I do not speak any logographic language, contemporary or otherwise, but I have students whose original languages are written logographically.
I was trying to imagine summarizing, rewriting and paraphrasing an original or secondary source in such a language. I supposed that there would be a limited vocabulary, and that syntactical rules might also be quite restrictive.
In English, I find it easy to cite the information in some source while using an extremely different phrasing. But would a logographic language afford the same flexibility?
Suppose you have an academic paper in front of you as your primary source written in a logographic language. If you're writing in the same language, do you even have vocabulary and grammatical alternatives to the phrasing in your source?
Does this differ among logographically-written languages?
Can Western definitions of plagiarism be applied fairly to academic environments in languages that use logographic writing?
With students for whom logographics are their native written language, do we in the Western academic environments have to train them in the sort or originality we expect of native Western students?