Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-fscjk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T21:42:34.520Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Plagiarism and ideology: Identity in intercultural discourse

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  19 February 2009

Ron Scollon
Ron Scollon
Affiliation:
Department of English, City Polytechnic of Hong Kong, 83 Tat Chee Avenue, Kowloon, Hong Kong
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The concept of plagiarism, as used both in considerations of academic writing and in international negotiations over intellectual copyright, assumes a model of communication based on autonomous, rational, individuals who behave as originators of their own discourses. But studies of communication, beginning with Goffman's concepts of production format and footing – and also including the concepts of enactment, social role, face, politeness pragmatics, metaphors of self and communication, and innatist/social concepts of knowledge – indicate that such a unified, autonomous, and original communicative identity presupposes an oversimplified model of communication, centrally based in the ideology of the rational, autonomous individual which has been dominant in Europe since the Enlightenment. The concept of plagiarism masks the assertion of this ideological position. (Plagiarism, ideology, identity, intercultural discourse)

Type
Research Article
Information
Language in Society , Volume 24 , Issue 1 , March 1995 , pp. 1 - 28
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Allen, R. E. (1990), ed. The concise Oxford dictionary of current English. 8th ed.Oxford: Clarendon.Google Scholar
Bakhtin, Mikhail (1981). The dialogic imagination. Austin: University of Texas Press. [First published in 1934–35.].Google Scholar
Bakhtin, Mikhail (1986). Speech genres and other late essays. Austin: University of Texas Press. [First published in 1952].Google Scholar
Bell, Allan (1991). The language of the news media. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Bellah, Robert N. et al. , (1985). Habits of the heart. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Bentham, Jeremy (1988). A fragment on government. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press. [First published in 1776.]CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boswood, Timothy; Dwyer, Robert; Hoffman, Robert; & Lockhart, Charlie (1993). Audiotaped feedback on writing. City Polytechnic of Hong Kong, Department of English, Research report no. 24.Google Scholar
Brown, Penelope, & Levinson, Stephen (1978). Universals in language usage: politeness phenomena. In Goody, Esther (ed.), Questions and politeness, 56–289. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press. (Revised as Politeness, Cambridge University Press, 1987.)Google Scholar
Carbaugh, Donal (1989). Talking American: Cultural discourses on DONAHUE. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Cazden, Courtney (1995). Vygotsky, Hymes and Bakhtin: From word to utterance and voice. In Forman, Ellice A. et al. (eds.), Contexts for learning: Sociocultural dynamics in children's development, 197–212. Oxford & New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Duranti, Alessandro (1993). Beyond Bakhtin, or the dialogic imagination in academia. Pragmatics 3:333–40.Google Scholar
Gee, James Paul (1989). Literacy, discourse, and linguistics: Essays. Jurnal of Education 171:1–176.Google Scholar
Gee, James Paul (1990). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses. London: Falmer.Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving (1974). Frame analysis. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar
Goffman, Erving (1981). Forms of talk. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
Hsu, Francis L. K. (1983). Rugged individualism reconsidered: Essays in psychological anthropology. Knoxville: University of Tennessee Press.Google Scholar
Hsu, Francis L. K. (1985). The self in cross-cultural perspective. In Marsella, Anthon J. et al. (eds.), Culture and self: Asian and Western perspectives, 24–55. New York: Tavistock.Google Scholar
Hu, Hsien Chin (1944). The Chinese concept of “face”. American Anthropologist 46:45–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hymes, Dell (1972). Models of the interaction of language and social life. In Gumperz, John J. & Hymes, Dell (eds.), Directions in sociolinguistics, 35–71. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
Kant, Immanuel (1990). The science of right. In Adler, Mortimer J. (ed.), Great books of the Western world. Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica. [First published in 1788.]Google Scholar
Lakoff, George, & Johnson, Mark (1990). Metaphors we live by. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Lakoff, Robin (1973). The logic of politeness; or, minding your p's and q's. Chicago Linguistic Society 9:292–305.Google Scholar
Lakoff, Robin (1974). What you can do with words: Politeness, pragmatics and performatives. Berkeley Studies in Syntax and Semantics 1:1–55.Google Scholar
Lanham, Richard A.. (1983). Literacy and the survival of humanism. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Li, Chor Shing David; Yee, Wanda Poon Lau Woon; Rogerson-Revell, Pamela M.; Scollon, Ron; Scollon, Suzanne; Kwong, Bartholomew Yu Shiu; & Yee, Vicki Yung Kit (1993). Contrastive discourse in English and Cantonese newsstories: A preliminary analysis of newspaper, radio, and television versions of the Lan Kwai Fong newsstory. City Polytechnic of Hong Kong, Department of English, Research report no. 30.Google Scholar
Lin, Angel M. Y. (1990). Teaching in two tongues: Language alternation in foreign language classrooms. City Polytechnic of Hong, Department of English, Research report no 3.Google Scholar
Locke, John (1990). An enquiry concerning human understanding. In Adler, Mortimer J. (ed.), Great books of the Western world. Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica. [First published in 1690.]Google Scholar
Magner, D. K. (1993a). Historian charged with plagiarism disputes critics' definition of term. Chronicle of Higher Education, 05 12, A16–A20.Google Scholar
Magner, D. K. (1993b). History association to probe accusations of plagiarism against Stephen Oates. Chronicle of Higher Education, 06 2, A12–A14.Google Scholar
Markus, Hazel Rose, & Kitayama, Shinobu (1991). Culture and the self: Implications for cognition, emotion, and motivation. Psychological Review 98:224–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McCormick, F. (1989). The “plagiario” and the professor in our peculiar institution. Journal of Teaching Writing 8:133–45.Google Scholar
Mill, John Stuart (1990). Utilitarianism. In Adler, Mortimer J. (ed.), Great books of the Westernw orld. Chicago: Encyclopaedia Britannica. [First published in 1836.]Google Scholar
Miller, Keith D. (1993). Point of view. Chronicle of Higher Education, 01 20, A60.Google Scholar
Moerman, Michael (1988). Talking culture. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murphy, R. (1990). Anorexia: The cheating disorder. College English 52:898–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nienhuis, T. (1989). The quick fix: Curing plagiarism with a note-taking exercise. College Teaching 37:100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nordhoff, Nancy (1993). Experiencing Hedgebrook. Cottages at Hedgebrook News, Winter/Spring, p. 3.Google Scholar
Patterson, Lyman Ray (1968). Copyright in historical perspective. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press.Google Scholar
Philipsen, Gerry (1990). Speaking “like a man” in Teamsterville: Culture patterns of role enactment in an urban neighborhood. In Carbaugh, Donal (ed.), Cultural communication and intercultural contact, 11–26. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Reddy, Michael J.. (1979). The conduit metaphor: A case of frame conflict in our language about language. In Ortony, Andrew (ed.), Metaphor and thought, 284–324. Cambridge & New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Richards, Jack C.; Platt, John; & Weber, Heidi (1985). Longman dictionary of applied linguistics. Harlow, England: Longman.Google Scholar
Rogers, Everett M., & Agarwala-Rogers, Rekha (1976). Communication in organizations. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Samovar, Larry A.., & Porter, Richard E.. (1988), eds. Intercultural communication: A reader. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
Scollon, Ron (1981). Human knowledge and the institution's knowledge. Final report to the National Institute of Education on grant no. G–80–0185, Communication Patterns and Retention in a Public University.Google Scholar
Scollon, Ron (1994). As a matter of fact: The changing ideology of authorship and responsibility in discourse. World Englishes 13:33–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Scollon, Ron, & Scollon, Suzanne (1981). Narrative, literacy and face in interethnic communication. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Google Scholar
Scollon, Ron & Scollon, Suzanne (1992). Individualism and binarism: A critique of American intercultural communication analysis. City Polytechnic of Hong Kong, Department of English, Research report 22.Google Scholar
Scollon, Ron & Scollon, Suzanne (1994). Face parameters in East-West discourse. In Ting-Toomey, Stella (ed.), The challenge of facework, 133–57. Albany: State University of New York Press.Google Scholar
Scollon, Ron, Scollon, Suzanne (1995). Intercultural communication: A discourse approach. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Scollon, Suzanne (1989). Literacy and face relations in teaching English in China. In Shuime, Chang et al. (eds.), A collection of papers presented in the Sixth Conference on English Teaching and Learning in the Republic of China, 195–204. Taipei: Crane.Google Scholar
Scollon, Suzanne (1993). Contrastive metaphors of self and communication. Perspectives (Working Papers of the Department of English, City Polytechnic of Hong Kong) 5:41–62.Google Scholar
StOnge, K. R.. (1988). The melancholy anatomy of plagiarism. Lanham, MD: University Press of America.Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah (1986). That's not what I meant! New York: Ballentine.Google Scholar
Tannen, Deborah (1989). The pragmatics of cross-cultural communication. Applied Linguistics 5:189–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tannen, Deborah (1990). You just don't understand: Women and men in conversation. New York: Morrow.Google Scholar
Ting-Toomey, Stella (1988). Intercultural conflict styles: A face-negotiation theory. In Young, Kim & Gudykunst, William (eds.), Theories in intercultural communication, 213–35. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
Uspensky, Boris (1973). A poetics of composition. Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar