1

In my paper, I am quoting a sentence which involves a quote from another paper. I am using Chicago style notes and bibliography. How should I do this? See the example below:

Hoffman concludes, “Actual class affiliation is not as important for the rise of Islamic fundamentalism as ‘an incongruity between high aspirations and the decrease in economic and political opportunities.’”

Is it enough if I just reference Hoffman like this in my note:

Valerie J. Hoffman, “Muslim Fundamentalists: Psychosocial Profiles,” in Fundamentalisms Comprehended, ed. Martin E. Marty and R. Scott Appleby (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1995), 203.

Or should I also in some way include a reference to the reference she uses?

Improve this question

2 Answers 2

Reset to default
2

The important issue is not the citation style. The important issue is that you should look at the original source, the paper that Hoffman quotes from. This way you will be able to give credit to the person who wrote it, and it makes sure that you are quoting them accurately.

If that one sentence is all you are quoting from Hoffman, I don't think you should cite her paper at all. Just cite the one she is quoting from.

You might find this paper interesting, about the importance of checking references properly: "Monuments to Academic Carelessness: The Self-fulfilling Prophecy of Katherine Frost Bruner", by Rekdal. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0162243914532138

Improve this answer
6
  • Yes, paraphrasing (after looking up the sources) would obviate the need for a "nested citation" as well.
    – henning no longer feeds AI
    Commented Oct 28, 2021 at 18:32
  • There are different opinions about this, but I generally want to credit where I found the source I'm checking.
    – joncgoodwin
    Commented Oct 28, 2021 at 19:01
  • @user2619203 You can cite the publication that cited the earlier one if you want. But if a quotation from someone else is all you are crediting them for, I think it is unnecessary. Checking and citing the original source is the important thing.
    – toby544
    Commented Oct 29, 2021 at 6:48
  • The reason I am not directly including the secondary source is because I am doing a literature review and that paper does not fulfill my inclusion criteria. Paraphrasing Hoffman would definitely solve the problem, but I'm still curious to know whether there are any guidelines how to solve this. For example in a case in which one has a much longer quote
    – kraagje
    Commented Oct 30, 2021 at 11:10
  • @arina That isn't a good reason not to include the original source. If you have a list of papers that fulfil your inclusion criteria, then that is OK, and you can put that list in a table to show it clearly. But you should still check and cite the original source.
    – toby544
    Commented Oct 30, 2021 at 18:22
1

Look at 14.273 of the Chicago Manual of Style (16th ed.). You can see an example of how it would be formatted here: https://libguides.westsoundacademy.org/c.php?g=457482&p=3156527

Improve this answer
8
  • Welcome to Academia! Whilst this may theoretically answer the question, it would be preferable to include the essential parts of the answer here, and provide the link for reference.
    – Anton Menshov
    Commented Oct 28, 2021 at 15:24
  • The linked example doesn't answer the question whether the in-text reference to the source of the "inner" quotation has to be included within the "outer" quotation and if so, how.
    – henning no longer feeds AI
    Commented Oct 28, 2021 at 18:35
  • Yes, it does, as does the CMS. See: "Astrik L. Gabriel, "The Educational Ideas of Christine de Pisan," Journal of the History of Ideas 16, no. 1 (1995): 3-21, quoted in Sarah Gwyneth Ross, The Birth of Feminism: Women as Intellect in Renaissance Italy and England (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2009), 23." The question did not give the bibliographic information for what Hoffman quoted, but it can be found in the source and formatted per above.
    – joncgoodwin
    Commented Oct 28, 2021 at 19:00
  • @user2619203 The CMS only discusses the case in which one wants to quote the part that Hoffman quoted. It says nothing about what you should do when you also include part of the text written by Hoffman.
    – kraagje
    Commented Oct 30, 2021 at 11:06
  • In the example in my comment above, Ross = Hoffman, no?
    – joncgoodwin
    Commented Oct 30, 2021 at 18:52

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .