Hello,
If someone uses a primary source, should the context be quoted directly?
If it is not, would that constitute original research? Another words, if
someone takes the primary source and interprets it to his or her own
need, it does seem like a re-creation of a primary source. It's like
original research in an attempt to make the primary source a secondary
source.
I've seen this kind of discussion before. The result was that all
scholarly work is always based on secondary scholastic sources. That
does not give an answer to the primary sources as above, but it does
shed some insight into non-scholarly source creep.
Feedback is appreciated.
Jonathan