Desire 031 Jacques Lacan

Desire 031

Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN
BOOK VI
Desire and its Interpretation
欲望及其解釋

3.12.58 52
Seminar 4: 3 December 1958

Things are necessarily organised starting from this necessity, and all sorts of consequences are going to flow from this, that there is a topology which it is necessary and sufficient for us to conceive of as constituted by two superimposed chains, for us to account for it, but it is absolutely required in order that we should account for it, that there are these two superimposed chains, and it is towards this
that we are advancing.

事情必須要被組織,從這個必要的部份。各種的結果就在從這裏紛至遝來。有一個拓樸圖形,我們有需要而且足夠去構想它,當著是由兩個重疊的意符鎖鏈組成。我們有需要而且足夠去解釋它。但是這個絕對是必要的,為了讓我們解釋它,要有這兩個重疊的意符鎖鏈。我們就朝著這一個目標前進。

Here at the level of Anna Freud’s dream, how do things appear?

在安娜、佛洛伊德的夢的層次,事情的狀況是怎樣?

It is true that they appear in a problematic, ambiguous fashion, which permits, which makes it legitimate up to a certain point for Freud to distinguish a difference between children’s dreams and adults dreams.

它們出現的方式確實很棘手,而且模糊曖昧。到達某個的程度,這種方式容許,並且使佛洛伊德振振有理,區別一個差異,處於小孩的夢跟成人的夢之間的差異。

Where is the chain of nominations which makes up the dream of Anna Freud situated? On the upper chain or on the lower chain? It is a question regarding which you have been able to notice that the upper part of the graph represents this chain in a dotted form, putting the accent on the element of discontinuity of the signifier, while we represent the lower chain of the graph as continuous, and on the other hand I told you that of course in every process the two chains are involved.

組成安娜、佛洛伊德的夢的命名意符鎖鏈,位置在哪里?在上面的意符鎖鏈?還是在下麵的意符鎖鏈?關於這個問題,你們已經能夠注意到,這個欲望圖形的上面部份代表這個意符鎖鏈,以點點的形式,強調這個意符不連續性的元素。而我們代表這個欲望圖形的下面意符鎖鏈,作為連續性。在另一方面,我告訴你們,當然,在每一個過程,這兩個意符鎖鏈都會牽涉到。

(22) What does the lower chain mean at the level that we are posing the question? The lower chain at the level of demand, and in so far as I told you that the subject qua speaking took on this solidity borrowed from the synchronic solidarity of the
signifier, it is quite obvious that it is something that participates in the unity of the sentence, of this something which has made people talk and which gave rise to so much discussion, about the function of the sentence as holophrase in so far that is as the holophrase exists.

下面的這個意符鎖鏈,當它處於我們正在提出問題的層次,它是什麼意思?下面的意符鎖鏈處於要求的層次。我告訴過你們,生命主體作為言談的主體,形成這個牢固性,從意符的同時性的牢固性借用而來。這是顯而易見的,某件東西參與這個句子的一致性。這個某件東西使人們談論,並且產生如此多的討論,關於這個句子的功用,作為以一個字代表整個句子。也就是全句字是存在的。

There is no doubt about it, the holophrase has a name: it is the interjection.

無可置疑的,全句字有一個名字,那就是驚歎詞。

If you like, to illustrate at the level of the demand what the function of the lower chain represents, it is: “Foodl”, or “Helpl”; I am speaking about universal discourse, I am not talking about the child’s discourse for the moment. This form of sentence exists, I would even say that in certain cases it takes on a quite pressing and demanding value.

容我以這個要求的層次來說明,下面的意符鎖鏈的功用代表什麼。「食物!」或是「救命!」我是談論到普及的真理論述,目前,我不是談論有關小孩的真理論述。句子的這個形式存在,我甚至會說,在某些的情況,它會形成一個相當迫切而要求嚴格的價值。

This is what is in question, it is the articulation of the sentence, it is the subject in so far as this need which of course must pass by way of the defiles of the signifier qua need, is expressed in a fashion which is deformed, but at least which is monolithic. except that the monolith that is in question, is the subject himself at this level which constitutes him.

這就是受到質疑的地方。這個句子的表達,這個生命主體。當然,這個需求必須藉由意符作為需要的污染通過。這個需求被表達,以一種畸形的方式。但是至少,這個方式是整體的,除了:這個整體物本身受到質疑。生命主體的本身在這個層次,組成他。

What happens on the other line, is quite different. What can be (23) said about it is not easy to say, but for a good reason, which is that it is precisely what is at the basis of what happens on the first line, the lower one; but undoubtedly what we see, is that even in something which is given to us as being as primitive as this child’s dream, Anna Freud’s dream, something marks for us that here the subject is not simply constituted in the sentence and by the sentence, in the sense that when the
individual, or the crowd, or the mob cries: “Foodl”, one knows very well that in this case the whole weight of the message is on the emitter, I mean that it is the dominant element and one even knows that this cry just by itself is sufficient precisely in the
forms that I have just evoked, to constitute this emitter, as being well and truly a unique subject, even if it has a hundred mouths, a thousand mouths. It does not need to introduce itself, the sentence introduces it sufficiently.

在安娜、佛洛伊德的夢,某件東西跟我們標示著,在此,生命主體不僅在這個句子裏被形成,而且這個句子的意義是,當個人,或是群眾,或是暴徒,大聲喊叫:「食物!」我們知道得很清楚,在這個情形,訊息的整個重量是在這位發表者。我的意思是,這是支配性的元素,我們甚至知道,光是這聲喊叫本身,就已經確實足夠形成這個發表者,作為道道地地是一個獨特的生命主體,以我剛剛召喚的形式而言。即使它有一百個嘴巴,一千個嘴巴。它並不需要介紹它自己,這個句子已經足夠介紹它自己。

Now all the same we find ourselves confronted with the following, that the human subject when he operates with language, takes himself into account, and to such a degree is it his primitive position that I do not know if you remember a certain text by Monsieur Binet, namely the difficulties that the subject has in going beyond this stage which I for my part find much more suggestive than any of the stages indicated by Monsieur Piaget, and this stage, I am not going to tell you about it because I do not want to get into details, appears as distinctive and consists in the fact that the (24) subject perceives that there is something wrong with the sentence: “I have three brothers, Paul, Ernest and me”.

現在,我們仍然發現我們自己面對著以下的問題。人類的生命主體,當他使用語言運作,考慮到自己的本身,到達這個程度,以致于他的原初的立場。我不知道你們是否記得某一個文本,邊拿先生的著作。換句話說,生命主體或遭遇的困難,當他前進超越了這個階段。就我而言,我發現這個階段,比起皮亞傑先生指示的任何的階段,更加具有意義。這個階段,我不是要告訴你們關於它,因為我不想要從事細節討論。這個階段清楚明白,而且在於這個事實:生命主體感覺到,這個句子有某個地方不對勁:「我有三個兄弟,保羅、厄内斯特、和我。」

Up to a fairly advanced stage this seems to him quite natural, and for a very good reason, because to tell the truth everything about the implication of the human subject in the act of speech is there: the fact is that he takes himself into account in it, that he
names himself in it, and that consequently this is what I might call the most natural the most coordinated expression.

一直到一個非常高級的階段,這個句子對於他而言,似乎相當自然。理由很簡單,因為坦白說,在言談的行動中,人類生命主體所牽涉到的每一件事情,都在那裏。事實上,他考慮到自己的本身在裏面,他在裏面命名他自己。結果是,這就是我所謂的最自然,最調和一致的表達。

The child simply has not found the proper formula which would obviously be the following: “We are three brothers, Paul, Ernest and me”, except that we would be very far from reproaching him for giving it the ambiguities of the function of being and
having. It is clear that a step must be taken in order that in sum what is in question, namely the distinction between the I qua subject of the enunciation and the I qua subject of the enunciating, can be made, because this is what is in question.

這位小孩就是還沒有找到這個適當的公式。這個公式顯見如下:「我們是三個兄弟,保羅、厄尼斯特,跟我自己。」除了,我們根本不會責怪他,因為他給予它,生命實存跟生命擁有的功用的這個模糊曖昧。顯而易見的,我們必須採取一個步驟,總之,在受到質疑的地方,我們必須做出這個區別:在我作為表達的生命主體,跟我作為被表達者的生命主體。因為這是受到質疑的地方。

What is articulated at the level of the first line when we take the following step is the process of enunciation: in our dream of the other day: “he had died”. But when you announce something like that, in which I would point out to you in passing, the whole novelty of the dimension that the word introduces into the world, is already implied, because to be able to say: “He had died”, this cannot be said otherwise than in a completely different perspective to that of the statement (du dire) “He had died”, means absolutely nothing (ne veut absolument rien dire);

在第一行的這個層次所被表達的東西,當我們採取以下的步驟,就是前天我們談論的夢,表達的過程:「他已經死亡。」但是當你們宣佈像那樣的某件事情,在這件事情,我順便跟你們指出這個向度的整個新奇性。這個字詞介紹給世界的這個向度的新奇性,已經被暗含在裏面。因為能夠說:「他已經死亡」。這句話不能夠被說,除了在一個完全不同的觀點,跟陳述的觀點不同。「他已經死亡」本身絕對沒有任何意義。

(25) “He had died”, means: he no longer exists, therefore there is no need to say it, he is no longer there in order to say he is dead, he must already be a being supported by the word. But no one is being asked to perceive this, of course, but simply on the
contrary the following, that the act of enunciating: “He had died”, usually requires in the discourse itself all sorts of reference points which are distinct from the reference points that are taken from the enunciation of the process.

「他已經死亡」意味著:他不再存在。因此,沒有需要去說它。他已經不在那裏,為了要說,他已經死亡。他必須已經是一個被文字支援的生命。但是當然,沒有人會被要求去感覺這一點。相反對,僅是會發生以下的問題。在真理論述的本身,表達「他已經死亡」的這個行動,通常會要求各種的指稱點。這些指稱點截然不同於從過程的表達的這些指稱點。

陳春雄譯
32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
https://springhero.wordpress.com

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: