A love letter 02

Encore by Lacan

P.79
A love letter

We’ll start with the four propositional formulas at the top of the table, two of which lies to the left, the other two to the right. Every speaking being situations itself on one side or the other. On the left, the lower line—ΑxΦx—indicates that it is through the phallic function that man as whole acquires his inscription, with the proviso that this function is limited due to the existence of an x by which the function Φx is negated : ΣxΦx. That is what is known as the father function—whereby we find, vie negation, the proposition Φx, which grounds the operativity of what makes up for the sexual relationship with castration, insofar as that relationship is in no way inscribable. The whole here is thus based on the exception posited as the end-point, that is on that which altogether negates Φx.

我們先從表格上方的四個命題公式開始。其中有兩個靠左邊，其它兩個靠右邊。每一個說話的主體都將自己的位置放在一邊或另外一邊。在左邊，底下那一欄—ΑxΦx—指示著，透過陽具的功用，男人作為一個整體需要他的銘記，及一個附帶條件：由於x的存在，陽具的功用受到限制。由於這個x的存在，Φx的功用被否決掉ΣxΦx。那就是眾所皆知的父親的功能。藉由這個功能，我們透過否決，找到Φx這個命題。它作為以閹割彌補性關係的運作的基礎，因為那個性關係根本就無法辨認出來。在此男人作為一個整體的基礎，被假定是一個終點的「切除」，換句話說，完全否決Φx的地方。

雄伯：
標記符號請參照圖表的標記，因為A、E 字母的倒轉，及Φx的上方畫一條槓，我的電腦打不出來。不知道哪一位電腦輸入的高手可以教教我？或者主編直接幫我在網頁上修正？

On the other side, you have the inscription of the woman portion of speaking beings. Any speaking whatsoever, as is expressly formulated in Freudian theory, whether provided with the attributes of masculinity—attributes that remains to be determined—or not, is allowed to inscribe itself in this part. If it inscribes itself there, it will not allow for any universality—it will be a not-whole, insofar as it has the choice of positing itself in Φx or of not being there.

在另一方面，還有一個說話的主體，在女性部份的銘記。如同佛洛伊德理論所生動描繪的，無論是否稟賦有陽剛的屬性，或屬性尚未決定，任何作為說話的主體，都被允許將自己銘記在這個部份。即使它將自己銘記在這裡，它並沒有考慮到是否合乎通俗標準的問題。它將是一個的「非整體」，因為它能夠選擇將自己定位在Φx的位置，或是不在那個位置。

Those are the only possible definitions of the so-called man or woman portion for that which finds itself in the position of inhabiting language.

那些是所謂的男人或女人的唯一可能的定義，因為主體作為男人或女人，不完全看性器官，而是看它將自己駐紮在語言系統的哪一個位置。

Underneath—that is, below the horizontal bar where the vertical bar is crossed over, that division of what is improperly called humanity insofar as humanity is divided into sexual identifications—you have a scanded indication of what is in question. On the side of man, I have inscribed $, certainly not to privilege him in any way, and the Φ that props him up as signifier and is also incarnated in S1, which, of all the signifiers, is the signifier for which there is no signified, and which, with respect to meaning, symbolizes the failure thereof. It is “ half-sense,” “ inde-sense” par excellence, or if you will allow me again, “ reti-sense.’

在底下部份，換句話說，在水平橫槓底下，垂直線被越過的地方，也就是俗稱男女被區隔的地方，因為主體總是要被區別為性別的認同，你們可以看出爭議的問題出在哪理。在男人這一邊，我銘記為被禁制的主體$，確實是為了不要讓他有任何特權，然後再銘記為隱藏在後面的大它者Φ，來支撐它作為意符，並且在第一主體那裡具體表現出來。在所有的意符當中，第一主體是沒有意旨作為依據的意符，因此就意義的尋求而言，象徵著它的功敗垂成。它是標準的「半個意義」「片面意義」，或者容我再換句話說，「瘖啞的意義」。

This $, thus doubled by that signifier on which, in the end, it does not even depend, this $ never deals with anything by way of a partner but object a inscribed on the other side of the bar. He is unable to attain his sexual partner, who is the Other, except inasmuch as his partner is the cause of his desire. In this respect, as is indicated elsewhere in my graphs by the oriented conjunction of $ and a, this is nothing other than fantasy. This fantasy, in which the subject is caught up, is as such the basis of what is expressly called the “ reality principle” in Freudian theory.

這個被禁制的主體，由於有了大它者充當意符，而成為雙重主體，可是，主體臨終時，他甚至獨立於大它者這個意符之外。這個被禁制的主體處理任何事情，從來不是藉由大它者的夥伴，而是藉由被鐫刻在橫槓的另一邊的「小客體」。問題是，他無法得到他的性的夥伴，因為那是「大它者」，只好將他的性的夥伴，當成是他的性欲望的原因。在這一方面，我曾經用圖形來表示被禁制的主體跟小客體互動的定位，那道道地地就是主體的「幻見」。這個被主體沉迷不悟的「幻見」，在佛洛伊德的理論，生動地表達為「現實原則」。

Now for the other side. What I am working on this year is what Freud expressly left aside: Was will das Weib? “ What does woman want?” Freud claims that there is only masculine libido. What does that mean if not that a field that certainly is not gegligible is thus ignored. That field is the one of all beings that take on the staus of woman—assuming that being takes on anything whatsoever of her destiny. Moreover, it is improper to call her Woman ( la femme), because, as I stressed last time, as soon as Woman is enunciated by way of a not-whole, the We cannot be written. There is only barred Woman here. Woman is related to the signifier of A insofar as it is barred. I will illustrate that for you today.

現在再談另外一邊。今年，我研究的問題是佛洛伊德刻意避開的問題：「女人到底要什麼？」佛洛伊德宣稱，只有男性的力比多生命力存在。那句話的意思，難道不就是：有一個確實不應該被忽略的領域，因此受到忽略？那個領域是所有扮演女性角色的存在主體的領域，假如她能夠扮演起她自己命運的角色的話。而且，我上次強調過，稱呼她為「女人」，並不是很恰當，因為「女人」是藉由作為一個「非整體」來表達自己，這個「女人」，無法充當讓人書寫生命文本的客體。女人作為生命主體，是被禁制的。這個被禁制的主體，跟大它者的意符有關，因為她受到他的禁制。今天，我要跟你們詳加說明。

The Other is not simply the locus in which truth stammers. It deserves to represent that to which woman is fundamentally related. Assuredly, we have but sporadic testimonies of this, and that is why I took them up last time in their metaphorical function. Being the Other, in the most radical sense, in the sexual relationship to the Other. That is what I would like to articulate a little more precisely today.

大它者不僅是真理若隱若現的軌跡。大它者所代表的，應該跟女人息息相關的軌跡。的確，我們所獲得的證據，只是片斷零落，這就是為什麼我上一次談論到這些證據，只能拐彎抹角地隱喻。從性的關係，從無意識界的關係，存在意義作為大它者，跟女人息息相關，並讓女人念茲在茲。今天，我想要說個清楚，講個明白。

Woman has a relation to the signifier of that Other, insofar as, qua Other, it can but remain forever other. I can only assume here that you will recall my statement that there is no Other of the Other. The other, that is, the locus in which everything that can be articulated on the basis of the signifier comes to be inscribed, is,, in its foundation, the other in the most radical sense. That is why the signifier, with this open parenthesis, marks the other as barred: $ (A)

女人跟那個大它者的意符脫離不了關係，因為它大者既然被尊為大它者，只好永遠保持在高高在上那一邊。我在此，不妨假定你們都還記得我說過的陳述：「大它者之外，別無大它者。」換句話說，大它者是意符表達、意符鐫刻的軌跡。意符的種種動作，追根究底，都是以大它者當它們的基礎。這就是為什麼意符用開放的括弧，將大它者標記為被禁制：S( A)。

雄伯：
法文的大它者字首是A，隱藏在括弧中的大它者A，應該有畫一斜槓的標記，我的電腦無法輸入，讀者自己畫罷。

How can we conceive of the fact that the Other can be, in some sense, that to which half—since that it also roughly the biological proportion—half of all speaking beings refer? That is nevertheless less what is written on the blackboard with the arrow that begins from Woman. Woman cannot be said. Nothing can be said of woman. Woman has a relation with S (A), and it is already in that respect that she is doubled, that she is not-whole, since she can also have a relation with Φ.

我們如何構想這個事實？從某種意義來說，大它者是所有作為說話的主體的另一半，因為從作為生物的生理構造來看，人只是一半的主體。可是，那就是我在黑板上用一個箭頭方向所書寫的，從被禁制的女人開始。被禁制的女人無法被敘說。關於女人，我們無話可說。女人跟隱藏的大它者有密切關係。在這一方面，女人是大它者的雙重人，女人本身是一個「非整體」，因為她跟被閹割陽具的主體，也能夠有關係。

I designate Φas the phallus insofar as I indicate that it is the signifier that has no signified, the one that is based, in the case of man, on phallic jouissance. What is the latter if not the following, which the importance of masturbation in our practice highlights sufficiently—the jouissance of the idiot?

我指明被畫橫槓的標記Φ是陽具，當我提到，那個標記是沒有意旨作基礎的意符，就男人而言，就是純為陽具爽快的歡樂意符。這個歡樂意符的重要性，從男人手淫的自得其樂，難道不是彰顯得一清二楚？男人手淫的自得其樂，難道不是像白痴一般的自摸自爽？

雄伯譯
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
springherohsiung@gmail.com