Voir les livres par...
View books by...



XII: Reassembling the Social-General (typos of the first print)
 


Bruno Latour Reassembling the Social -Oxford University Press, 2005

Warning: ALL TYPOS HAVE BEEN CORRECTED IN THE SECOND PRINTING AFTER FEBRUARY 2006

Just in case you have the first printing here are some typos that have rendered a few sentences of the first print ununderstandable; here are the corrections to be made:
p. 31 line 12 please delete “groupings composed of” the sentence should read “the list of social aggregates”
p. 49 line 4 please delete “that is” and replace with “for” or “with”, the sentence should clearly say: “we should not substitute a precise expression for (or with) a well known repertoire”;
p. 102 line 9, the sentence should read “should not be confused with replacing a given phenomenon with some social stuff”
p. 105 line 13 from bottom again a mistake in substitution, it should read “For all practical purposes, it can be subsituted to them” and not “by them”.
p. 133 second paragraph line 2, here it is a member of sentence that has been dropped “what we have to do is to add to the many traces left by the social fluid another medium the textual account through which the traces are rendered again present” [this is the most serious mistake]
p. 183 line l: should be a negative: "in order NOT to give the impression";

p.218 line 15: two question marks have been added by mistake, it should read: "A subject is whatever is present; an object whatever was present";
p. 219 second paragraph line 8 there is an “it” in the middle that makes no sense at all, please delete, sentence should read “inside tiny loci, allowing us”;
p. 235 10 lines before end, the sentence should read “two impossible non-existing sites: the mind of the believer and the social reality hidden behind illusions propped up by even more illusions”;
p. 237 second paragraph 11 lines before end of paragraph please delete “influence” by “add”; the sentence should read “And if you are allowed progressively to add the quality of the varnish” etc.
p. 260 line 9 should of course be Parsons and not Parson.

Thanks for catching more mistakes before an eventual second print.