Using Your Sources
Summarizing, paraphrasing, and quoting
Hello Gorgias! is a weekly newsletter devoted to writing, rhetoric, and long-form argument. If you’re enjoying my posts, please consider becoming a subscriber.
By now, you’ve probably been reading for theory for years. You’ve taken notes, dog-eared all your favorite pages, and marked the best passages and quotes.
But what do you do with that material? How do you gather up everything you’ve discovered in these texts and start communicating it to audiences in ways they’ll understand and appreciate?
Last week, I discussed how to categorize sources rhetorically, according to what they do. This week, we’ll discuss the three main ways to incorporate sources into your writing: paraphrasing, summarizing, and quoting.
Folks often use the terms “summarizing” and “paraphrasing” interchangeably, but a paraphrase is generally longer and more detailed than a summary.1
If I’m paraphrasing, I’m giving a point-by-point description of what someone else said. It involves the same level of detail; I’m just putting it in my own words.
If I’m summarizing, I’m using my own language to give folks the gist of the conversation. Summarizing is shorter and less detailed than paraphrasing. When you’re summarizing, you’re condensing or abbreviating the argument.
This means summarizing is often harder because you have to make thoughtful decisions about what to leave out.
Summarizing and paraphrasing are not interchangeable. They serve a different rhetorical function. Paraphrasing is for recounting another’s argument in full detail. Summarizing is condensing someone’s argument to explain how it relates back to what you’re saying.
Paraphrasing
When it comes to paraphrasing sources in your work, Andrea Lunsford and John Ruszkiewicz have some useful suggestions:
Identify the source and explain why it’s relevant. Make sure you’re respecting the source by covering the main points and including everything they would include if they were presenting the argument.
Use your own words and sentence structures.
Be as clear, objective, and neutral as possible. Try to avoid using language that is suggestive or emotionally charged.
Make sure you’re comparing your paraphrasing to the original to ensure that it’s your language and that you’re accurately representing the author’s argument.
Summarizing
I agree with Cathy Birkenstein and Gerald Graff, authors of “They Say/I Say,” who say “good summary requires balancing what the original author is saying with the writer’s own focus.”
This means writers have to play Elbow’s “Believing Game.” But it also means avoiding list summaries, which are summaries that just list your sources without tying them to your larger point. An effective summary emphasizes the aspects of your sources that interest you, the writer. As Birkenstein and Graff explain, “a good summary faces “two ways at once: both outward (toward the author being summarized) and inward (toward yourself).”
When it comes to actually summarizing your sources, Lunsford and Ruszkiewicz have a few recommendations:
Identify the thesis or heart of the passage and make it “the heart of your summary” by explaining what the source accomplishes.
Identify the source, state the point, then add your own comments about why the material is significant or related to the argument you’re making. Include only the necessary information you need to make your point. Make sure you’re using your own words or quotation marks, when necessary.
Provide an in-text citation (something I’ll discuss in a future post).
Check the summary against the original text to make sure you’re using your own words and capturing the author’s main points.
Quoting
Quoting is tricky.
If you quote too much, audiences might assume you lack confidence in your own writing or don’t understand the source well enough to explain it in your own words.
If you don’t quote enough, audiences might not understand how your source relates to your argument or decide you haven’t read it closely.
Thinking rhetorically about when, what, and how you’re quoting can help you strike the right balance in your writing. It’s often good to quote someone when:
You want to draw attention to the specific language an author is using.
You can’t improve on the original language of the passage. By this, I mean the original language accomplishes your goal better than it would if you rephrased it.
The author is a respected authority who supports your ideas.
The author is issuing a credible challenge to the established consensus. If the challenge is new to your audience or feels counterintuitive, it can be worth it to let the author explain in their own words.
You’re referencing a term someone else coined, especially if you’re planning to expand, challenge, modify that definition somewhere in your piece.
Remember, quotations don’t speak for themselves. They require framing and context. I recommend avoiding “floating quotations,” which are quotes that aren’t being introduced in the writer’s own words. Here’s an example, courtesy of ChatGPT:
Alan Kay thinks innovation is crucial for staying ahead in today's fast-paced market. "The best way to predict the future is to invent it." Embracing new ideas and technologies not only enhances productivity but also fosters a culture of continuous improvement.
The quotation in the middle of the paragraph just floats there. It isn’t connected to anything else in the paragraph.
Even when quoting is done well, it comes with risks. If you’re quoting too frequently or in the wrong places, your sources can start to dominate the text. When that happens, it waters down the writer’s voice and makes the argument feel like a set of notes.
The best way to make sure your voice is coming through in your writing it to pay close attention to where, when, and how often you’re quoting your sources.
Block Quotes
Block quotes are longer quotations formatted as blocks of text. They introduce an entire paragraph or passage, which means they’re useful if:
You’re planning to return to a passage over and over again.
You need to present an author’s entire argument in their own words.
You’re trying to establish an “anchor image,” which is an image, scene, analogy, example, or metaphor that illustrates your fundamental premise and often doubles as a though line in your writing.
At the same time, block quotes are also something of a necessary evil. They’re useful, but a little risky because:
They interrupt the writer’s voice. They take the reader out of the text by placing them inside another writer’s work. There are lots of good reasons to do this, but your audience came to the text expecting your thoughts, expressed in your voice. If they wanted to read the authors you’re citing, they would.
They make peoples’ eyes glaze over. Some readers skim them. Others skip them entirely. But every time you introduce a block quote, you risk losing your audience.
Don’t get me wrong. Block quotes can be strategic and effective. But it’s important to have a clearly identifiable reason for using them.
If you don’t, your audience might think you didn’t want to take the time to paraphrase the author’s argument in your own words. Or they might assume you don’t actually understand the argument, and you need your authors to explain it for you.
Conclusion
Summarizing, paraphrasing, and quoting have different rhetorical functions. They do different things in the context of your writing. Ideally, you’re using all three interchangeably, as needed.
When it comes to developing a voice in your writing, summarizing and paraphrasing are helpful. When it comes to channeling your authors’ voices, quoting is a great move.
Whatever you decide to do, just make sure you’re able to explain (to yourself, if not the reader) why you’re doing it. The goal is always to be making informed, deliberate choices in your writing.
Good luck!
Lunsford, A. A., Ruszkiewicz, J. J., & Walters, K. (2001). Everything's an Argument (p. 568). Boston, MA: Bedford/St. Martin's.