Paraphrasing
To build a strong argument in your academic writing, you need to master paraphrasing. It’s about using ideas from other texts in your own words, ethically and effectively. Read on to learn practical strategies to paraphrase with confidence and avoid plagiarism.
How to paraphrase
The point of paraphrasing a text – apart from being best practice - is to demonstrate your understanding of the material and its context within the work you are doing. A paraphrase does not need to ‘sound fancy’ or use complex language – it simply needs to sound like you in conversation about a topic.
To paraphrase a text, read the source and make a list of bullet points outlining the original argument, discussion or idea. Read the original passage again to make sure you really do understand what has been written. Check your bullet points to ensure you have covered everything.
Next apply the following five key strategies to your bullet points to develop a paraphrase from them.
Paraphrasing strategies
Synonyms are different words with the same meaning. Some examples are: ‘small’ - ‘little’; or ‘large’ - ‘big’.
By using synonyms, you can retain the meaning of a passage - changing the language makes your paraphrase different from the original. Be aware, however, that only replacing some words with synonyms is not enough – using this strategy by itself will not be an effective paraphrase.
Change the expression used in the original sentence. This could include altering any (or all) of the following:
- tense, for example, from past tense to present, or vice versa
- grammar, for example, from passive voice to active voice
- word forms, for example, convert a verb to a noun
This strategy is best used in combination with others to ensure an effective paraphrase.
The third approach to paraphrasing involves reordering or swapping the ideas in the sentence.
For example:
- Original: Cats are superior to dogs.
- Paraphrase: Dogs are inferior to cats.
Consider changing the length of the sentences as you paraphrase. This would differentiate your paraphrase from the original, and there is nothing wrong with your paraphrase being longer than the original text.
For example, you could break a long sentence into several shorter sentences, or you might give more meaning and context in your paraphrase.
Another strategy involves making the meaning of the original more concrete (or simpler) in your paraphrased version.
This might involve using straightforward language, stating the ideas more plainly, or attempting to clarify and streamline complex concepts.
If you know yourself to be better at discussing a topic than writing about it, try this technique:
Imagine yourself explaining the point to some intelligent Year 12 kids in a classroom. If explaining ‘out loud’ helps you to find a new way to express the original text, then it is a short step to writing it down.
Remember, retaining the meaning of the original text is more important than becoming tangled in ‘fancy’ language.
Summarising
Summarising is a paraphrasing skill that involves taking a key text (book or article) or passage and condensing it when you write about it in your work.
You may choose to summarise if you want to:
- provide an overview of a text
For example: 'In her seminal work, Gender Trouble (1990), Butler argues that...'
- write about it in general
For example: 'Research into psychopathic behaviours in managers (Andrews & Furniss, 2009) suggests that they spend more effort in manipulating people than in other aspects of management.'
- condense complex or lengthy ideas for the sake of brevity
For example: 'Coronavirus has been shown by Byttebier (2022) to be caused by...'
- refer to an author’s overall findings, oeuvre (body of work), or key texts
For example: 'In his last three important works (2010; 2012; 2015), Derrida turned to exploring...'
- discuss a text, theory or concept developed over a long period of time
For example: 'The feminist movement can be traced back several centuries to Mary Wollstonecraft (1792), who wrote that...'
Example paraphrase
This original quote is by Plutarch, translated from Greek into English. It is not an easy passage to read!
By paraphrasing, the writer hopes to improve the flow of the writing without changing the meaning.
On leaving that country and traversing Asia, he learned that Domitius had been defeated by Pharnaces the son of Mithridates and had fled from Pontus with a few followers; also that Pharnaces, using his victory without stint, and occupying Bithynia and Cappadocia, was aiming to secure the country called Lesser Armenia, and was rousing to revolt all the princes and tetrarchs there. At once, therefore, Caesar marched against him with three legions, fought a great battle with him near the city of Zela, drove him in flight out of Pontus, and annihilated his army. In announcing the swiftness and fierceness of this battle to one of his friends at Rome, Amantius, Caesar wrote three words: “Came, saw, conquered.” In Latin, however, the words have the same inflectional ending, and so a brevity which is most impressive.
- Caesar in Asia, news regarding Pontus
- Domitius defeated and has fled
- Pharnaces (son of Mithridates) in revolt
- Occupying Bithynia and Cappadocia trying to gain Lesser Armenia
- Caesar defeated Domitius using three legions near city of Zela
- Battle was swift and very successful
- Caesar writes to his friend Amantius: Came, saw, conquered (the Latin = ‘Veni, Vedi, Vici’*)
- Plutarch comments on the same inflectional ending and brevity of this statement (refer to rhetoric-alliteration)
According to Plutarch, it was while travelling through Asia that Caesar heard of the defeat of Domitius and his flight from Pontus. (Plutarch, trans. 1919) Pharnaces, the son of Mithradates, had led a revolt which occupied Bithynia and Cappadocia and was currently attempting to secure lesser Armenia. In a swift confrontation outside the city of Zela, Caesar and his three legions comprehensively defeated the rebels. Caesar famously wrote “Veni. Vedi. Vici.” to his friend Amantius. Plutarch is impressed by the brevity of this rhetorical alliteration, which translates as ‘came, saw, conquered’ (Plutarch, Life of Caesar, 50).
Note that with some additional research into what is said, the Latin that Caesar is purported to have used was a well-known phrase, which may support the overall interpretation of the piece.