Josephine Andal

Proseminar

Prof. Agnieszka Szarkowska

LESSONS LEARNED FROM THE PAST:

A REMINDER ON THE IMPORTANCE OF DOING THINGS RIGHT

As students who are about to embark on a new expedition, the long and excruciating journey of writing an
academic thesis, being exposed to the The Great Eskimo Hoax provided us with a perfect example of how NOT to
do our research. This phenomenon is the result of a series of slipups committed one after the other. The worst part is,
that the players seemed to be unaware that what they stated were mere misconceptions of the previous studies
made, thus stripping them of the chance to get up and correct their blunders.

THE PAST
Who were the key players in these unfortunate events? From the article written by Martin (1986), she
mentioned that it was Franz Boas who pioneered a study on the Eskimos and snow in 1911. Boas provided four
words and stated that Eskimos apparently have distinct roots for different forms of snow. This is in no way different
from the English language having separate roots for different forms of water (liquid, lake, river, brook, wave, etc.).
Almost 30 years after, Benjamin Whorf presented as many as five words which were different from Boas.
His article was mentioned in numerous studies done after his work was published. However, questions were raised
for his inability to cite his sources and because of this, it wasnt clear whether or not he has read any related literature
written prior to his work.

Then came Roger Brown in 1958 who declared that there are only three words for snow. This figure was
deduced as a result of his superficial review of Whorfs work. By superficial, it means just by looking at the pictures on
Whorfs paper and not paying attention to the details. A year after, it was Edwards Hall who cited Boas but
misinterpreted his data. The list goes on and on even involving New York Times and Cleveland TV weather forecast.
From just four words it ballooned to 100, up to 200 and all of this happened because researchers did not take their
work seriously. They failed to check the validity of their resources and chose to take things at face value rather than
looking for a solid empirical evidence of the facts presented.

THE PRESENT
On Wikipedia
In this day and age, modern technology has given us the power to access a great number of research
materials online. Different sources are just right at the tip of our fingers. Just one click can lead us to that most
coveted article crucial to complete our study. With unlimited choices, we must be careful which ones to consider.
Unfortunately, some of us take the easiest and most convenient path: Wikipedia.
This I believe, is the most misused website of this era. Wikipedia itself describes its system as a freeaccess, free-content encyclopedia and anyone who has access to the site can edit almost any of its articles. It
follows a community-based production, comprised of different contributors whose main task is to monitor and improve

the entries. To be fair, it could be a good source of general information, and may also lead us to other related
reading materials as it contains references at the end of each entry. Still, the question of reliability arises due to its
multiple authorship. Who makes the final decision? Are all the entries monitored? It has to be highlighted though that
Wikipedia is not entirely to blame as they have been transparent on how their system works. The problem relies on
indolent students who treat it as the only valid source of information, an easy way out.

On Plagiarism
One basic rule that every researcher should follow: give credit where credit is due. Sadly, its a responsibility
that we do not all subscribe to. A clear indication of this dejected reality is the prevalence of plagiarism cases not just
in the academe, but also in politics, movies and arts. Our lives are definitely easier with the power of technology. Less
trips to the library are made because people are opting for free access to journals and books online. Note that there
are consequences for having a more convenient life. Sources found online do not always have the complete
reference information. So for us to have a bibliographical entry, the tendency is to cite incomplete information. Worse,
we do not cite altogether because we simply didnt get it and was too tired to make one more click. Remember that
whatever you fail to attribute, will forever hunt you.

This is what happened to Joe Biden who was then a US Senator when he was accused of plagiarizing
speeches during his campaign in the 80s causing him to withdraw from the presidential race. Another skeleton in his
closet came out on a similar offense he did during law school (Dionne, 1987).
In movies, words like knock off and inspiration are used as a more lenient term for plagiarism. Films like
Sliding Doors, a British-American romantic comedy was said to be a knock off of Krzysztof Kieslowskis Blind
Chance. The same was said for Avatar who got the idea from Pocahontas. Meanwhile, in the field of the
photography, a student submitted a plagiarized photo to a contest sponsored by the Chilean Ambassador Roberto
Mayorga. It won the top prize but was luckily caught by the real photographer (Aurelio, 2013). Bear in mind that the
internet is like a double-edged sword where its easy to get ideas, check others work, and other resources. But at the
same time, the same technology makes it easy to double-check sources or to uncover plagiarism

THE FUTURE
The cases listed above, blind obedience to unsupported data and unending incidence of plagiarism, are the
basic examples of how scholars honor academic laziness. Same actions that were clearly committed when the
Eskimo research was done. In my opinion, misinterpretation of a source text, just like what Edwards Hall did, may
have prompted us to question his capacity and readiness to take on such task. However, this deficiency can easily be
solved by exposure and re-learning. Plagiarism, on the other hand, is more serious and is a deeper grave to come
out from as it involves an intent to cause harm. It questions not only ones cognition but more importantly ones
integrity. Failure to cite properly, whether it was deliberate or by mere accident is still a misappropriation of another
persons ideas.

Plagiarism was defined by Martin (1994) as a serious breach of scholarly ethics, being a theft of credit for
ideas in a competitive intellectual marketplace. These ideas are referred to as Intellectual Properties-- any property
derived from the work of an individual's mind or intellect (2004). It could be a song, an invention or a book. Like any

other possession, permission must be asked before one can use it. In research, it is a must to acknowledge that
something was borrowed by citing your sources.
Why do we give so much importance on citing sources? As indicated, doing so gives respect to the source
of your idea. To add to this, Dartmouth College created their own document called Sources and Citation in Dartmouth
Colleges (2008) and it states that:
By citing sources correctly, you acknowledge your debts to other scholars, signal your desire to belong to
a community of ideas, and highlightpreciselyyour contribution to the ongoing academic conversation.
When you demonstrate that you have done the research required to qualify you to join the conversation,
you not only show respect for others work, you also confer authority upon yourself and highlight the
novelty of your particular contribution to the set of ideas under discussion. In these ways, citing sources
represents a fundamental step in developing a scholarly voice. Furthermore, by citing sources you extend
a courtesy to other scholars. Citations provide a trail by which others who are interested in your topic can
track an idea.

Going through the wearisome process of research is an exploration and a continuous learning process. Its
no secret that ideas are passed on from one generation to another and its not shameful to re-use data to support
your study. You owe it to your readers to provide similar works for them to understand the context of your
investigation.

Considering all that has been stated, the eternal mystery remains: how to push the students to the right
path. There is no one correct answer for this. The success of a thesis or any research for that matter would highly
depend on the give and take relationship between the student and the teacher. Students must be rational all times,
use common sense to figure out if information presented is factual or not. Generalizations, usually a product of
stereotypical ideas, must always be avoided. One should not be too nave of them, but rather be inquisitive and make
sure to have empirical data on hand before trusting a source. Utilize the tools technology provides to improve work
and find supporting materials. Check and re-check. A little touch of OCD (obsessive compulsive disorder) is required
to make sure that everything is in its proper place.

Should you encounter road blocks, ask questions. It would be helpful to consult an expert, and this is where
the role of a professor comes in. Professors serve as consultants who can help clarify doubts. They should be
supportive and open minded, and should learn to listen first before discrediting the study done by the student. Instead
of imposing an idea, they should encourage critical thinking. When one starts dictating, the other starts to feel loss of
control over his work, and this results to lack of interest. Together with foreign language problems, time constraints
and lack of knowledge, lack of interest is one of the factors that can cause plagiarism according to the study done by
Eret and Gokmenoglu (2010). Students must feel that professors can be trusted for them to open up and be receptive
to criticisms.
It is easy to pass off others words as ones own or to fabricate ideas to stir interest or to attract attention to
ones work. However, these days, plagiarism is easily discoverable. Once exposed, it can affect the credibility not
only of the document or idea itself, but raise questions on the integrity of the writer as well. So carefully note down all

your sources, in this way, forgetting to cite will never be your excuse. Just when you think that nobodys watching,
think again. Its best to always do things right, have a clear conscience and a clean online profile.
Genius borrows nobly Ralph Waldo Emerson
References:
Aurelio, J. (2013, September 24). UP Probes Photo Grabber. Inquirer. Retrieved from
http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/493661/up-probes-photo-grabber
Committee on Sources, (2008). Sources and Citation at Dartmouth College. Retrieved from http://writingspeech.dartmouth.edu/learning/materials/sources-and-citations-dartmouth#2A
Dionne Jr., E. (1987, September 18). Biden Admits Plagiarism in School But Says It Was Not Malevolent. New York
Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/1987/09/18/us/biden-admits-plagiarism-in-school-but-says-itwas-not-malevolent.html
Eret, E., & Gokmenoglu, T. (2010). Plagiarism in higher education: A Case Study with Prospective Academicians.
Procedia - Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2(2), 3303-3307.
Intellectual Property. (2004). In Merriam-Websters online dictionary. Retrieved from http://www.merriamwebster.com/dictionary/intellectual%20property
Martin, B. (1994). Plagiarism: A Misplaced Emphasis. Journal of Information Ethics, 3(2), 36-47.
Martin, L. (1986). Eskimo Words for Snow: A Case Study in the Genesis and Decay of an Anthropological Example.
American Anthropologist, New Series, Vol. 88, No. 2, 418-423.
Pullum, G. (1991). The great Eskimo vocabulary hoax. In G. Pullum The Great Eskimo Vocabulary Hoax and Other
Irreverent Essays on the Study of Language (pp. 159-171). Chicago & London: The University of Chicago
Press.