Archive for August, 2009

雄伯手記980807

August 8, 2009

雄伯手記980807

最近充滿了生命的無常感。晚間就寢時好端端的,第二天醒來就發現不是右腳掌有硬塊,就是左腳跟隱隱作痛。到醫院就醫,往往就是要抽血驗尿,若是狀況不對,還要照些高科技精密儀器。唉!真是讓人沒了志氣。

以前在學校帶班級時,曾有一位遠地鄉下過來的高三資優生,住宿時半夜腹胃絞痛,急送到醫院,經各種精密高科技儀器測驗,兩天花了將近萬把元,卻查不出什麼具體病因。請假回鄉下休養半個月,居然不藥而癒。

我是把它解釋為好勝心的競爭壓力,造成生理的病痛症狀。W在家時,也常常有這樣的現象,莫名其妙地心悸加快,或胃腸絞痛,緊急送到醫院急診室,發現醫生臉帶神秘微笑,開個鎮定劑之類的藥,讓她在病床上休息一陣子,也就恢復出院。

心病需要從心理來醫,但心理醫生似乎比生理醫生更難科學化。聽任她在台北聽經聞法,雖然造成婚姻生活的疏離及經濟狀況的沉重負擔,也只好勉強蓋括承受地再觀察一陣子。

藝人文英過世,友人親人涕泣交加地緬懷,卻也透露出外表開朗,作為大家開心果的她,近年來深為憂鬱症所困。

這使我想起一則以前馬戲團諧趣演員的軼聞:

病人: 我活得很不快樂,很想自殺。
醫生:我建議你去觀看馬戲團的小丑諧星的表演。他滑稽的動作跟幽默的對白,保證會使你開懷大笑,快樂起來。
病人:問題是,我就是那位小丑諧星。我表演給別人看,別人快樂,我自己卻不快樂。

雄伯手記980806

August 7, 2009

雄伯手記980806

最近右腳掌前端似有硬塊似的,隱隱欲痛,唯走起路來尚無大礙。今天早上起來,卻發現左腳跟轉動,也隱隱欲痛。因為是週末,沒有立刻去醫院看醫生。倒是獨自思索一些問題:生理上的疾病一定從生理上的藥物來醫?還是跟心理的意識有關?意識的凝結淤積會也是一種病嗎?改變生活形態能化解意識的凝結淤積,從而減少疾病的發作嗎?

回想起去年以來的大陸自助旅行跟紐西蘭腳踏車之旅,發現自己真是盲目地勇敢!獨自一人,沒有明確的規劃,只是順著感覺,搭乘夜間睡臥巴士,從廈門、溫州、上海、鄭州、西安、蘭州、嘉裕關、敦煌、土魯番、烏魯木齊,我一路坦蕩蕩地換車及轉車,從未想到一但生理有狀況,我該如何處理?

生理的狀況或多或少其實還是有的。從廣州搭乘硬座火車前往成都時,途中就因為車廂內乘客擁塞,空氣混濁,我飲食失調,再加上兩天長時間坐姿不動,胃腸開始痙攣,似要腹瀉。勉強撐著在貴陽臨時下車。說也奇怪,在旅館淋浴後渾體舒暢,晚餐時點了一道糖醋排骨,配著啤酒喝了,再加一夜好眠。第二天早上醒來,又是生龍活虎地精力充沛。

隨後在成都跟旅友會合,連續幾天的晚睡早起,精神開始有點不濟。觀賞千年冰川時,頭部開始有點發燒,走路有點搖晃,晚間就寢時氣喘幾乎要發作。我勉強用意志力撐了一天一夜,第二天在旅館內翻索背包,找到一包僅存的氣喘藥,心裡想著,若晚間氣喘依舊發作,就準備脫隊,免得擔擱旅友行程。說也奇怪,第二天醒來,又精神煥發起來。

廈門到福州來回的五天,跟紐西蘭的十五天腳踏車之旅,生理狀況始終還好。想是沿途專注地用力踩行,汗流滿身,把肌肉及毛細管之間的污穢,都排放出來,動脈跟靜脈的血管暢通無礙,再加上到陌生環境,意識的注意力全都被吸引轉換,應接不暇,自然沒有凝結淤積,造成疼痛的毛病。

八月一日是退休存款兩年一次換約的日子,說什麼也不能擔誤。然後不是颱風來臨,就是腳掌腳跟隱隱欲痛。不知是老天的預兆?或是生理的預警?唉!太瞻前顧後的性格,常是什麼事都做不了!

道德地質學 02

August 7, 2009

道德地質學 02 雄伯譯

A Thousand Plateau by Deleuze and Gattarie
德勒茲及瓜達里:千高台

3. 10,000 B. C: The Geology of Morals
第三章:紀元前一萬年的道德地質學

(Who Does the Earth Think It Is?)
(地球認為自己是誰?)

Every stratum is a judgment of God; not only do plants and animals, orchids and wasps, sing or express themselves, but so do rocks and even rivers, every stratified thing on earth. The first articulation concerns content, the second expression.

每個階層都是上帝的判決,不僅是植物跟動物,蘭花跟黃蜂,連岩石跟河流,地球上的每一階層化的東西,都在歌唱或表達自己。第一種表達關係到內涵,第二種表達關係到表白。

The distinction between the two articulations is not between forms and substances but between content and expression, expression having just as much substance as content and content just as much form as expression.

兩種表達之間的區別不是在形式跟物質之間,而是在內涵與表白之間。表白有同樣多的物質當內涵,正如內涵有同樣多的形式當表白。

The double articulation sometimes coincides with the molecular and the molar, and sometimes not; this is because content and expression are sometimes divided along those lines and sometimes along different lines.

雙重表達有時跟分子與粒子巧合,有時沒有。這是因為內涵與表白有時順其途徑分開,有時沿著不同途徑分開。

There is never correspondence or conformity between content and expression, only isomorphism with reciprocal presupposition.

內涵與表白之間沒有一製或一貫,只有互相各自假設的異種同型。

The distinction between content and expression is always real, in various ways, but it cannot be said that the terms preexist their double articulation.

從各種方式看,內涵與表白之間的區別總是真實,但是我們不能因此就說,這些術語存在先於雙重表達。

It is the double articulation that distributes them according to the line it draws in each stratum; it is what constitutes their real distinction.

雙重表達分配這些術語,依照在每個階層中各自界限,這才是構成他們真正不同的地方。

(On the other hand, there is no real distinction between form and substance, only a mental or modal distinction: since substances are nothing other than formed matters, formless substances are inconceivable, although it is possible in certain instances to conceive of substanceless forms.)

(在另一方面,形式與物質之間沒有真正的區別,只有精神或情態的區別,因為物質道道地地就是成形的物料,沒有形式的物料是不可思議的,雖然在某些情況,可以構想一些沒有物質的形式。)

Even though there is a real distinction between them, content and expression are relative terms (“first” and “second” articulation should also be understood in an entirely relative fashion).

即使內涵與表白之間真有區別,他們也只是相對的名詞(「第一種」及「第二種」表達也只能以完全相對的方式瞭解。)

Even though it is capable of invariance, expression is just as much a variable as content.

即使表白能夠變化,它跟內涵一樣是個變數。

Content and expression are two variables of a function of stratification.

內涵跟表白是階層化功用的兩個變數。

They not only vary from one stratum to another, but intermingle, and within the same
stratum multiply and divide ad infinitum.

他們不但從一階層到另一階層會變化,而且混雜時,在同一階層內,會無窮盡地加倍跟減除。

Since every articulation is double, there is not an articulation of content and an articulation of expression—the articulation of content is double in its own right and constitutes a relative expression within content; the articulation of expression
is also double and constitutes a relative content within expression.

既然每個表達都是雙重,就沒有單純的內涵及表白的表達。內涵的本身是雙重的,組成內涵之內的相對表白,表白的表達也是雙重,組成表白之內的相對內涵。

For this reason, there exist intermediate states between content and expression,
expression and content: the levels, equilibriums, and exchanges through which a stratified system passes.

因為這個理由,內涵跟表白,表白跟內涵之間,存在中間的狀態:一個階層經過層次、平衡、跟交換。

In short, we find forms and substances of content that play the role of expression in relation to other forms and substances, and conversely for expression.

總之,我們找到內涵的形式跟物質,然後扮演相對於其他形式跟物質的表白的角色。在另一方面,我們也找到表白的形式跟物質,然後同樣地扮演。

These new distinctions do not, therefore, coincide with the distinction between forms and substances within each articulation; instead, they show that each articulation is
already, or still, double.

因此,這些區別並沒有相對應於每個表達之內的形式跟物質之間的區別。代替的,他們顯示出,每個表達,已經或衣舊是雙重的。

This can be seen on the organic stratum: proteins of content have two forms, one of which (the infolded fiber) plays the role of functional expression in relation to the other.

從有機體的階層,可看出這一點:內涵的蛋白質有兩個形式,每一個內摺纖維都扮演相對於另一個內摺纖維的功用表達的角色。

The same goes for the nucleic acids of expression: double articulations cause certain formal and substantial elements to play the role of content in relation to others; not
only does the half of the chain that is reproduced become a content, but the
reconstituted chain itself becomes a content in relation to the “messenger.”

表達的核酸也是同樣的道理:雙重表達引起某些形式跟物質的元素,扮演相對於其它元素的內涵的角色。被複製的鎖鏈的另一半形成內涵,但是重新被建造的鎖鍊本身,形成相對於「使者」的內涵。

There are double pincers everywhere on a stratum; everywhere and in all directions there are double binds and lobsters, a multiplicity of double articulations affecting both expression and content.

階層的每個地方都有雙重鰲鉗;每個地方,每個方向,都有雙重約束及龍蝦,雙重表達的多重性,影響到表達跟內涵。

Through all of this, Hjelmslev’s warning should not be forgotten: “The terms expression plane and content plane . . . are chosen in conformity with established notions and are quite arbitrary.

透過這些,希姆列夫的警告應該被銘記在心:「術語表達的平面跟內涵平面的選擇跟已建立的觀念一致,而且是強制的一致。」

Their functional definition provides no justification for calling one, and not the other, of these entities expression, or one, and not the other, content.

他們的功用的定義並沒有理由召喚這些實體之一的表達,或另一實體的內涵。

They are defined only by their mutual solidarity, and neither of them can be identified otherwise.

他們只是根據互相的團結下定義,沒有一個能根據其它方式下定義。

They are defined only oppositively and relatively, as mutually opposed functives of one and the same function.”6

他們只是相反及相對地下定義,某一個相同的功用互相相對的功用。

We must combine all the resources of real distinction, reciprocal presupposition, and general relativism.

我們必須聯合真正區別、互相假定及一般相對論的所有資源。

The question we must ask is what on a given stratum varies and what does not.

我們必須問的問題是:在某個階層,何者會變化?何者不變化?

What accounts for the unity and diversity of a stratum? Matter, the pure matter of the plane of consistency (or inconsistency) lies outside the strata.

何者可以解釋階層的一致及多樣性?物料,一致(或不一致)平面的純粹物料,存在於階層之外。

The molecular materials borrowed from the substrata may be the same throughout a stratum, but that does not mean that the molecules will be the same.

從次階層借用過來的分子物料,在階層各處可能相同,但這並不意味著,分子將會相同。

The substantial elements may be the same throughout the stratum without the substances being the same.

物質的元素在階層各處可能相同,而物質並不相同。

The formal relations or bonds may be the same without the forms being the same.

形式關係或契合可能相同,但形式並不相同。

In biochemistry, there is a unity of composition of the organic stratum defined at the level of materials and energy, substantial elements or radicals, bonds and reactions.

在生物化學,有有機階層組合的一致性,根據物料及能源、物質元素或根素、契合及反應等層次下定義。

But there is a variety of different molecules, substances, and forms. Should we not sing the praise of Geoffrey Saint-Hilaire?

但是分子、物質跟形式有許多種。我們難道不應該像聖希拉爾般讚不絕口嗎?

For in the nineteenth century he developed a grandiose conception of stratification.

因為在十九世紀,他對階層化提出恢宏的構想。

He said that matter, considered from the standpoint of its greatest divisibility, consists in particles of decreasing size, flows or elastic fluids that “deploy themselves” by radiating through space.

他說,從最大可除盡的觀點看,物料在於逐漸變小的粒子,在於流動或彈性液體,他們透過空間散發,自行展開。

Combustion is the process of this escape or infinite division on the plane of consistency.

燃燒就是這個在一致性平面上的逃避或無限除盡的過程。

Electrification is the opposite process, constitutive of strata; it is the process whereby similar particles group together to form atoms and molecules, similar molecules to
form bigger molecules, and the biggest molecules to form molar aggregates:
“the attraction of like by like,” as in a double pincer or double articulation.

來電就是相反的過程,階層的組成;憑藉這個過程,相同粒子聚集形成原子及分子,相同分子聚集形成更大分子,最大分子聚集形成壓制聚合體:「同性相吸」,如同在雙重鰲鉗或雙重表達。

Thus there is no vital matter specific to the organic stratum, matter is the same on all the strata.

因此有機階層並沒有明確的生命力物料;物料在各個階層上是相同的。

But the organic stratum does have a specific unity of composition, a single abstract Animal, a single machine embedded in the stratum, and presents everywhere the same molecular materials, the same elements or anatomical components of organs, the same formal connections.

但是有基階層確實有明確的組合一致性,一個單一的抽象動物,一台鑲嵌於階層的機器,到處呈現相同的分子物料,器官的相同元素或解剖成份,相同的形式連接。

Organic forms are nevertheless different from one another, as are organs, compound substances, and molecules.

可是,有機的形式互相不同,如同器官、組合物質、及分子互相不同。

It is of little or no importance that Geoffroy chose anatomical elements as the substantial units rather than protein and nucleic acid radicals.

聖希拉爾選擇解剖元素,而不是蛋白質及核酸根素當著物質單位,這並非是重點。

At any rate, he already invoked a whole interplay of molecules.

無論如何,他已經召喚分子的整個運作。

The important thing is the principle of the simultaneous unity and variety of the stratum: isomorphism of forms but no correspondence; identity of elements or components but no identity of compound substances.

重要的是同時性一致及階層多樣的原理;形式的同型性但是沒有對應、元素的認同,或是有成份,但是組成的物質並不認同。

雄伯譯
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

雄伯手記980803

August 6, 2009

雄伯手記980804

「人生的意義是什麼?」

大學讀存在主義的小說跟哲學時,問過這個問題。現在退休後獨自過著悠閒的歲月,這個問題又浮現上來。

“ Life is a meaningless existence.” 這是當年朗朗上口的句子,現在解析起來,還是覺得似是而非:人生怎可能是無意義的存在? 家庭、倫理、友情、愛情、國家、社會、藝術、奉獻、小愛、大愛、難道不是耳熟能詳的意義?自出生以來,你難道不是因為這些意義,消耗掉你一生有限的時間、精力、跟用心?

只是語言架構出來,聽起來堂而皇之的意義,你內心相信到幾分,行為實踐到多真誠?有時你真誠地相信一個意義,常會排除其他意義,有時眾多意義常會聚集起來壓縮你真誠相信的意義。有時你堅決相信一個意義,卻發現互動的人只是虛與委蛇,那是被人背叛?有時互動的人信誓旦旦,你卻無感於衷,那是你的背叛?
你到底要怎樣的抉擇,才真正有意義?

意義!意義!多少人為意義而活!多少人為意義而死?有朝一日,人生若淪落到被剝除掉意義,就再也活不下去?還是因而活得更自在?這當然是看你自己究竟是怎樣的一個人?你跟語言是怎樣一個互動關係?是主人?或是奴隸?

無論無何,生命本質是動物性的無常存在,語言所架構出來的意義,只存在於人際互動的空間跟時間。生命的實體本身若不存在,語言的裝飾無論如何金碧輝煌也是枉然!

「枉然!枉然!」這是多少人彌留時模糊不清的喃喃自語。騙得了世界,終就騙不了自己!倒不如爽然承認,亙古不變的人作為動物性的生命本質就是難免一死,說聲:「夫復何求?」或者不說也沒關係,因為你可能悟在心裡口難開了!

雄伯手記980801

August 6, 2009

雄伯手記980802

人生很難有什麼始終如一的長遠之計,原因是作為動物身的生命的本質就是無常。人際倫理之間的關係,更是不斷更迭地處於不穩定狀態。縱使你有些微的財力、能力或洞察力,維持平衡之一時,罅隙裂縫都會隱隱欲現。

「你再給我一些時間。等我有一天開悟畢業了,我就回花蓮。」W輾轉反側了一個晚上,終於若有所悟地說。

「你信教聽法也有畢業的時候?」D嘲諷地說。

雄伯手記980730

August 6, 2009

雄伯手記980729

一生中牽涉到有關金錢的回憶,總是令人不愉快的居多。

三十幾年前家中初安置祖先公媽牌時,請了一位鄰居幫忙釘壁上支架,當時因為討吉祥的關係,慷慨地給予1000元整數當工資,兼隱含睦鄰的潛意識。不料,他喜出望外後,竟然當我的面,跟後來他邀請而來的水電工說:「這位老板很慷慨,你等一下工資可以多要一點,沒關係!」

我自年少時代對於金錢物質的享受,養成自奉儉樸節約的習慣,因此口袋中若有餘裕,朋友相借,常是慷慨給予,從未計較是否歸還。次數多時才警覺地發現到,借錢友人的衣著及日常花費頗為奢靡,我的捨己為人只是滿足他的過度揮霍而已。

成家立業之後,對於社會上人際之間金錢的往來,觀察得越細微,釐清得更明白時,常是令人黯然神傷或心驚的時刻居多。然則,人情、友情、親情都牽涉到生命及倫理的價值意義,豈可輕言幻夢覺醒?

年輕時選擇劣勢經濟的婚姻結構,因此常需夜間兼營家教作為補貼。這跟正常的人際往來也產生不少扞格,例如,每有友人邀宴小聚,勢必停掉家教前往,不僅多開銷必需分擔或禮數的金錢,及收入減少,也影響到家教維持的穩定性。經過幾次理性考量婉拒後,卻發現自己的人際生活圈日愈狹窄而疏離。

退休後的休閒跟金錢稍有餘裕,但是隨著W在外的聽經聞法及子女的各自獨立,我生命的無常觀及疏離感日愈加劇。另一方面,社會經濟的通貨膨脹跟不景氣環境的更迭,也使我醒悟到金錢、財物、甚至生命本身的不可恃。

莎士比亞的「李爾王」、黑澤林的「亂」、經典電影「冬之獅」、及托爾思泰的「伊凡之死」,所描述的家庭倫理的無情疏離,我並非毫無警覺。但是自己執著於財物的擁有而聽任家人處於社會的經濟競爭的劣勢,亦是我內心所不忍見。

道德地質學 01

August 4, 2009

道德地質學 01 雄伯譯

A Thousand Plateau by Deleuze and Gattarie
德勒茲及瓜達里:千高台

3. 10,000 B. C: The Geology of Morals
第三章:紀元前一萬年的道德地質學

(Who Does the Earth Think It Is?)
(地球認為自己是誰?)

Double Articulation 雙重表達

The same Professor Challenger who made the Earth scream with his pain machine, as described by Arthur Conan Doyle, gave a lecture after mixing several textbooks on geology and biology in a fashion befitting his simian disposition.

偵探小說作者柯南、道爾曾描述過一位張廉吉教授,用一台他的拷問機器,逼使地球尖叫。這位教授以其特有的人猿性情的方式,綜貫好幾本地質學及生物學的教科書,發表演講。

He explained that the Earth—the Deterritorialized, the Glacial, the giant Molecule—is a body without organs.

他解釋說:解除轄域,冰河期,及大分子的地球,是沒有器官的身體。

This body without organs is permeated by unformed, unstable matters, by flows in all directions, by free intensities or nomadic singularities, by mad or transitory particles.

這個沒有器官的身體瀰漫著沒有形式的不穩定物質,朝四面八方流動,激情任意不定,分子狂飃倏忽,有著逐水草而居的遊牧特質。

That, however, was not the question at hand. For there simultaneously occurs upon the earth a very important, inevitable phenomenon that is beneficial in many respects and unfortunate in many others: stratification.

可是,這個並不是我們目前要討論的問題。因為在這個地球上同時發生一件重大的無可避免的現象,許多方面是有利益的,可是不幸的,在其它方面,形成階層。

Strata are Layers, Belts. They consist of giving form to matters, of imprisoning intensities or locking singularities into systems of resonance and redundancy, of producing upon the body of the earth molecules large and small and organizing them into molar aggregates.

階層就是層層纏繞。階層組成是因為物質擁有形式,激情被囚禁,或獨特性被封鎖成為拾人牙慧,在地球上產生的大大小小的分子,並且組織成為分子聚落。

Strata are acts of capture, they are like “black holes” or occlusions striving to seize whatever comes within their reach.

階層是捉取的行動。像是「黑洞」或吸納器,設法攫取任何進入他們範圍的東西。

They operate by coding and territorialization upon the earth; they proceed simultaneously by code and by territoriality.

他們的運作方式是將地球符碼化及轄域化;同時又符碼再符碼,轄域再轄域,層層繼續下去。

The strata are judgments of God; stratification in general is the entire system of the judgment of God (but the earth, or the body without organs, constantly eludes that judgment, flees and becomes destratified, decoded, deterritorialized).

階層就是上帝的判決,整體階層就是上帝判決的整個系統(可是,地球或沒有器官的身體,卻又不斷地逃避那個判決,逃離而成為解除階層,解除符碼,解除轄域)。

Challenger quoted a sentence he said he came across in a geology textbook. He said we needed to learn it by heart because we would only be in a position to understand it later on: “A surface of stratification is a more compact plane of consistency lying between two layers.”

張廉吉教授引述一句他在地質學教科書偶然看到的句子。他說我們需要先記背來,日後自然就會了解:「階層的表面是兩個層面之間,一個更加緊密的光滑層面。」

The layers are the strata. They come at least in pairs, one serving as substratum for the other. The surface of stratification is a machinic assemblage distinct from the strata.

這些層面就是階層。他們至少都是成雙成對,互為對方的次階層。階層的表面是機械般的裝配,不同於階層。

The assemblage is between two layers, between two strata; on one side it faces the strata (in this direction, the assemblage is an inter stratum), but the other side faces something else, the body without organs or plane of consistency (here, it is a metastratum). In effect, the body without organs is itself the plane of consistency, which becomes compact or thickens at the level of the strata.

裝配處於兩個層面之間,兩個階層之間,一邊面向著階層(朝這個方向,裝配是內階層),但是另一邊面向別的東西,沒有器官的身體或光滑的平面(在此,裝配是虛擬階層)。事實上,沒有器官的身體本身就是光滑的平面,在階層的層面上變得更加緊密或濃密。

God is a Lobster, or a double pincer, a double bind. Not only do strata come at least in pairs, but in a different way each stratum is double (it itself has several layers). Each stratum exhibits phenomena constitutive of double articulation. Articulate twice, B-A, BA.

上帝是大龍蝦,有一對鰲鉗或一對夾鉗。階層不但成雙成對,而且每個階層都是雙層,儘管方式各異(它本身就有好幾道層面)。每個階層都展示雙重表達所組成的現象,例如是非、善惡等二元對立。

This is not at all to say that the strata speak or are language based. Double articulation is so extremely variable that we cannot begin with a general model, only a relatively simple case.

這並不是說,階層會言說,或是以語言為基礎。雙重表達變數很多,我們無法一開頭就豎立一般模式,那是較簡單的說法。

The first articulation chooses or deducts, from unstable particleflows, metastable molecular or quasi-molecular units (substances) upon which it imposes a statistical order of connections and successions (forms).

第一層表達是減除或扣除,從不穩定的分子流動,虛穩定或假分子的單位,因為這些單位有著統計的連接及連續形式的秩序。

The second articulation establishes functional, compact, stable structures (forms), and constructs the molar compounds in which these structures are simultaneously actualized (substances).

第二層表達建立功用性的緊密的穩定結構形式,然後建立分子組合,讓這些結構同時可以實現物質。

In a geological stratum, for example, the first articulation is the process of “sedimentation,” which deposits units of cyclic sediment according to a statistical order: flysch, with its succession of sandstone and schist.

例如,在地質的階層,第一層表達是「渣滓」的過程,依照統計的秩序,沉澱循環渣滓的單位:積層岩有沙岩跟片岩的疊積。

The second articulation is the “folding” that sets up a stable functional structure and effects the passage from sediment to sedimentary rock.

第二層表達是「折疊」,建立起穩定的功用性結構,然後形成從渣滓到渣滓岩的通路。

It is clear that the distinction between the two articulations is not between substances and forms. Substances are nothing other than formed matters. Forms imply a code, modes of coding and decoding.

顯然,雙重表達之間的區別不是在於物質及形式。物質僅僅就是組成的物料。形式意味著符碼,符碼化及解除符碼的模式。

Substances as formed matters refer to territorialities and degrees of territorialization and deterritorialization. But each articulation has a code and a territorially;
therefore each possesses both form and substance.

物質作為組成的物料,涉及到轄域,轄域的程度,及解除轄域。但是每個表達都有符碼跟轄域,因此各擁有形式跟物質。

For now, all we can say is that each articulation has a corresponding type of segmentarity or multiplicity: one type is supple, more molecular, and merely ordered; the other is more rigid, molar, and organized.

至於現在,我們所能說的是,每個表達都有相對應的渣滓或多重性:一種是鬆散的分子秩序,另一種則是嚴密的分子組織。

Although the first articulation is not lacking in systematic interactions, it is in the second articulation in particular that phenomena constituting an overcoding are produced, phenomena of centering, unification, totalization, integration, hierarchization, and finalization.

雖然系統的互動並不缺乏第一種表達,但是產生形成過度符碼的現象,產生中央集權、大一統、一體化、合併、階層化、及最後上面裁決等現象,特別是發生在第二種表達。

Both articulations establish binary relations between their respective segments. But between the segments of one articulation and the segments of the other there are biunivocal relationships obeying far more complex laws.

兩種表達都建立各自的渣滓之間的二元關係。但是在一種表達的渣滓跟另一種表達的渣滓之間,有著雙重的單一關係,遵照更加複雜的法則。

The word “structure” may be used to designate the sum of these relations and relationships, but it is an illusion to believe that structure is the earth’s last word.

「結構」此字可以用來指明這些二元關係及雙重單一關係的數目,但是若以為用結構就可以將地球定調,那可是妄想。

Moreover, it cannot be taken for granted that the distinction between the two articulations is always that of the molecular and the molar.

而且,我們不能理所當然地認為,兩種表達之間的區別總是分子跟粒子之間的區別。

He skipped over the immense diversity of the energetic, physicochemical, and geological strata. He went straight to the organic strata, or the existence of a great organic stratification.

能源階層,物理跟化學階層,及地質階層廣裘多樣,我們暫時避而不論,直接到達有機體階層,或有機體階層的存有地帶。

The problem of the organism—how to “make” the body an organism—is once again a problem of articulation, of the articulatory relation.

有機體的問題,也就是如何使身體成為有機體,在此再一次成為是表達的問題,表達的關係的問題。

The Dogons, well known to the professor, formulate the problem as follows: an organism befalls the body of the smith, by virtue of a machine or machinic assemblage that stratifies it.

張廉吉教授耳熟能詳的道元禪宗描述這個問題如下:有機體落在鐵匠的身體,憑藉機器或機械的裝配,使它形成階層。

“The shock of the hammer and the anvil broke his arms and legs at the elbows and knees, which until that moment he had not possessed. In this way, he received the articulations specific to the new human form that was to spread across the earth, a form dedicated to work…. His arm became folded with a view to work.”

「鐵鎚及鐵鉆的猛擊,使他的手臂跟腳在手肘及膝蓋處斷裂,雖然在那個時刻之前,他並未擁有手肘及膝蓋。以這種方式,他接收到新的人類形體特有的表達,他新的人類形體將遍佈地球,是個致力於工作的形體。為了工作,他的手臂變得可以彎伸。」

It is obviously only a manner of speaking to limit the articulatory relation to the bones. The entire organism must be considered in relation to a double articulation, and on different levels.

將表達的關係限制於骨頭,顯然只是言說的方式之一。整個有機體必須被認為是在不同層次上,跟雙重表達的關係。

First, on the level of morphogenesis: on the one hand, realities of the molecular type with aleatory relations are caught up in crowd phenomena or statistical aggregates determining an order (the protein fiber and its sequence or segmentarity); on the other hand, these aggregates themselves are taken up into stable structures that “elect” stereoscopic compounds, form organs, functions, and regulations, organize molar mechanisms, and even distribute centers capable of overflying crowds, overseeing mechanisms, utilizing and repairing tools, “overcoding” the aggregate (the folding
back on itself of the fiber to form a compact structure; a second kind of segmentarity). Sedimentation and folding, fiber and infolding.

首先,在器官形態發生的層次:在一方面,分子類型偶然關係的現實,受困於決定秩序的群體現象或統計聚落(蛋白質纖維及其基因系列或沉澱);在另一方面,這些聚落本身也凝聚成為穩定的結構,結構則精選立體的組合,形成器官、功用跟規則,組織分子機構,甚至分派各處中心,能夠超越群眾,監督機構,使用及修復工具,並使聚落「過度符碼化」(纖維本身可以折疊,形成緊密的結構,第二種沉澱)。沉澱及折疊,纖維及再折疊。

On a different level, the cellular chemistry presiding over the constitution of proteins also operates by double articulation.

在不同層次上,管轄蛋白質成份的細胞化學,也以雙重表達運作。

This double articulation is internal to the molecular, it is the articulation between small and large molecules, a segmentarity by successive modifications and polymerization.

雙重表達是分子的內部,是大小分子之間的表達,是連續修改及聚合的沉澱。

“First, the elements taken from the medium are combined through a series of transformations.. . .All this activity involves hundreds of chemical reactions.

首先,從媒介中得來的元素,透過一系列的轉換組合起來。所有這個活動牽涉到數百個化學反應。

But ultimately, it produces a limited number of small compounds, a few dozen at most. In the second stage of cellular chemistry, the small molecules are assembled to produce larger ones.

但是最後,它產生少數的小組合,充其量是幾什個。在細胞化學的第二階段,小分子被吸收來產生更大的分子。

It is the polymerization of units linked end-to-end that forms the characteristic chains of macromolecules.

這些單位的首尾聚合,形成大分子的特有連鎖。

. .. The two stages of cellular chemistry, therefore, differ in their function, products and nature.

因此,細胞化學的兩個階段,在他們的功用,產品及特性方面,都大不相同。

The first carves out chemical motifs; the second assembles them. The first forms compounds that exist only temporarily, for they are intermediaries on the path of biosynthesis; the second constructs stable products.

第一階段刻劃出化學主題,第二階段裝配他們。第一階段形成暫時存在的組合,因為他們在生物合成的過程是中介,第二階段才建造穩定的產品。

The first operates by a series of different reactions; the second by repeating the same reaction.”4

第一階段以一系列的不同反應運作,第二階段則以重複相同反應運作。

There is, moreover, a third level, upon which cellular chemistry itself depends.

而且,還有第三階段,那是細胞化學所依賴的。

It is the genetic code, which is in turn inseparable from a double segmentarity or a double articulation, this time between two types of independent molecules: the sequence of protein units and the sequence of nucleic units, with binary relations between units of the same type and biunivocal relationships between units of different types.

基因符碼跟雙重沉澱或雙重表達互不可分,這一次是在兩種獨立的分子之間:蛋白質單位的系列,跟核子單位的系列,在相同種類得單位,有雙邊的關係,在不同種類的單位之間,有兩個單邊關係。

Thus there are always two articulations, two segmentarities, two kinds of multiplicity, each of which brings into play both forms and substances.

因此,總是有兩種表達,兩種沉澱,兩種多重性,每一種都運作到形式跟物質。

But the distribution of these two articulations is not constant, even within the same stratum.

但是這兩種表達的分配並不是固定的,即使是在相同的階層範圍。

The audience rather sulkily denounced the numerous misunderstandings,
misinterpretations, and even misappropriations in the professor’s presentation, despite the authorities he had appealed to, calling them his “friends.”

張廉吉教授演講時,聽眾相當慍怒地抨擊無數的誤解,誤導,甚至誤用,儘管他訴諸權威人士,跟他們平起平坐。

Even the Dogons . . . And things would presently get worse.

即使是跟道元禪宗。看來情況會更加惡化。

The professor cynically congratulated himself on taking his pleasure from behind, but the offspring always turned out to be runts and wens, bits and pieces, if not stupid vulgarizations.

教授自我解嘲地慶幸自己有後起之秀,但後續者卻總證明是並非棟樑之材,即使不是委瑣鄙陋,也是不堪造就。

Besides, the professor was not a geologist or a biologist, he was not even a linguist, ethnologist, or psychoanalyst; what his specialty had been was long since forgotten.

除外,教授並非是地質學家或生物學家,甚至也不是語言學家,民族學者,或精神分析師;他的專業是什麼早已經為人遺忘。

In fact, Professor Challenger was double, articulated twice, and that did not make things any easier, people never knew which of him was present.

事實上,張廉吉教授是雙重身份,表達兩次。可是這樣說未必使事情更加明白,因為人們不知道,他表現的是哪一種身份。

He (?) claimed to have invented a discipline he referred to by various names: rhizomatics, stratoanalysis, schizoanalysis, nomadology, micropolitics, pragmatics, the science of multiplicities.

他(哪個他?)宣稱他曾經用不同名稱,提倡他所提到的學問:塊莖、階層分析,精神分裂分析、遊牧學、微小政治學、實用論、多重化學。

Yet no one clearly understood what the goals, method, or principles of this discipline were.

可是,沒有人清楚地瞭解這門學問的目標、方法、或原理是什麼。

Young Professor Alasca, Challenger’s pet student, tried hypocritically to defend him by explaining that on a given stratum the passage from one articulation to the other was easily verified because it was always accompanied by a loss of water, in
genetics as in geology, and even in linguistics, where the importance of the
“lost saliva” phenomenon is measured.

年輕的阿拉斯卡教授是張廉吉教授的得意門生,曾經假惺惺地替他辯護說,在某個階層,從一個表達到另一個表達的過程很容易被驗證,因為那總是伴隨著水份的損失。在基因學、地質學,甚至語言學,「唾液減損」現象的重要性,是可以測量出來。

Challenger took offense, preferring to cite his friend, as he called him, the Danish Spinozist geologist, Hjelmslev, that dark prince descended from Hamlet who also made language his concern, precisely in order to analyze its “stratification.”

張廉吉教授甚感不以為然,他寧可引述他的朋友,專擅史賓諾莎哲學的丹麥地質學家,希姆列夫:黑暗王子的先行者是莎士比亞名劇中的主人翁哈姆雷特,因為他對於語言耿耿於懷,主要是為了要分析語言的「階層」。

Hjelmslev was able to weave a net out of the notions of matter, content and
expression, form and substance.

希姆列夫能夠將物料、內涵及表達、形式及物質等觀念,編織成一家之言的網絡。

These were the strata, said Hjelmslev. Now this net had the advantage of breaking with the form-content duality, since there was a form of content no less than a form of expression.

「階層無所不在。」希姆列夫說。目前,這個網絡的優點是可以中斷形式跟內涵的雙重性,因為內涵有形式,正如表達有形式。

Hjelmslev’s enemies saw this merely as a way of rebaptizing the discredited notions of the signified and signifier, but something quite different was actually going on.

希姆列夫的反對者則將此僅僅視為是,符號旨跟符號具的過時觀念,重新包裝命名,但是實際上,我們發現裡面另有新義卓見存焉。

Despite what Hjelmslev himself may have said, the net is not linguistic in scope or origin (the same must be said of double articulation: if language has a specificity of its own, as it most certainly does, that specificity consists neither in double articulation nor in Hjelmslev’s net, which are general characteristics of strata).

儘管希姆列夫自己曾經說過,這個網絡的範圍或起源並非是語言學(此說可應用到雙重表達:即使語言有自己的特性,它確實是有,但是那個獨特性,既不在於雙重表達,也不在於希姆列夫的網絡,後者是階層的一般特性。)

He used the term matter for the plane of consistency or Body without Organs, in other words, the unformed, unorganized, nonstratified, or destratified body and all its flows: subatomic and submolecular particles, pure intensities, prevital and prephysical free singularities.

他使用物料這個術語來描述光滑的平面或沒有器官的身體,換言之,沒有形式,,沒有組織,沒有階層,或除掉階層的身體,及所有流動的次原子,次分子的粒子,純粹的張力,尚未有生命力及形式的自由的特性。

He used the term content for formed matters, which would now have to be considered
from two points of view: substance, insofar as these matters are “chosen,” and form, insofar as they are chosen in a certain order (substance and form of content).

他使用內涵這個術語來描述有形體的物料,因為有兩個觀點非考慮到物料不可:物質會牽涉到所「選擇」的這些物料,形式會牽涉到在某個秩序的選擇(物質與內涵的形式)。

He used the term expression for functional structures, which would also have to be considered from two points of view: the organization of their own specific form, and substances insofar as they form compounds (form and content of expression).

他使用表達這個術語來描述功用的結構,因為有兩個觀點非得考量結構不可:他們自己明確形式的組織,以及形成組合牽涉到的物質(形式跟表達的內涵)。

A stratum always has a dimension of the expressible or of expression serving as the basis for a relative invariance; for example, nucleic sequences are inseparable from a relatively invariant expression by means of which they determine the compounds, organs, and functions of the organism.

階層總是有可表達或表達充當相對變數的向量。例如,核子系列跟相對變數的表達密不可分,因為憑藉後者,核子系列才能決定組合、器官、及有機體的功用。

To express is always to sing the glory of God.

表達總是讚揚上帝的榮耀。

雄伯譯
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw