When writing a research paper and citing sources - what do you do if you cite a particular line that is footnoted?

Sorry if this is confusing- I am so confused. I haven't had to write a research paper in years. Asked by eggplantia5 56 months ago Similar questions: writing research paper citing sources cite line footnoted Computers > Software.

Similar questions: writing research paper citing sources cite line footnoted.

If possible, find the source and cite it I understand exactly what you are talking about. I recommend looking up the source cited in the footnote. Then use it as a source yourself.It is always better to use a primary source and not a secondary.

What I mean by this is, use firsthand information whenever possible. "Mining" the literature cited section of papers is a good way to find more sources on the topic of interest. Using secondary literature is not as good because you are interpreting an interpretation, and there is room for error.

I hope I'm making sense here. Please ask for a clarification if not..

OK ... If you want to quote from a section that has a footnote you don't need to include the footnote, just like you (say) don't have to include a whole paragraph if you just want a sentence. However, if the footnote is stating that the quote is from another paper, you have two choices. By far and away the best thing to do is drag out that original paper, because otherwise you don't know that you are quoting correctly.

If you can't, you must cite both the original and the paper you read it in, ie. Dull et al. (1953), as cited by Hum and Drum (1996).

So, to give an example picked from a random book on my shelf if you have "The amount should be 100-500 U/lb bodyweight depending on the severity of the disease* Since the antiserum used is derived from hyperimmune horses, the usual skin test for sensitivity should be performed. *Doses greatly in excess of those needed to neutralize all the toxin are indicated in order to achieve as rapid inactivation of the toxin as possible. " If you want to, you can perfectly legitimately say "The amount should be 100-500 U/lb bodyweight depending on the severity of the disease" (Davis et al, 1980).

Without including the footnote. But if the footnote is giving you a source, best go back to that source, and if you can't, quote it and the citer. Sources: Me (and davis et al of course) .

See details... If the footnote included an explanation, a "See also" reference, or generally something other than a citation, something irrelevant to your paper, e.g. The Ultra Roller Coaster is one of the most exhilarating experiences a person³ can find. — ³ A non-felon, anyway. Then removing the footnote would essentially be removing part of the quote, and as such needs to be noted.

I would write, depending on the style of citation/quotation used in the paper: One expert in the roller coaster field even called it "one of the most exhilarating experiences a person can find" (Johnston, 17; footnote removed). One expert in the roller coaster field even called it "one of the most exhilarating experiences a person can find."¹² — ¹² Johnston, 17 (footnote removed). According to Johnston, this "is one of the most exhilarating experiences a person can find" (footnote removed).

On the other hand, if the footnote is a citation, then you would still cite the source you found the quote in, but also indicate the original source of the quote.In this case, the footnote doesn’t contain content; it’s metadata, and can be manipulated without changing the quote. So I would write something like this, depending on the citation style (I’ll just stick with one style from now on): In the debates leading up to the election, candidate Atcheson called for the governor to "stop playing these partisan games and start serving the people. "² — ² "Candidates tackle issues in televised debate," R.

Mitchum, Springfield Register. 14 Aug 2000, page A4, quoted in Baker, 14. Here, you are quoting from your "Baker" source on page 14, but the quote originates in the newspaper article.

Since you have not read the newspaper article yourself, but are instead relying on Baker’s report about what the article said, you must cite the original article and where you found it quoted. If you need to reference the text of the footnote as well as the text that surrounds it, you should probably just quote them separately. For example: A single cherry tree can produce up to ## cherries a year.

With over ## trees in the United States alone, "if you made a wall of cherries stretching from Seattle to Ft. Lauderdale, it would be ## feet high. "²² To put it another way, one year’s growth of cherries is "enough to feed Hurley from Lost for ## years and not have him lose a single pound."²³ — ²² Jacks, 227 (footnote removed).

²³ Jacks, 227, footnote 47. The ##s are because I haven’t the foggiest idea what the actual numbers would be. :-) It might not be completely necessary to include "(footnote removed)" for note 22, because you’re including it in note 23.

However, I would still include it, just for completeness.

Most people don't use actual footnotes anymore. Most colleges prefer internal citation, also called parenthetical citation. Immediately after the sentence in which you are quoting information, you put a set of paranthesis with the author's last name and if applicable, the page number where the quotation came from.

For example. "kjhgkdhgkfd" (Smith 42). Then at the end of you paper, you add a page listing the full source for your information in alphabetical order.

If you are going to be doing this a lot, you might want to invest in an MLB handbook, which lists all of this information in grea detail. If you need more information right away, send me a message, and I can send you the handout I provide my senior research students. This is what I'm teaching right now.

BarbieM's Recommendations MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers, Sixth Edition Amazon List Price: $17.50 Used from: $8.00 Average Customer Rating: 4.5 out of 5 (based on 63 reviews) .

Cite the original source if at all possible. When citing a quote found via an intermediate source, it is always better to find the original source, verify it, and cite it. The only exception would be if for some reason the point of interest was the fact that the intermediate source cited it.(For example, to establish that the author of the intermediate source was aware of the content of the quote.) I can't think of any other reason that the original source would not be preferred.

(What if the intermediate source got it wrong? ) I assume that the other questions you asked are really leading up to the last one, but I'll give the first one a try: when citing a line that is footnoted, I think it is quite acceptable to leave out the footnote according to your own estimation of its (in)significance. If you feel the footnote is an essential part of the quote, then you have (at least as far as my experience goes) a rare and thorny problem, which I might solve by adding a sentence of my own phrasing, indicating that the source includes a footnote with such-and-such additional information.

Again, if the footnote is to cite a more original source, find that source, verify it, and cite it appropriately. I know it can be a drag, but that's the standard I would defend.(I checked The Chicago Manual of Style for something about a footnote in a quote, but couldn't find anything.) .

Be specific..please! " "Is it appropriate to cite almost every line in a paper? It's a case study paper, and each line refers to the patient" "How do you cite an Askville source in a research paper?

It's a case study paper, and each line refers to the patient.

I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.