an ethical question

[clingerman]

Here's a random one: I'm proofreading a friend's book on a baseball team from the mid-1900s. He utilizes the autobiography of the team's manager and uses "Smith said" for passages that were written in Smith's book. (he's citing everything in the endnotes, so it does not seem to me as if he's trying to take credit for work that isn't his). The debate is this: Ethically, does he need to write, "Smith wrote," or is there nothing wrong with "Smith said."? We've been having this debate for a few days. Would love the insight of anyone with experience in the field.

Thank you.

 

[Mizzougrad96]

It should be "Smith wrote..."

 

[sportschick]

Said implies that the words were spoken, so it really should be wrote.

 

[TyWebb]

Agreed, should be wrote.

 

[Ace]

Unless you are quoting something he actually put quote marks around in the autobiography.

 

[MU_was_not_so_hard]

Smith wrote in his biography (or something to that effect) on first reference and periodically there after seems sufficient.