Body Paragraph (Evidence)
Page Author: Eamon Cunningham
The evidence is information drawn from source material that is used to support the thesis statement and is an essential part of writing effective argument/interpretation of a topic. Evidence can take three forms in academic writing projects: direct quotation, paraphrase, and summary.
Varieties of Evidence
Direct Quotation
Direction quotations are a verbatim, or word-for-word, inclusion of an excerpt from source material that a writer uses to illustrate or support an essay’s arguments. For most academic writing assignments, direct quotation is the preferred method of source inclusion since it presents the source material in a direct, first-hand way that presents the author's own words as they appear in the original source text.
Use Cases
Direct quotation is the best method of source inclusion for most assignments since it presents the source material with the highest degree of accuracy. Direct quotation can provide expert testimony, supply corroborating evidence, frame a historical context, or present a jumping-off point for further analysis and commentary. Quotations are the preferred method of source inclusion in the following use cases when the writer wants:
- To present information in the clearest and most direct way
- To discuss the language/ideas found in the quote with accuracy
- To showcase the source’s voice and style as a feature of the analysis
Integration Methods
Enclosing Quotations in Quote Marks
A quotation must be enclosed in quote marks (“ “) to indicate where it begins and where it ends. Doing so signals to a reader of the paper the boundary between the author’s words and those of the source material. When writers include direction quotations, they must observe several basic conventions: 1) use quote marks around all material that has been integrated from source material, 2) put the ending punctuation within the quote marks, and 3) do not alter wording, punctuation, or spelling from the original.
Quotation Enclosed in Quote Marks: According to Joseph Harris, “how you actually go about incorporating other texts into your own prose can also say a good deal about the stance or attitude you want to take towards them.”
Introducing Quotations with Signal Phrases
In addition to quote marks, writers should acknowledge the quoted text in the form of a lead-in of “signal phrase” to clearly indicate the source of the quotation. Writers should not present a quotation as an independent sentence with quote marks around it; quotations should always be attached to the author’s own language. When quotations are not clearly attributed, a reader may not know where it comes from or how to interpret the way the writer understands the quote’s meaning. By including a signal phrase before the quote, the writer will make clear distinctions 1) between sources (if quoting from more than one source text) and 2) between the author’s own writing and that of the source material.
Argument: As Thomas argues in a recent study, “Rates of rising levels are projected to produce dire consequences on the Florida coastline over the next two decades.”
Analysis: Dickens establishes the novel’s tone in the opening line when he says, “It was the best of time, it was the worst of times.”
To effectively integrate quotations into an essay, writers should consider the verb inside the signal phrase, something which often suggests how the author is putting the quote to use. Some useful verbs for introducing quotations are the following: says, notes, observes, argues, contradicts, reports, suggests, claims, alleges, etc.
Shortening Quotations with Ellipses
Writers can omit part of a quotation that is not necessary through the use of an ellipsis (three successive dots). Using ellipses effectively can help to draw attention to the most important parts of the quotation but writers must ensure that the omission does not alter or misrepresent the meaning of the original quotation.
Without Ellipses: “how you actually go about incorporating other texts into your own prose can also say a good deal about the stance or attitude you want to take towards them.”
With Ellipses: “how you actually go about incorporating other texts…say a good deal about the stance or attitude you want to take towards them.”
In most cases, the gap between the quoted passages should be short and what is left should respect the original sense of the quotation.
Altering or Adding to Quotations with Brackets
Writers can change the wording of a quotation in order to maintain a consistent tone with the surrounding text. Using square brackets inside of the quote marks indicate that the writer is altering the original quotation. There are several instances when a writer may alter the original quotation:
Insert additional explanation or clarification: Smith notes the dangers to “the long-term health of American democracy [as he did in his famous 2021 speech in Washington D.C.],” according to a recent New York Times article.
Provide a definition or example: Smith notes the dangers to “the long-term health [its ability to hold up against partisan infighting] of American democracy,” according to a recent New York Times article.
Match the verb tense/noun case to the surrounding text: Smith has always “[contested] the long-term health of American democracy,” according to a recent New York Times article.
Like shortening quotations with ellipses, writers must respect the original sense of the quotation when including additional information within square brackets. It is not advised to insert words or phrasings that alter the fundamental meaning of the quotation to suit the purpose of the writer’s agenda or argument.
Common Errors
Overquoting
Overquoting occurs when the writer uses more quotations than is necessary or uses longer quotations when shorter ones will do. In each scenario, writing that is defined by overquoting gives the impression that the writer has substituted their own thinking for the words of the source texts. Since quotations are often written in a different voice and style than that of the essay writer, an overreliance on quotations often makes an essay feel incoherent and disjointed. There is no set rule for how many quotations is “too many,” but writers should try to present the quoted material in a way that is symmetrical in length to their own discussion, analysis, and commentary (i.e. for every quotation, the writer should include an equally long, if not longer, commentary and discussion on it).
Overquoting: Paul Auster says, “One day there is life. A man, for example, in the best of health, not even old, with no history of illness. Everything is as it was, as it will always be. He goes from one day to the next, minding his own business, dreaming only the life that lies before him. And then, suddenly, it happens. There is death. A man lets out a little sigh, he slumps down in his chair, and it is death. The suddenness of it leaves no room for thought, gives the mind no chance to seek out a word that might comfort it. We are left with nothing but death, the irreducible fact of our own mortality. Death after a long illness we can accept with resignation. Even accidental death we can ascribe to fate. But for a man to die of no apparent cause, for a man to die simply because he is a man, brings us so close to the invisible boundary between life and death that we no longer know which side we are on.” The short sentences introduce a feeling of surprise, something that the author is trying to express in regard to how he felt about the death of his father.
Selectively quoting: Paul Auster says, “One day there is life. A man, for example, in the best of health, not even old, with no history of illness. Everything is as it was, as it will always be. He goes from one day to the next, minding his own business, dreaming only the life that lies before him. And then, suddenly, it happens. There is death. A man lets out a little sigh, he slumps down in his chair, and it is death.” The short sentences introduce a feeling of surprise, something that the author is trying to express in regard to how he felt about the death of his father.
Drop-In Quoting
Drop-in quoting (sometimes known as “cold” quoting) occurs when a writer presents a quotation as an independent sentence with quote marks around it. Drop-in quotes often leave a reader disoriented and confused as to the source of the quote, who is the speaker, or how this quotation factors into the bigger arguments found elsewhere in the essay as a whole. Quotations should always be attached to the author’s own language. The simplest and most direct way to avoid drop-in quoting is to precede each quotation with a lead-in phrase which, in effect, blends the writer’s language with that from the quoted material.
Drop-in quoting: “We are tired of being beautiful.” This quote illustrates the idea that…
Quoting with lead-in phrasing: As the narrator says towards the end of “The Family with Little Feet” in The House of Mango Street, “We are tired of being beautiful.” This quote illustrates the idea that…
Quoting vs. Common Knowledge
Common knowledge is a fact, piece of information, or idea so broadly accepted that a writer may use them in their work without citing a specific source. Information that is generally considered common knowledge would be historical events, information that is widely taught in schools, or views/ideas that have no known origin. The boundary between what needs to be quoted and what is considered common knowledge is not precisely defined, so a writer should provide a quotation if they are not sure.
Common knowledge: John F. Kennedy was the last U.S. president who was assassinated.
Information requiring quotation: As reported by Jones in his 1974 biography, “John F. Kennedy was assassinated with a bolt-action Italian rifle on November 22, 1963 in Dallas, TX.”
Paraphrase
Use Cases
Paraphrase occurs when a writer restates an idea from a reading using their own words and phrasings. Paraphrase is the best method of source inclusion for a writer who includes complex source material but wants to present those ideas in clear and understandable language. A well-done paraphrase has a few identifiable characteristics: 1) it is expressed with approximately the same number of words as the original, 2) it accurately represents the content of the original writing, 3) it reflects the degree of detail in the original passage, and 4) creates a tone of consistency between the paraphrase and other parts of the writing. Like quotations, authors need to identify paraphrases with a lead-in phrase or appropriate citation to let readers know the boundary between borrowed words and those of the author. Paraphrases are the preferred method of source inclusion in the following use cases when the writer wants:
- To express a complex idea in more understandable terms
- To present important information while using original wording for accuracy/emphasis
- To reorder the ideas of the source material
- To introduce variety to break up repetitive, heavy use of quotation
- To maintain a consistent tone in the writing across the paper
Integration Methods
Signal Phrases
Paraphrases do not require quotation marks, but they do require that the writer identifies who is being paraphrased and why. There are two ways to signal that a paraphrase is about to begin: 1) the writer can identify the source text with a lead in phrase or 2) the writer can identify the source text with a parenthetical citation (if the assignment requires citations) at the conclusion of the paraphrase. In both cases, a writer must ensure that the boundary between the borrowed words and original words are made clear. Paraphrases are equally useful in both argument and analysis writing.
Argument: According to the 2020 United States Census, apportionment is the process of dividing the 435 memberships, or seats, in the U.S. House of Representatives among the 50 states.
Analysis: In Act III of Shakespeare’s Hamlet, King Claudius’s soliloquy centers on an important question: what will happen if he confesses to killing the king?
Common Errors
Paraphrasing can run into three main errors:1) mirroring the syntax of the source text 2) providing synonyms for select words in the source text or 3) failing to attribute ideas and arguments to the source text. Read the excerpt from the Translator’s Postscript in Robert Fagles’s translation of The Aeneid (2006). Then, consider how each example fails to integrate Fagles work in an effective paraphrase.
Source Text: Seeing is believing that all three epic poems coexist but giving voice to that belief is another matter – enough to leave one standing “silent, upon a peak in Darien.” So let me extend these questions of style to others that also affect a translator, his mood and mind, and his appreciation of his author. Whether or not such things find full expression, they may inform his approach, and perhaps a part of his work as well
Mirroring Syntax of Source Text
Faulty Paraphrase: Seeing is believing that the Iliad, the Odyssey, and the Aeneid coexist, but giving voice to that belief is another matter. These concerns extend to questions style that also affect a translator, his mood and mind, and his appreciation of his author.
In this example, the words belong to Fagles and not the writer. The structure of the paragraph belongs to Fagles, too: no lead-in phrasing has been used to suggest that the ideas come from a source text and the order of the ideas belong to Falges and are, thus, not an accurate paraphrase.
Providing Synonyms in Source Text
Faulty Paraphrase: The relationship between all three epic poems give voice to another matter – questions of style that also affect a translator, his disposition and attitude, and his indebtedness of his author. It’s impossible to say whether such things will realize complete expression in a translation, but they may influence his approach, and perhaps part of the work itself.
In this example, the writer has changed the source’s language by supplying synonyms, but the work does not belong to the writer, it belongs to Fagles. The source text has provided the writer with everything but some nouns and verbs – even those new nouns and verbs (“relationship” for “coexist,” “disposition” for “mood,” “attitude” for “mind, “realize” for “find,” and so forth), both what they are and where they are, suggest Fagles’s work and is, thus, not an accurate paraphrase.
Failing to Attribute Ideas to Source Text
Faulty Paraphrase: It’s plain to see that all three epic poems coexist. The fact that these poems bear such close similarities give rise to other concerns in Virgilian scholarship, concerns which deeply affect the translator, his attitude towards the text and his reverence for the author. Do these things find full expression in the translation process? It’s hard to say, but what one can confidently say is that these variables shape his process, and they may even find their way into the final product.
In this example, the writer has failed to attribute the words and ideas to the source text. As a result, the writer is suggesting that what’s written is original, both in thought and presentation. If read closely against the original, Fagles’ Translator’s Postscript, what follows the quote doesn’t belong to the writer; these ideas are Fagles’s. The ideas, what they are and how they hang together, are taken from the source without attribution and is, thus, not an accurate paraphrase.
Summary
Use Cases
Summary occurs when a writer provides a brief restatement of a source text’s main point, supporting ideas, and key details. Unlike paraphrases, which try to maintain the same level of detail from the source text, summaries aim to communicate long, complicated ideas in a short space (often just a few sentences). Summaries, themselves, are not arguments; they should not be used to approve or disapprove of what’s being summarized. Summaries are meant to bring clarity and understanding to the topic; they are not meant to evaluate. Summaries are the preferred method of source inclusion in the following use cases when the writer wants:
- To provide perspective on the subject as a whole prior to evaluation
- To communicate the main idea of a source text in a short amount of space
- To show how a writer’s argument is situated in a larger context
Integration Methods
Signal Phrases
Like paraphrases, summaries do not require quotation marks, but they do require that the writer identifies the basic pieces of information about the text. There are two ways to signal that a summary is about to begin: 1) the writer can identify the source text with a lead-in phrase or 2) the writer can identify the source text with a parenthetical citation (if the assignment requires citations) at the conclusion of the summary. In both cases, a writer must ensure that the boundary between the borrowed words and original words are made clear. Summaries are less useful in analysis writing than they are in argument writing.
John McLeod argues that the internet will ultimately end up consuming print media as we know it while making it possible for the average writer to reach a massive audience. On the other hand, Mary Talbot argues that electronic texts become tiresome after a short time and people have historically returned to traditional print media when observed over a long enough period of time.
In this example, the writer has captured the main idea of both McLeod and Talbot in a concise and direct manner. The summary does make an evaluation of the contrasting findings and omits specific details to ensure that a reader can understand the key points as it relates to the paper’s bigger arguments. The summary also demonstrates that the writer has read, understood, and fully engaged with the source material.
Common Errors
Including Argument in Summary
David Bartholomae’s “Inventing the University” makes a number of faulty assumptions regarding common errors of novice writers who feel that they must adopt an inauthentic academic language in order to enter into the university community. While his argument asserts that there is some degree of falsity in the academic voice of students, I believe that students can enter academic conversations without being forced into the language of a community that is not their own.
In this example, the writer has referenced the source text but has failed to withhold their own views regarding Bartholmae’s argument. As a result, the information is not presented fairly and accurately and, thus, does not communicate that the writer fully understands the basics of Bartholomae’s essay apart from their own biases and assumptions.
Wording is Too General
Sanderson’s article is really interesting. He makes a lot of good points for why we should invest money early in life and makes his readers really think about what he says.
In this example, the author’s summary of the source is too general and vague. Phrasings such as “really interesting,” “a lot of good points,” and “really think about what he says” fail to communicate the main ideas of Sanderson’s article with an appropriate level of specificity. Such a vague treatment of the article’s main points gives the impression that the writer does not fully understand the source text and, thus, is not an effective summary of the source reading.
False Equivalence
In an essay about social issues, an analogy is drawn between playing a competitive sport and striving for success in life, suggesting that the tactics used in sports are directly applicable to personal success.
This creates a false equivalence by comparing two fundamentally different scenarios, implying that strategies in sports can be directly translated to life success, which may not always be true and can mislead the reader.
Over-Simplification
While discussing complex economic policies, an analogy is made comparing a nation's economy to a household budget, implying that national economic principles work the same as managing personal finances.
This oversimplifies the complex nature of economic policies, failing to account for the nuances and broader implications of national economic systems compared to personal budgeting.
Distraction
In an argument about climate change, the writer uses an elaborate analogy comparing Earth to a spaceship, which becomes so detailed that it shifts the focus away from the main argument about environmental responsibility.
This analogy, while creative, distracts from the central argument by focusing too much on the intricacies of the comparison, rather than the actual issue of climate change.
Misinterpretation
In a piece discussing leadership styles, an analogy is used comparing leaders to shepherds guiding sheep, which can be misinterpreted as implying that followers are mindless and need to be herded.
This analogy can lead to misinterpretation, potentially offending readers and detracting from the intended point about guidance and leadership.