Confusing and wordy, but. . .

I still have my MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers, second edition, that I purchased in 1984, prior to my entering college. A slim 224 pages, the book nonetheless provided the information for accurately documenting sources cited for reports and research papers, as well as essentials on usage, grammar, spelling and proper formatting. Noticeably absent to a modern reader is any mention of the Internet, which although officially about 16 years old at the time, was still in its infancy. The sixth edition of the MLA Handbook for Writers of Research Papers, edited by Josephi Gibaldi, is a stout 364 pages, and contains ample explanations and examples regarding proper documentation of online sources.

The chapters and sections are numbered in decimal format. Chapter 1, Research and Writing, is broken down as follows: 1.1 The Research Paper as a Form of Exploration; 1.2 The Research Paper as a Form of Communication; 1.3 Selecting a Topic, etcetera. Similarly, topics in the index are also referenced this way instead of by page number. This is neither more nor less helpful, simply another method. The other chapters are: 2 Plagiarism; 3 The Mechanics of Writing; 4 The Format of the Research Paper; 5 Documentation: Preparing the List of Works Cited; 6 Documentation: Citing Sources in the Text; 7 Abbreviations. There are also two appendices: A: Selected Reference Works by Field and B: Other Systems of Documentation. Chapter 5 is a staggering 89 pages.

The MLA Handbook is so thorough as to be bewildering. Mr. Gibaldi provides examples not only for proper citation of books, magazine articles and web sites, but of television programs, performances of plays, musical scores, paintings, sculptures and photographs, as well as other sources too numerous to mention here. He leaves several questions unanswered. Under what circumstances would a writer have to cite a painting, sculpture or photograph? Certainly he would need permission to reproduce an image or a picture, but aside from including a copyright notice and the photographer or artist's name, why would anything else be necessary? For citing web sites, Mr. Gibaldi states that proper format requires first listing the name of the web site, underlined. That seem reasonable. Following is the name of the "editor" of the web site -or, I suppose, the writer/author/webmaster/whatever- if applicable. Then comes the date that the writer accessed the web site, followed by the url, or web address.

What if the writer goes back to the site two, three or four times? Is he expected to record each date in the entry? That could prove very cumbersome. The MLA Handbook places more emphasis on rigid, meticulous documentation than a well-written paper.

The section on conducting research (1.4) is helpful, and suggests a number of potentially valuable sources that most people would never realize existed. And while Mr. Gibaldi does dedicate a significant portion of the handbook to utilizing and documenting online sources, he does urge writers not to rely solely on that particular medium, citing difficulty in verifying the accuracy of some information, and certain limitations imposed by strictly Internet research. Also valuable is the warning about plagiarism, particularly inadvertent or unintentional plagiarism. Simply copying another's words verbatim is fairly obvious plagiarism, but the writer who paraphrases someone else's idea without giving due credit is just as guilty, Mr. Gibaldi cautions. Mr. Gibaldi also offers strategies for effective note-taking, and suggests the use of quotation marks when copying material for notes, lest the writer forget that he is actually taking down someone else's words.

With all of its obvious flaws, the MLA Handbook is still the standard for writers of research papers. Although I have my reservations about recommending this book, the choices out there are somewhat limited.