That can vary. A fair number of institutions would consider an undergrad paper that consisted mostly of cited quotations, with only a small amount of original analysis and conclusion drawing to be a form of plagiarism, even while a similar paper that paraphrases many of the cited works might be more acceptable, especially if the paraphrasing was adding value, like standardizing equivalent terminology between the sources (ideally including footnotes about what each author originally called each concept).

Other institutions do hold more of a view that plagiarism is not possible with credit, but they will then consider the first mentioned paper as some other form of academic violation.

Even the narrow definition institutions don't view plagiarism purely as misrepresenting sources of ideas as yourself, or self-plagiarism would not be a thing. It ends up as something more like: passing off original ideas from another work as having originated in this current work.