-
Looking for HSC notes and resources? Check out our Notes & Resources page
How do you reference something already referenced in a book. (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter stazi
- Start date
hipsta_jess
Up the mighty red V
- Joined
- May 30, 2003
- Messages
- 5,981
- Gender
- Female
- HSC
- N/A
santaslayer
Active Member
If I was doing it, I'd just make it a primary reference. 
LeftrightOut
Needs more cowbell
Oh come on, I always ran into in text quotes I found so damn fascinating I just had to go to the library and borrow the book and read the whole thing so I could reference it as an originalhfis said:
External student "Selected Readings" guides are perfect for this.
hipsta_jess
Up the mighty red V
- Joined
- May 30, 2003
- Messages
- 5,981
- Gender
- Female
- HSC
- N/A
Nat, you can only reference the original if you go and find the original and read that.
If you read X in Y, you need to reference both, because although it was X saying whatever, you didn't actually read X.
If you read X in Y, you need to reference both, because although it was X saying whatever, you didn't actually read X.
The way i use:
Footnote:
Deborah Lupton, The Embodied Computer/User, in Cyberspace, Cyberbodies, Cyberpunk, (Sage Publications:1995) p 100.
Bibliography:
Featherstone, M & Burrows, R (eds.), 1995. Cyberspace, Cyberbodies, Cyberpunk: Cultures of Technological Embodiment, London: Sage Publications.
Err, forgot formatting
Footnote:
Deborah Lupton, The Embodied Computer/User, in Cyberspace, Cyberbodies, Cyberpunk, (Sage Publications:1995) p 100.
Bibliography:
Featherstone, M & Burrows, R (eds.), 1995. Cyberspace, Cyberbodies, Cyberpunk: Cultures of Technological Embodiment, London: Sage Publications.
Err, forgot formatting
Just to make it clearer....AsyLum said:The way i use:
Footnote:
Deborah Lupton, The Embodied Computer/User, in Cyberspace, Cyberbodies, Cyberpunk, (Sage Publications:1995) p 100.
Bibliography:
Featherstone, M & Burrows, R (eds.), 1995. Cyberspace, Cyberbodies, Cyberpunk: Cultures of Technological Embodiment, London: Sage Publications.
Err, forgot formatting
Footnotes and endnotes
The first two systems of referencing, footnotes and endnotes, are very similar: in both you insert a number (either in brackets or slightly above the line) in your text at the end of a sentence or immediately following a direct quotation or a point taken from a source. For footnotes these numbers may either run consecutively through the whole essay or start afresh with (1) at the start of each new page; for endnotes the numbering is always consecutive. With footnotes the information about the source of each numbered reference is given at the bottom of each page of your text; with endnotes the same information is given in a consolidated list at the end of the essay.
Format: The following points should be noted, both for use in your own essays and to enable you to interpret the footnotes and endnotes you encounter in your reading:
1 On a first citation of a work, full details, as in the bibliography, must be given, together with a precise page reference, for example, 'R. Beard (1970), Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, Penguin, London, p. 49.'
2 Subsequent references to the same work may be cited by:
short form: the writer's name, the short title, and the page number,
e.g. Beard, Teaching and Learning, pp. 89-91.
op.cit.: (i.e. opere citato, Latin, 'in the work cited') This is used following the writer's name and followed by the page reference when the citation is to the same work referred to in earlier but not in the immediately preceding footnote. It may or may not be underlined, e.g.,
1. M. Douglas (1973), Natural Symbols, Penguin, London, p.88.
2. R. Fox (1967), Kinship and Marriage, Penguin, London, p.161.
3. M. Douglas, op.cit., p.132.
ibid.: (i.e. ibidem, Latin, 'in the same place') This is used, with a following page number, when the citation is to the same work referred to in the immediately preceding footnote. It may or may not be underlined, e.g.,
1. M. Douglas (1973), Natural Symbols, Penguin, London, p.68
2. ibid., pp. 70-71,
3. ibid., p. 173
2
2
1 Other common abbreviations in references:
loc.cit. (loco citato, 'in the place already quoted') has confused usage (and you would probably be wise to avoid it in your own writing). It is sometimes used in place of op.cit. when the reference is to an article or chapter rather than a book. It is sometimes used in place of ibid. when the citation is to the same source and the same page as the immediately preceding reference. It is sometimes used in place of op.cit. when the citation is to the same page as the previous citation to the same source.
f. (or ff.) ('and the following page(s)') is used to indicate frequent references to an item within a few consecutive pages, e.g. R. Fox, Kinship and Marriage, p. 71f.
passim ('scatteredly') is used when the reference is to items to be found throughout that source or that section of a book. E.g. Beard, Teaching and Learning, passim.
2 Complex references. If you are citing a quotation or material which you have found already quoted by another writer, include in your citation both the full bibliographic details of the original quotation (which you will find in the reference) and the details of the book in which you found it, e.g. H. Cox (1968), The Secular City, Penguin, London, p. 93, quoted in M. Douglas (1973), Natural Symbols, Penguin, London, p. 37.
Included references (Harvard, In-text, Authorate)
In this third style of referencing, which is commonly used in science and the social sciences, all references are cited in the body of your text. The references are extremely brief (writer's family name, date of publication, page number) and the full bibliographic information is supplied in the bibliography. Some styles of included referencing use p. or pp. to indicate page numbers. Others use a colon: between the year and the page number.
Format:
1 If the writer's name appears in the text of your essay, the remaining items of the citation will follow this in brackets,
e.g. Beard (1970: pp. 91-92) argues that concept learning is important.
(Here the actual argument is found on pages 91 and 92.)
e.g. Fox (1967) demonstrates the close relationship between kinship and marriage in certain
societies.
(As this relationship is the theme of the whole book, no specific page references are given.)
2 If the writer's name does not appear in the text of your essay, the reference must include his or her family name within the brackets and should come at the end of a sentence or immediately following a direct quotation.
e.g. It has been argued that concept learning is important (Beard, 1970, pp. 91-92).
Comparison of referencing styles
Each style of referencing has characteristic advantages:
1 Footnotes make it easy for the reader to identify a source immediately merely by glancing to the bottom of the page. However, lengthy footnotes, including comments and additional information, can be distracting and clumsy.
2 Endnotes permit extended commentary and additional information, but require the reader to refer constantly between the actual text and the final pages of the essay.
3 Included references are extremely efficient but can only identify a source and allow no room for additional comments.
In order to demonstrate these styles of referencing more clearly, we have taken a passage from a student's prehistory essay and used included references in version 1 and footnotes in version 2. Endnotes represent the version 2 style, except that the citations for the whole essay would be listed at the end.
Version 1
The work of van Lawick-Goodall (1971), Kortlandt and van Zon (1968), and Wright (1972) shows that present-day chimpanzees, orangutans and macaque monkeys are capable of using simple tools and bipedal locomotion. Wright (1972, p. 305) concluded, after tool-using experiments with a captive orangutan, that manipulative disability is not a factor which would have prevented Australopithecines from mastering the fundamentals of tool technology. However, while there is an unquestionable validity in comparing the behaviour of present-day apes with early hominids, it is important to note, as Howells (1973, p. 53) says, 'a Pantroglodyte is not and cannot be the ancestor of man. He cannot be an ancestor of anything but future chimpanzees.'
3
3
However, van Lawick-Goodall (1971, p. 233) suggests that the modern chimpanzee shows a type of intelligence closer to that of man than is found in any other present-day mammal. She argues that
…the chimpanzee is, nevertheless, a creature of immense signifance to the understanding of man…He has the ability to solve quite complex problems, he can use and make tools for a variety of purposes. Who knows what the chimpanzees will be like forty million years hence? (van Lawick-Goodall, 1971, pp. 244-245).
The bibliography following the essay from which this passage was taken includes the following items:
Howells, W. (1973), Evalution of the Genus Homo, Addison-Wesley, New York.
Kortlandt, A. & van Zon, J. C. J. (1968), 'The present state of research on the dehuminization hypothesis of African ape evolution'. Proc. 2nd Int. Cong. Primatol., Atlanta, pp. 10-13.
Van Lawick-Goodall, J. (1971), In the Shadow of Man, Collins, London.
Wright, R.V. S. (1972), 'Imitative learning of a flaked-stone technology', Mankind 8, pp. 296-306.
Version 2
The work of van Lawick-Goodall,1 Kortlandt and van Zon,2 and Wright3 shows that present-day chimpanzees, orangutans and macaque monkeys are capable of using simple tools and bipedal locomotion. Wright concluded, after tool-using experiments with a captive orangutan, that manipulative disability is not a factor which would have prevented Australopithecines from mastering the fundamentals of tool technology.4 However, while there is unquestionable validity in comparing the behaviour of present-day apes with early hominids, it is important to note, as Howells says, 'a Pantroglodyte is not and cannot be the ancestor of man. He cannot be an ancestor of anything but future chimpanzees.'5
However, van Lawick-Goodall suggests that the modern chimpanzee shows a type of intelligence closer to that of man than is found in any other present-day mammal.6 She argues that
…the chimpanzee is, nevertheless a creature of immense significance to the understanding of man…He has the ability to solve quite complex problems, he can use and make tools for a variety of purposes…Who knows what the chimpanzees will be like forty million years hence? 7
1 J. van Lawick-Goodall (1971), In the Shadow of Man,Collins.
2 A. Kortlandt & J. C. J. van Zon (1968), 'The present state of research on the dehumanization hypothesis of African ape evolution', Proc.2nd Int.Congr.Primatol, Atlanta, pp. 10-13.
3 R.V.S.Wright (1972), 'Imitative learning of a flaked-stone technology', Mankind 8, pp. 296-306.
4 ibid., p. 305.
5 Howells (1973), Evolution of the Genus Homo, Addison-Wesley p. 53.
6 van Lawick-Goodall, op.cit., p. 233.
7 ibid., pp. 244-245.
http://www.anu.edu.au/academicskill.../footnotes_endnotes_and_harvard_citations.pdf
The first two systems of referencing, footnotes and endnotes, are very similar: in both you insert a number (either in brackets or slightly above the line) in your text at the end of a sentence or immediately following a direct quotation or a point taken from a source. For footnotes these numbers may either run consecutively through the whole essay or start afresh with (1) at the start of each new page; for endnotes the numbering is always consecutive. With footnotes the information about the source of each numbered reference is given at the bottom of each page of your text; with endnotes the same information is given in a consolidated list at the end of the essay.
Format: The following points should be noted, both for use in your own essays and to enable you to interpret the footnotes and endnotes you encounter in your reading:
1 On a first citation of a work, full details, as in the bibliography, must be given, together with a precise page reference, for example, 'R. Beard (1970), Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, Penguin, London, p. 49.'
2 Subsequent references to the same work may be cited by:
short form: the writer's name, the short title, and the page number,
e.g. Beard, Teaching and Learning, pp. 89-91.
op.cit.: (i.e. opere citato, Latin, 'in the work cited') This is used following the writer's name and followed by the page reference when the citation is to the same work referred to in earlier but not in the immediately preceding footnote. It may or may not be underlined, e.g.,
1. M. Douglas (1973), Natural Symbols, Penguin, London, p.88.
2. R. Fox (1967), Kinship and Marriage, Penguin, London, p.161.
3. M. Douglas, op.cit., p.132.
ibid.: (i.e. ibidem, Latin, 'in the same place') This is used, with a following page number, when the citation is to the same work referred to in the immediately preceding footnote. It may or may not be underlined, e.g.,
1. M. Douglas (1973), Natural Symbols, Penguin, London, p.68
2. ibid., pp. 70-71,
3. ibid., p. 173
2
2
1 Other common abbreviations in references:
loc.cit. (loco citato, 'in the place already quoted') has confused usage (and you would probably be wise to avoid it in your own writing). It is sometimes used in place of op.cit. when the reference is to an article or chapter rather than a book. It is sometimes used in place of ibid. when the citation is to the same source and the same page as the immediately preceding reference. It is sometimes used in place of op.cit. when the citation is to the same page as the previous citation to the same source.
f. (or ff.) ('and the following page(s)') is used to indicate frequent references to an item within a few consecutive pages, e.g. R. Fox, Kinship and Marriage, p. 71f.
passim ('scatteredly') is used when the reference is to items to be found throughout that source or that section of a book. E.g. Beard, Teaching and Learning, passim.
2 Complex references. If you are citing a quotation or material which you have found already quoted by another writer, include in your citation both the full bibliographic details of the original quotation (which you will find in the reference) and the details of the book in which you found it, e.g. H. Cox (1968), The Secular City, Penguin, London, p. 93, quoted in M. Douglas (1973), Natural Symbols, Penguin, London, p. 37.
Included references (Harvard, In-text, Author
ate)In this third style of referencing, which is commonly used in science and the social sciences, all references are cited in the body of your text. The references are extremely brief (writer's family name, date of publication, page number) and the full bibliographic information is supplied in the bibliography. Some styles of included referencing use p. or pp. to indicate page numbers. Others use a colon: between the year and the page number.
Format:
1 If the writer's name appears in the text of your essay, the remaining items of the citation will follow this in brackets,
e.g. Beard (1970: pp. 91-92) argues that concept learning is important.
(Here the actual argument is found on pages 91 and 92.)
e.g. Fox (1967) demonstrates the close relationship between kinship and marriage in certain
societies.
(As this relationship is the theme of the whole book, no specific page references are given.)
2 If the writer's name does not appear in the text of your essay, the reference must include his or her family name within the brackets and should come at the end of a sentence or immediately following a direct quotation.
e.g. It has been argued that concept learning is important (Beard, 1970, pp. 91-92).
Comparison of referencing styles
Each style of referencing has characteristic advantages:
1 Footnotes make it easy for the reader to identify a source immediately merely by glancing to the bottom of the page. However, lengthy footnotes, including comments and additional information, can be distracting and clumsy.
2 Endnotes permit extended commentary and additional information, but require the reader to refer constantly between the actual text and the final pages of the essay.
3 Included references are extremely efficient but can only identify a source and allow no room for additional comments.
In order to demonstrate these styles of referencing more clearly, we have taken a passage from a student's prehistory essay and used included references in version 1 and footnotes in version 2. Endnotes represent the version 2 style, except that the citations for the whole essay would be listed at the end.
Version 1
The work of van Lawick-Goodall (1971), Kortlandt and van Zon (1968), and Wright (1972) shows that present-day chimpanzees, orangutans and macaque monkeys are capable of using simple tools and bipedal locomotion. Wright (1972, p. 305) concluded, after tool-using experiments with a captive orangutan, that manipulative disability is not a factor which would have prevented Australopithecines from mastering the fundamentals of tool technology. However, while there is an unquestionable validity in comparing the behaviour of present-day apes with early hominids, it is important to note, as Howells (1973, p. 53) says, 'a Pantroglodyte is not and cannot be the ancestor of man. He cannot be an ancestor of anything but future chimpanzees.'
3
3
However, van Lawick-Goodall (1971, p. 233) suggests that the modern chimpanzee shows a type of intelligence closer to that of man than is found in any other present-day mammal. She argues that
…the chimpanzee is, nevertheless, a creature of immense signifance to the understanding of man…He has the ability to solve quite complex problems, he can use and make tools for a variety of purposes. Who knows what the chimpanzees will be like forty million years hence? (van Lawick-Goodall, 1971, pp. 244-245).
The bibliography following the essay from which this passage was taken includes the following items:
Howells, W. (1973), Evalution of the Genus Homo, Addison-Wesley, New York.
Kortlandt, A. & van Zon, J. C. J. (1968), 'The present state of research on the dehuminization hypothesis of African ape evolution'. Proc. 2nd Int. Cong. Primatol., Atlanta, pp. 10-13.
Van Lawick-Goodall, J. (1971), In the Shadow of Man, Collins, London.
Wright, R.V. S. (1972), 'Imitative learning of a flaked-stone technology', Mankind 8, pp. 296-306.
Version 2
The work of van Lawick-Goodall,1 Kortlandt and van Zon,2 and Wright3 shows that present-day chimpanzees, orangutans and macaque monkeys are capable of using simple tools and bipedal locomotion. Wright concluded, after tool-using experiments with a captive orangutan, that manipulative disability is not a factor which would have prevented Australopithecines from mastering the fundamentals of tool technology.4 However, while there is unquestionable validity in comparing the behaviour of present-day apes with early hominids, it is important to note, as Howells says, 'a Pantroglodyte is not and cannot be the ancestor of man. He cannot be an ancestor of anything but future chimpanzees.'5
However, van Lawick-Goodall suggests that the modern chimpanzee shows a type of intelligence closer to that of man than is found in any other present-day mammal.6 She argues that
…the chimpanzee is, nevertheless a creature of immense significance to the understanding of man…He has the ability to solve quite complex problems, he can use and make tools for a variety of purposes…Who knows what the chimpanzees will be like forty million years hence? 7
1 J. van Lawick-Goodall (1971), In the Shadow of Man,Collins.
2 A. Kortlandt & J. C. J. van Zon (1968), 'The present state of research on the dehumanization hypothesis of African ape evolution', Proc.2nd Int.Congr.Primatol, Atlanta, pp. 10-13.
3 R.V.S.Wright (1972), 'Imitative learning of a flaked-stone technology', Mankind 8, pp. 296-306.
4 ibid., p. 305.
5 Howells (1973), Evolution of the Genus Homo, Addison-Wesley p. 53.
6 van Lawick-Goodall, op.cit., p. 233.
