Johanna Parker wrote:
I can't state enough that I personally do not care what it is called. charlesdarwin has given a number of different words one could use, here on this thread. Regardless of what we call it, it is happening. You (MMD) said to me on here that (I'm paraphrasing) if someone wants to pretend that it doesn't exist, it's their problem, not mine. I do think I'm following what QAL said - she was basically accusing me of saying she's stupid, when I asked her a simple question she could have answered with yes or no - being "Did you read the other examples given?" Instead, she choses to focus on the travel guide only, once again. I suppose this seems the easiest to discard or discredit. However, scottw in the post I quoted says that it seems (note he doesn't claim to be sure that he's 100% right) Dylan has used that same book not only in the "LAT" songs, but also in Chronicles. I don't know how many half-lines and phrases off the same page it takes for people to consider the possibility of Dylan taking this book as his lead, but if people want to know I can look it up tomorrow.
There is a difference between these things:
1. A person denies there are any quotation/allusions/appropriations at all.
2. A person accepts that there are such appropriations in Dylan's work, but disputes a particular passage is a quote/appropriation.
3. A person accepts that there are such appropriations in Dylan's work, accepts your claim that a particular passage is a quote/appropriation, but disputes the claim that the particular passage in Dylan's work is a quote/appropriation from the particular book you claim it is from -- that is, thinks it might be from another work.
4. A person accepts that there are such appropriations in Dylan's work, accepts a claim that the passage in Dylan's work is a quote/appropriation, accepts that it is from the source you claim it's from, but doesn't agree that this appropriation is plagiarism.
QAL is doing 4 most of the time in arguments with you. Once in a while she is doing 2 or 3.