A manual for writers of research papers, theses, and dissertations, Ninth edition - Kate L. Turabian 2018

Reference works and secondary citations
Author-date style: citing specific types of sources
Source citation

19.9.1 Reference Works

Well-known reference works, such as major dictionaries and encyclopedias, should usually be cited only in parenthetical citations. You generally need not include them in your reference list, although you may choose to include a specific work that is critical to your argument or frequently cited. Omit the date, but specify the edition (if not the first, or unless no edition is specified). Articles consulted online will require a URL (see 15.4.1.3); for undated items, include an access date (see 15.4.1.5). For a work arranged by key terms such as a dictionary or encyclopedia, cite the item (not the volume or page number) preceded by s.v. (sub verbo, “under the word”; pl. s.vv.)

P:

✵ (Oxford English Dictionary, 3rd ed., s.v. “ROFL,” accessed March 9, 2017, http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/156942#eid1211161030)

✵ (Encyclopaedia Britannica, s.v. “Dame Margaret Drabble,” accessed June 26, 2016, http://www.britannica.com/biography/Margaret-Drabble)

Reference works on disk should include information about the medium.

P:

✵ (Oxford English Dictionary, 2nd ed., CD-ROM, version 4.0, s.v. “onomatopoeia”)

Treat reference works that are more specialized or less well known as you would a book (see 19.1).

R:

✵ MLA Handbook. 2016. 8th ed. New York: Modern Language Association of America.

✵ Aulestia, Gorka. 1989. Basque—English Dictionary. Reno: University of Nevada Press.

P:

✵ (MLA Handbook 2016, 6.8.2)

✵ (Aulestia 1989, 509)

An individual entry by a named author can be cited like a chapter in a book (see 19.1.9).

19.9.2 Reviews

Reviews of books, performances, and so forth may appear in a variety of periodicals and other sources. In your reference list, include the name of the reviewer; the words review of, followed by the name of the work reviewed and its author (or composer, director, or the like); any other pertinent information (such as film studio or location of a performance); and, finally, the periodical in which the review appeared. (You can repeat the year with the month and day in the reference list entry to avoid any confusion regarding the exact date.) If the review was consulted online, include a URL (see 15.4.1.3).

R:

✵ Brody, Richard. 2013. Review of Gravity, directed by Alfonso Cuarón. Warner Bros. Pictures. New Yorker, October 4, 2013.

✵ Cox, Katharine. 2016. Review of Covered in Ink: Tattoos, Women, and the Politics of the Body, by Beverly Yuen Thompson. Journal of Gender Studies 25, no. 3: 349—50. https://doi.org/10.1080/09589236.2016.1171889.

✵ Williams, Richard. 2015. Review of Bob Dylan in concert at the Royal Albert Hall, London, UK. Guardian, October 22, 2015. https://www.theguardian.com/music/2015/oct/22/bob-dylan-review-royal-albert-hall-london.

19.9.3 One Source Quoted in Another

Responsible researchers avoid repeating quotations that they have not actually seen in the original. If one source includes a useful quotation from another source, readers expect you to obtain the original to verify not only that the quotation is accurate but also that it fairly represents what the original meant.

If the original source is unavailable, however, cite it as “quoted in” the secondary source in your reference list. In a parenthetical citation, give only the name of the original author.

R:

✵ Zukofsky, Louis. 1931. “Sincerity and Objectification.” Poetry 37 (February): 269. Quoted in Bonnie Costello, Marianne Moore: Imaginary Possessions (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1981).

P:

✵ (Zukofsky 1931, 269)

The same situation may arise with a quotation you find in a secondary source drawn from a primary source (see 3.1). Often you will not be able to consult the primary source, especially if it is in an unpublished manuscript collection. In this case, follow the principles outlined above.

If, however, you consult a primary document or other work exhibited by the holding institution as part of an online collection (as opposed to a copy posted by someone else), such a source can usually be considered primary for the purposes of research. See 19.7.5 and 19.10.1.1 for examples.