7 ibid., pp. 244-245.
http://www.anu.edu.au/academicskill.../footnotes_endnotes_and_harvard_citations.pdf
rhapsody11
Member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2005
- Messages
- 144
- Gender
- Undisclosed
- HSC
- N/A
This is the definite answer. You're all (apart from Asy) sempaku.
With Harvard style, if you want to reference a citation, you refer to the original text in the body.
Say if Stas wrote a textbook on marketing in 2002, and Mike quoted him:
Mike's book might say:
In the biblio, you say 'cited in'.
With Harvard style, if you want to reference a citation, you refer to the original text in the body.
Say if Stas wrote a textbook on marketing in 2002, and Mike quoted him:
Mike's book might say:
Your essay would say:mike's book said:
(Or however you arrange your crappy references, whether it's |Author|:|Year| or |Author|:|Page|)your essay body said:
In the biblio, you say 'cited in'.
nb: in the biblio, it's optional to put the details of stas' book. You could simply putyour biblio said:
[edit; sorry, had to change italics of the book names into underlines, because the quote function uses all text as italic]your biblio (alternate) said:
Last edited:
ManlyChief
Member
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2005
- Messages
- 438
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2002
Howdie. Please let us remember -
(1) Every department in every university has their own style requirements, just like every journal, so there can never be a 'definitive' method or even a definitive style within each method. You must conform to the style for that department. For example I need to conform to 3 different styles in preparing my final essays for this semester. It's a bitch, but that's the way the cookie crumbles.
(2) You can only cite a work if you have read that work. To do otherwise is academic dishonesty. Just because we might not be caught dosen't mean it's not wrong ...
(3) Join me in the campaign to convert the world to footnotes and abandon that horrid 'intext'/'Harvard' system. It was invented in the era of typewriters to avoid the hassle of having to do footnotes on a typewriter - but now we all use word processors it is redundant. And it's ugly. It has to go!
Love to you all.
(1) Every department in every university has their own style requirements, just like every journal, so there can never be a 'definitive' method or even a definitive style within each method. You must conform to the style for that department. For example I need to conform to 3 different styles in preparing my final essays for this semester. It's a bitch, but that's the way the cookie crumbles.
(2) You can only cite a work if you have read that work. To do otherwise is academic dishonesty. Just because we might not be caught dosen't mean it's not wrong ...
(3) Join me in the campaign to convert the world to footnotes and abandon that horrid 'intext'/'Harvard' system. It was invented in the era of typewriters to avoid the hassle of having to do footnotes on a typewriter - but now we all use word processors it is redundant. And it's ugly. It has to go!
Love to you all.
I couldn't agree more. I'm in love with the legal footnote-style system of formatting (UoW uses the MULR Guide to Legal Citation, unsure about other law faculties). I had to use the in-text system for one of my subjects last semester and I couldn't stand it. So, so clumsy.ManlyChief said:
Keen
MD
- Joined
- Jul 20, 2004
- Messages
- 283
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2003
In our subject we got an example say you read about Freud's work in a general psych book (Myers, 2001) you would write: Freud had some interesting ideas (Freud, 1917 in Myers, 2001). Only Myers, 2001 appears in the reference list. I think this is fairly standard system. And while you may be right about different faculties and their systems, you're also wrong as most usually ask you to use either Harvard or Vancouver which are set refrencing styles. I just had to resubmit an assignment because I took slight liberties with Vancouver (using more of a harvard style in the writing out the referecing at the end).
Keen
Keen
ManlyChief
Member
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2005
- Messages
- 438
- Gender
- Male
- HSC
- 2002
I think it's quite presumptious of you to call me "wrong", and I take offence at that.Keen said:
- In law, we are asked to use the style set forth in Strhumke - but this changes if we are submitting something to the Review for publishing, in which case we are asked to use the house style of the Review (set out in the Review Style Guide). 2 different styles there.
- In history, the departmental policy has now adopted the Chicago Style for referencing. Theses, however, may be written following the Chicago, Oxford, MHRA style manuals. An abundance of styles there.
- In Government and International Relations, there was a degree of choice between a number of styles, including Harvard.
So, most do not "usually ask you to use either Harvard or Vancouver" (I have never once been asked to "use Vancouver") - and I have no problem in restating the proposition that you found so wrong: Every department in every university has their own style requirements, just like every journal, so there can never be a 'definitive' method or even a definitive style within each method. You must conform to the style for that department.
hipsta_jess
Up the mighty red V
- Joined
- May 30, 2003
- Messages
- 5,981
- Gender
- Female
- HSC
- N/A
IMO footnotes suck, and in text is the bomb.