself, the source must be given.

    Proper use (Example 9):
    Table 2.6. Growth in the value of world exports by major product groups, 1985-93.

    [table]

    Source: Ref [1].


    Proper use (Example 10):
    [graph]

    Figure 6. The annual GDP growth in Hong Kong, 1960-1990.

    Source: Ref [1].


    Back to top
 

Privacy Statement | Disclaimer
©Copyright 2018. The Chinese University of Hong Kong. All rights reserved.