Timeline for Changing a quotation so that the original is recognised, but has been given a new meaning
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
4 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 29, 2011 at 8:23 | comment | added | mudri | As it happens, I thought it was "paraphrasing" at first, then I looked it up and Wikipedia said that it was basically stating what a quotation implies. The quotation being talked about is separated from the paraphrasing by a phrase such as "that is", or "meaning that". Possibly people misuse the word. | |
| Aug 28, 2011 at 5:58 | comment | added | Loquacity | Yes, I thought that as I was writing it, and almost didn't provide an answer because of it. I don't think paraphrase is exactly the correct term, at least in terms of definitions, but it's definitely the one I would use in such a situation. | |
| Aug 28, 2011 at 4:26 | comment | added | Kyle Pearson | The question doesn't involve restating the meaning of a prior quote in different words -- which is what "paraphrasing" means -- but rather, re-using a trope in a different context, with a completely different meaning. "Trope" and "allusion" are both useful, here, but I don't think the questions is worded carefully enough to distinguish between which word would be more accurate. If it's any consolation, "paraphrase" was my first inclination, too. | |
| Aug 28, 2011 at 0:37 | history | answered | Loquacity | CC BY-SA 3.0 |