Another question (the meaning of "set off" in context) asks about the following two sentences:
Jaspers even records a dream in which, during a tense conversation with some of Heidegger's critics, his friend suddenly approached and addressed him for the first time with the familiar du. The two then set off together, alone.
This is the last part of the 13th paragraph in this New York Times excerpt.
The original question asks about the meaning of set off (which is depart), but as I read that sentence I wondered how could two people could depart together, alone.
And I figured I might not be the only one to stumble over this combination: I mean: don't alone and together mean opposite things: without anyone (alone) and with someone (together)?
So if the two men set off alone (each by himself), how can they do that together? Or if they set off together, how can they be alone? Or is there something else going on? Perhaps another meaning of either or both words is being used? Perhaps the author has chosen his words poorly? What's going on?
Best Answer
It is quite possible that the use of together and alone next to each other can cause difficulties interpreting this sentence, both to non-native and native speakers. I fall into the second group.
Alone basically means without others or by oneself. As Oxford puts it:
In fact, as an adjective, alone often means solitary, in the company of one's self.
Whereas together basically means with someone or in another's company. As Oxford puts it:
The native speaker in me wants to read together in its primary meaning and not, say, as at the same time.
Therefore when one reads this sentence one may very well pause and ask How can two people set off (depart) together (in one another's company), alone (by oneself)? This is the most natural reading of this sentence, yet it seems to defy standard word meaning.
A possibility is that since this occurs in a dream, the normal meanings of words do not apply. Another possibility is that the writer is using irony, saying that the two set off together but were so caught up in their thoughts that they might as well have been alone. (They were philosophers after all!) Another possibility is that the author has chosen his words poorly, that is, his sentence needs improvement. But a fourth possibility seems most likely, and depends on normal, straightforward meanings and even the collocation of alone and together.
Notice that in the dream there are others present in the scene, namely, some of Heidegger's critics.
It is these critics who stayed behind, while Jaspers and Heidegger set off together, alone.
Here alone does not mean by oneself but by themselves. See MacMillan:
Thus Heidegger and Jaspers depart together (in each other's company, not primarily: 'at the same time' although that is also true), alone (no one else is there, or by themselves).
This interpretation of the sentence would be clearer if the sentence had read
Here, its is clear that the two departed alone, apart from the critics, but in each other's company (together).
The author flip flops alone and together and what this does is to stress that the two departed in each other's company and that the critics did not form part of this company. Thus the sentence is well written, the word order well chosen, and the meaning apparent if not upon first glance.