How do we know this?
DaRoza said that he swung the cane as hard as he could into Keel's face.
Is it because DaRoza said it to us?
No, it's not. It's because DaRoza told the cops, and the cops put it in their report, and we read the report. So, proper attribution would be something like this:
DaRoza said that he swung the cane as hard as he could into Keel's face, according to a sheriff's report.
Let's not forget attribution. Attribution needs to go with everything we didn't witness, and needs to be attributed to the source of information. Often, that source is someone we interviewed. But in other cases, like here, it's the police report we read. Be sure to cite it, so people know from where you got your information.
So, if your source is a police report, treat attribution to that report in the exact same way we would treat attribution from an interview subject. And that's true whether our source of information is a person or a report or a stone tablet or graffiti on a wall.
In this story, odds were you should have offered a repeated, according to the police report over and over again, in graf after graf. That's okay. Just like human source attribution, we simply need to be consistent and thorough, even if it is a bit repetitive.
Also, in this story it would have been wrong to attribute things to the responding officer. That's because you didn't get information from the officer, you got it from the report he wrote.
If we talk so someone, we attribute the person. If we get it from a report the person wrote, then we either attribute it to so-and-so-wrote in a report (or, in the case of witnesses, so-and-so said, according to the report), or we simply attribute it to just, the report said.
DaRoza said that he swung the cane as hard as he could into Keel's face.
Is it because DaRoza said it to us?
No, it's not. It's because DaRoza told the cops, and the cops put it in their report, and we read the report. So, proper attribution would be something like this:
DaRoza said that he swung the cane as hard as he could into Keel's face, according to a sheriff's report.
Let's not forget attribution. Attribution needs to go with everything we didn't witness, and needs to be attributed to the source of information. Often, that source is someone we interviewed. But in other cases, like here, it's the police report we read. Be sure to cite it, so people know from where you got your information.
So, if your source is a police report, treat attribution to that report in the exact same way we would treat attribution from an interview subject. And that's true whether our source of information is a person or a report or a stone tablet or graffiti on a wall.
In this story, odds were you should have offered a repeated, according to the police report over and over again, in graf after graf. That's okay. Just like human source attribution, we simply need to be consistent and thorough, even if it is a bit repetitive.
Also, in this story it would have been wrong to attribute things to the responding officer. That's because you didn't get information from the officer, you got it from the report he wrote.
If we talk so someone, we attribute the person. If we get it from a report the person wrote, then we either attribute it to so-and-so-wrote in a report (or, in the case of witnesses, so-and-so said, according to the report), or we simply attribute it to just, the report said.
No comments:
Post a Comment