Here we find a stunning reference to a passage in D’Annunzio’s The Flame,
She was compelled into that blazing environment as though into a forge …
various editions are available, it is better to cite either from the first, or from the most recent if it is revised and corrected. The first edition is preferable if the following editions are simply reprints, and the last edition is preferable if it contains revisions, additions, or updates. In any case, your reference should specify both the first edition and the most recent edition, and should clarify from which one you are quoting (see section 3.2.3).
Rule 6: When your primary source is foreign, quote it in the original language. This rule is mandatory for literary works. In these cases, adding a translation in parentheses or in a note may be useful, but follow your advisor’s suggestions on this. Even if you are not analyzing the literary style of an author, if the exact expression of his thought, in all of its linguistic shades, has a certain weight (for example a philosopher’s commentary), then you should work with the text in the original language if possible. However, I recommend that you add the translation in parentheses or in a note, because the translation itself also constitutes an interpretive exercise on your part. If you are taking from a foreign author only a piece of information, statistical or historical data, or a general criticism, you can simply use a good translation, or even translate the passage yourself. In this case you do not want to submit the reader to continuous jumps from one language to the other, and it is sufficient to precisely cite the original title and to clarify which translation you are using. Finally, you may find yourself discussing the texts of a foreign author who happens to be a poet or a writer of fiction, but you only wish to examine his philosophical ideas and not his literary style. Here, if there are numerous long quotes, you may also decide to refer to a good translation to render the argument more fluid, and simply insert some short passages in the original language when you want to emphasize the revealing use of a particular word. (See also rule 4, point c.)
Rule 7: The reference to the author and the work must be clear. The following (incorrect) example should illustrate our point:
We agree with Vasquez when he claims that “the problem under scrutiny is far from being solved,”1 and, despite Braun’s well-known opinion2 that “light has been definitively shed on this age-old question,” we believe with our author that “we have a long way to go before we reach a satisfying stage of knowledge.”
1 Roberto Vasquez, Fuzzy Concepts (London: Faber, 1976), 160.
2 Richard Braun, Logik und Erkenntnis (Munich: Fink, 1968), 345.
The first quote is certainly from Vasquez and the second from Braun, but is the third really from Vasquez, as the context implies? And since we have indicated in footnote 1 that Vasquez’s first quote comes from page 160 of his work, should we also assume that the third quote comes from the same page in the same book? And what if Braun was the source of the third quote?
Here is how we should have drafted the same passage:
We agree with Vasquez when he claims that “the problem under scrutiny is far from being solved,”1 and, despite Braun’s well-known opinion that “light has been definitively shed on this age-old question,”2 we believe with our author that “we have a long way to go before we reach a satisfying stage of knowledge.”3
1 Roberto Vasquez, Fuzzy Concepts (London: Faber, 1976), 160.
2 Richard Braun, Logik und Erkenntnis (Munich: Fink, 1968), 345.
3 Vasquez 1976, 161.
Notice that footnote 3 indicates “Vasquez 1976, 161.” If the quote had still been from p. 160, and if it had immediately followed the previous Vasquez quote without being interrupted by the Braun quote, we could have written “ibid.” But shame on us if we had written “ibid.” in this case, since the two Vasquez quotes are separated by the quote from Braun. Had we done this, “ibid.” would have lead the reader to believe that Vasquez’s sentence was from p. 345 of Braun’s previously cited book. “Ibid.” means “in the same place,” and should only be used to repeat verbatim the reference of the previous note.
Rule 8: When a quote does not exceed two or three lines, you can insert it into the body of the text enclosed in quotation marks. I will do this now as I quote from Campbell and Ballou, who state, “Direct quotations not over three typewritten lines in length are enclosed in quotation marks and are run into the text.”1 When the quote is longer, it is better to set it off as a block quotation. In this case the quotation marks are not necessary, because it is clear that all set-off passages are quotes, and we must commit to a different system for our observations. (Any secondary developments should appear in a note.) Here is an example of two consecutive block quotations:6
If a direct quotation is more than three typewritten lines in length, it is set off from the text in a separate paragraph, or paragraphs, and single-spaced. …
The paragraphing of the original source should be retained in direct quotations. Paragraphs that were consecutive in the original are separated by a single space, as are the lines within each paragraph; paragraphs that are quoted from two different sources and that are not separated by intervening text should be separated by a double space.2
Indenting is used to indicate quotations, especially in factual writing involving numerous quotations of some length. … No quotation marks are used.3
1 William G. Campbell and Stephen V. Ballou, Form and Style, 4th ed. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1974), 40.
2 Ibid.
3 Porter G. Perrin, An Index to English, 4th ed. (Chicago: Scott, Foresman, 1965), 338.
This method is quite convenient because it immediately reveals the quoted texts; it allows the reader to skip them if he is skimming, to linger if he is more interested in the quoted texts than in our commentary, and finally, to find them immediately when need be.
Rule 9: Quotes must be accurate. First, transcribe the words exactly as they appear. (To this end, it is always a good idea to check the quotes against the original in your final draft, because errors or omissions may have occurred when you copied them by hand or typed them.) Second, do not omit text from a quote without indicating your omission with an ellipsis, three consecutive periods with or without brackets, in place of the omitted part. Third, do not make interpolations without clearly signaling them; each of our comments, clarifications, and specifications must appear enclosed in brackets. Finally, we must also indicate emphases that are ours rather than the author’s by adding, after the quote and enclosed in brackets, a formula such as “emphasis mine.”
If the author that you quote, despite his worthiness of mention, makes an evident mistake, you must respect his mistake, but you must indicate it to the reader.7 At the very least, indicate the mistake with the following expression enclosed in square brackets: [sic], literally meaning “so.” Thus you should write that Savoy states that, “in 1820 [sic], after Napoleon
Bonaparte’s death, Europe was in a grim situation with many shadows and few lights.” But, if I were you, I would stay away from this mysterious Savoy.
Rule 10: Quotes are like testimony in a trial, and you must always be able to track down the witnesses and demonstrate their reliability. For this reason, the reference must be exact and accurate (do not quote from an author without indicating the book and page number), and it must be verifiable. If this is the case, how should you proceed if important information or criticism comes from a personal communication, a letter, or a manuscript? In a note, you can use one of these expressions:
1. Personal communication with the author, June 6, 1975.
2. Personal letter to author, June 6, 1975.
3. Recorded statements, June 6, 1975.
4. C. Smith, “The Sources of Snorri Sturluson’s Edda” (manuscript).
5. C. Smith, Paper presented at the XII Physiotherapy Conference (manuscript, forthcoming fromMouton, The Hague).
You will notice that for sources 2, 4, and 5 there are related documents that you can exhibit. Source 3 is vague because the term “recording” does not specify whether you are talking about a magnetic audio recording or stenographic notes. As for source 1, only the source of the information could disprove you (but he may have died in the meantime). In these extreme cases, it is always good practice, after you have given a final form to the quote, to send a letter to the author with a copy of the text, and to ask for a letter of authorization in which he acknowledges the ideas you have attributed to him. If you are dealing with enormously important unpublished information (e.g., a new formula resulting from secret research), you should put a copy of the letter of authorization in the thesis’s appendix. Naturally, do so only if the author of the information is a well-known scholarly authority, and not any old Joe.
Minor rules: If you want to be precise about text you have omitted,
