sinthome 14

Jacques Lacan

雅克 拉康

Le Sinthome

病徵

Seminar 3: Wednesday16 December 1975

It is in as much as one of the two couples are distinguished from this specific knot by a different colour, to take up the term I used earlier, it is in so far as there is a link of the symptom to something particular in this set of four, it is, in a word, in as far (Fig III-7) – we do not know if it is this one or that one- it is in as much as we have a red-green couple here on the left, a blue-red here on the right, that we have a couple.

我們妨用不同顏色，將這兩對環圈之一，跟這個明確的結，區分開來，為了從事我早先用過的這個術語。這個病徵跟這個四個環圈一組的某件特別的東西有關連，總之，在遠遠的這裏（圖形III-7）。我們不知道是否就是這個或是那個，在左邊這裏，有一對紅色跟綠色的環圈，在右邊這裏，有一對藍色跟紅色的環圈。

And it is in as much as the sinthome is linked to the unconscious and that the Imaginary is linked to the Real that we are dealing with something from which the sinthome emerges.

當這個病徵跟這個無意識結合在一起，想像界跟真實界結合在一起，我們是在處理某件「病徵」出現的來處。

These are the difficult things that I wanted to state to you today.

有些困難的事情，今天我要跟你們陳述。

Assuredly this deserves a complement, the complement of the reason why here I opened up in a way the knot of three. Why did I give it the shape that you see here, which is not the circular one that is found drawn in the way that you see at the bottom (Fig II- 6).

的確，這個應該有一個補充，補充這個理由，為什麽我在此開展三個環圈的這個結。為什麽我給予你們看到的這個形狀。你們在底端看到的這個方式，並不是圓形的形狀（圖形II-6）

It results from the fact that with regard to this field, that I already, here noted as JØ, what is at stake is enjoyment (jouissance), the enjoyment not of the Other, because of the fact that I stated that (53) there is no Other of the Other, that there is nothing opposite the Symbolic, locus of the Other as such. That there is no enjoyment of the Other because there is no Other of the Other, and that this is what this Ø means.

這是因為這個事實而形成，關於這個領域，在此注明是「大它者的歡爽被禁制」的地方，岌岌可危的是歡爽，不是大它者的歡爽，因為我陳述過，這裏沒有大它者的大它者，沒有一樣東西，在意符界的對面，大它者本身的軌跡。這裏並沒有大它者的歡爽，因為沒有大它者的大它者，這就是這個「大它者的歡爽被禁制」的意思。

The result is that here J Ø, this enjoyment of the Other of the Other which is not possible for the simple reason that there is not, once what results from this that there remains only what is produced in the field, in the flattened out field of the circle of the Symbolic with the circle of the Imaginary which is meaning (fig III-8). And that on the other and what is here indicated, figured, is the relationship, is the relationship of the Symbolic to the Real in as much as from it there emerges what is described as the enjoyment of the phallus.

結果是，在此，大它者的這個歡爽是不可能存在。理由很簡單，一但這裏的結果是，只剩下這個領域所產生的東西，在這個意符界的圓圈，被想像界的圓圈處理過的領域，只剩這個意義（圖形III-8）。在另一方面，在這裏所被指示，所被描繪的，就是意符界跟真實界的關係。從那裏，所被描述為陽具的歡爽出現。

This is certainly not, in itself, enjoyment that is penile as such, but if we consider what it becomes with respect to the Imaginary, namely, the enjoyment of the double, of the specular image, of the enjoyment of the body qua Imaginary, is the support of a certain number of gaps, and properly speaking constitutes the different objects that occupy it.

就本身而言，這個確實並不是陰莖自身的歡爽。但是假如我們考慮到關於想像界，它所成為的東西，換句話說，這個雙重歡圈的歡爽，這個魅影形象的歡爽，這個身體作為想像界的歡爽，就是某些鴻溝的這個支持。適當地說，它組成的客體，跟佔有它的位置的客體，並不相同。

On the other hand, the enjoyment described as phallic is situated there, at the conjunction of the Symbolic with the Real. It is in as much that in the subject which is supported by the parlêtre in the sense that this is what I designate as being the unconscious, there is – and it is in this field that phallic enjoyment is inscribed – there

is the power, the power in short summoned, supported, the power of marrying what is involved in a certain enjoyment which, by the fact, by the fact of this word itself, marries an enjoyment experienced, experienced by the fact of the parlêtre, as a parasitic (54) enjoyment, and which is the one described as of the phallus.

在另一方面，被描述為陽具的歡爽，位在那裏，在意符界跟真實界交會的地方。被「畫板」所支持的生命的主體，這就是我指明是無意識的地方。就在這個領域，陽具的歡爽被銘記，總之，有力量被召喚，被支持，將某些歡爽所牽涉到的東西結合起來，根據這個字詞的本身，結合所經驗到的歡爽，被這個「畫板」所經驗到的歡爽，作為一種寄生的歡爽。這就是被描述為「陽具的歡爽」。

This indeed is the one that I inscribe here as a balance to what is involved in meaning, it is the locus of that which, through the parlêtre, is designated in conscience as power.

這個確實就是我所描述的歡爽，作為意義方面所牽涉到的一種平衡。透過這個「畫板」，就在這個軌跡，良心被指明是一種力量。

What dominates, to conclude with something that I suggest you should read, is the fact that the three rings participate in the Imaginary as consistency, in the Symbolic as hole, and in the Real as ex-sisting to them. The three rings then imitate one another. It is all the more difficult to do this in that they do not imitate one another simply. That by the fact of the said, they are arranged in a knot of three. Hence my concern, after having made the discovery that this knot of three was knotted in threes in a Borromean way, I affirmed that if they have preserved themselves free among

themselves, a knot of three, playing in a full application of its texture, ex-sists, which is well and truly the fourth, and which is called the sinthome. Voilà.

作為結論，我建議你們應該閱讀某件東西。重要的是，這三個環圈參與想像界，作為一致性，在意符界，作為一個空洞，在真實界，作為它們的「預先存在」。這三個環圈因此互相模仿。要互相模仿，其實是更加困難，因為它們不僅僅是互相模仿而已。根據以上所說的事實，它們是安排成以三個環圈組成一個結。因此，我的關心是，當我發現，這三個環圈所組成的一個環結，是以波洛米因結的方式，三個環圈一組所形成，我肯定，假如它們曾經維持自己的自由，在本身之內，這三個環圈組成的一個結，以充分運用它的質料來發揮，「預先存在」的，道道地地就是這第四個術語，也就是所謂的「病徵」。「滿意吧？」

雄伯譯

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

## Leave a Reply