late or latest work?

Question

My apologies for the technical jargon (philosophy), can you please please help me with the underlined word?
Should it be late or latest ?
Is it overall the paragraph correct?

"The paper aims to show that a spectral interpretation of reality, though fragmentary, can be uncovered in Derrida's late contributions concerning cinema and television."

Thanks for your help!!!!

Enoon · Accepted Answer

In that sentence (not paragraph), "late" means nothing more than "recent". "Latest" confines it to the most recent ones.

The thinking behind the sentence is unclear. "Though fragmentary" seems to be standing there with nothing to do.

Diotima · Answer

Thanks a lot Enoon! Could you please help me to improve it?
The meaning I should convey is 'works produced in the age of maturity" and I thought that "a late contribution/work" might apply. If not, what do you think will do?
As to "though fragmentary", do you think that "although fragmentary" sounds better? Or perhaps shall I change its position in the sentence?

thanks for your help!

Mister Micawber · Answer

diotimaThe meaning I should convey is 'works produced in the age of maturity" and I thought that "a late contribution/work" might apply.

That would be 'later contributions'.

Diotima · Answer

thanks a lot Mister Micawber!!

Enoon · Answer

diotimaThe meaning I want to convey is "works produced in the age of maturity", and I thought that "a late contribution/work" might apply. If not, what do you think will do?

MM's "later" is correct.

diotimaAs to "though fragmentary", do you think that "although fragmentary" sounds better? Or perhaps shall I change its position in the sentence?

I didn't mean that there was something wrong with the wording but with the thinking. Both "though" and "although" create a contrast; "(al)though X, Y" means that Y is somewhat surprising when you know about X. Your sentence, "The paper aims to show that a spectral interpretation of reality, though fragmentary, can be uncovered in Derrida's later contributions concerning cinema and television.", says that Derrida's interpretation is fragmentary, and its being fragmentary makes it somewhat surprising that it can be uncovered. I don't think that is what you mean, and I can't tell what you mean enough to propose a revision.

Diotima · Answer

I see. Thank you for your clarification. Please let me try again...

The paper aims to show that a spectral interpretation of reality, although fragmentary in its fashion, can be uncovered in Derrida's later contributions concerning cinema and television.

How does it sound?
In other words, the point is that the author of the article wants to show that there is a 'spectral interpretation of reality" (

sic!) in Derrida's later work even if it is still fragmentary ( or not fully developed). The author considers it remarkable and wants to uncover/highlight it.
Or at least this is what I got...I have always thought that philosophy helped make things easier, perhaps I was wrong. Or perhaps is just the combination of philosophy and " academese" !!

Enoon · Answer

diotimaThe paper aims to show that a spectral interpretation of reality, although fragmentary in its fashion, can be uncovered in Derrida's later contributions concerning cinema and television.

The same problem exists.

diotimaIn other words, the point is that the author of the article wants to show that there is a 'spectral interpretation of reality" ( sic!) in Derrida's later work even if it is still fragmentary ( or not fully developed). The author considers it remarkable and wants to uncover/highlight it.

OK, maybe, "The paper aims to show that an admittedly fragementary spectral interpretation of reality can be uncovered in Derrida's later contributions concerning cinema and television."

Diotima · Answer

Thanks a lot enoon!

late or latest work?

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions