This is in danger of turning into yet another "what is folk?" discussion when it is really about something different.

On the one hand you have those singers who learned their craft and their songs in the context of an ongoing tradition, where this music was still a part of the community's daily life. On the other hand, you have those singers who came from outside that tradition and who learned their songs mainly from books and records, and perform them mainly in a self-consciously "folky" environment.

That is what I meant by "context" in my earlier post. It is that context, or background if you prefer, which made Fred Jordan a "traditional" singer, even if he was singing a modern song, or even if he learned it off a Martin Carthy album, and even if he was performing in a folk club. The same context means I won't call myself a traditional singer, even when I'm singing a song I may have learned off Fred in a a Shropshire pub.

This is why terms such as "traditional singer" or "source singer" could be useful, if only everyone could agree on them. Of course, if you don't recognise the distinction, or don't think it matters, then you don't need these nuances of vocabulary.