I think a certain amount of research about a song is a good idea. As the Child Ballad books show, there are often many versions of the words. A singer should pick and choose what words to use so that they make sense to the singer. Often, the meaning can be twisted with just a slight word change. Take for example the "Gypsy" songs, Raggle Taggle, Seven Yellow Gypsies, Gypsy Davey, Gypsy Rover. In Gypsy Rover, the woman is the man's daughter which makes for a very different song. As a singer, I need to make sense out of the words and then the arrangement. I guess like an actor would make sense out of a script to help define his character.
I believe in the folk process and most important, I believe that I can be part of the folk process. The folk process didn't stop a generation ago, or 100 years ago. It is still working on the songs, fashioning them as each performer sees fit. A generation from now, today's singers will probably be regarded as "the tradition."
Going "back to tradition" is hard to do. Often there are no dots. What has been recorded is one persons take on a song.
The movie, Songcatcher, illustrates this by the main character coming to the US only to discover that English folk songs were better "preserved" in the US than in England. Does that make them more real? I don't think so. Not if you believe in the folk process.

Emily