可能不是類似 217f

可能不是類似 217f

On a Discourse that might not be a semblance

可能不是類似的真理論述

Jacques Lacan
雅克 拉康

Seminar 4: Wednesday 17 February 1971

This is where and in what there resides the incompatibility of being and having. In this text, this is repeated with a certain insistence, and putting into it certain emphases of style, which I repeat are just as important to make one‟s way as the graphs at which they culminate.

這就是生命實存與擁有的格格不入所駐居之地。在這個文本,這個主題持續地被重複,並且給予某種風格的強調。我重複一遍,我們探討前進時,這些風格的強調,跟它們達到顛峰時的圖形是同樣的重要。

And behold, I had in front of me, like that, at the famous Congrès de Royaumont,
some people who laughed derisively, if everything is there, if it is a matter of being and having, that did not seem to them to have any great importance, being and having. One makes one‟s choice, huh!

請注意,在著名的羅由門研討會,我遇到一些類似這樣的人在我面前,他們冷嘲熱諷,一切是否都在那裏,它是否是生命實存於擁有的問題,對於他們而言,似乎沒有什麼重要性。我們要有所選擇,呵呵!

(67) This is nevertheless what is called castration. What I am proposing is the following, it is to posit that we will put language here (1), in its reserved field in this gap of the sexual relationship, as the phallus leaves it open, by positing that what it introduces here, is not, not two terms that are defined as male and female, but this choice between these terms of a quite different nature and function that are called being and having. What proves, what supports, what renders this distance absolutely obvious, definitive, is the following, something whose difference it does not seem people have noticed, is the substitution for the sexual relationship of what is
called sexual law.

可是,這就是所謂的閹割。我正在建議的是以下,那就是要提出我們將語言放置在這裏,在它被保留的領域,在這個性關係的差距裏,當陽具讓它張開,提出它在此所介紹的東西,它並不是被定義為男性與女性的兩個術語,而是完全不同性質及功用,也就是生命實存與擁有的這些術語之間的選擇。證明,支持,彰顯,及定義這個距離的內容如下,某件人們似乎沒有注意到的東西,就是:對於所謂性的法則的性關係的替代。

It is here that there is this distance in which it is inscribed that there is nothing in common between what can be stated as a relationship which lays down the law in so far as it derives, in some form or other, from the application that a mathematical function circumscribes most closely, and a law that is coherent to the whole
register of what is called desire, of what is called prohibition, of what underlines that it is from the very gap of the inscribed prohibition that there derives the conjunction, indeed the identity, as I dared state, of this desire and of this law, and what is posited correlatively for everything that derives from the effect of language, from everything
that establishes the demansion of the truth from a structure of fiction.

在此,有這個距離,它被銘記,沒有一個共同的東西,處於能夠被陳述為一個關係,奠定這個法則。因為它以某種的形式,從這個運用獲得,一個數學的功用限制的最仔細。這個法則是一致的,對於所謂欲望,所謂的禁止的整體銘記,對於從被銘記的禁止的差距強調它。這種被銘記的禁止獲得對於欲望與這個法則的這個連接,確實是這個認同,容我大膽地陳述。所被提出跟一切相對應的東西,它得自於語言的影響,得自于一切建立真理的「維度」,得自幻想的結構。

13.1.71 I 85
The correlation that has always been made between ritual and myth, whose ridiculous weakness is to say that myth is supposed to be simply a commentary on the ritual, what is done to sustain it, to explain it, while it is, in accordance with a topology that I have already for long enough given a destiny not to have to recall it, ritual and myth are like the front and the back (l‟endroit et l‟envers), on condition that this front and this back are in continuity.

這個共同關係總是被建立在儀式與神話之間。它的荒謬的弱點,是說神話應該僅是對於儀式的評論,為了維持儀式,解釋儀式所做的東西。另一方面,為了符合一個拓撲圖形,那是我長久以來念茲在茲的拓撲圖形,儀式與神話就像是正面與反面,只要這正反兩面是連續性的。

The maintaining, the maintaining in analytic discourse of this residual myth that is called the Oedipus complex, God knows why, which is in fact that of Totem and taboo, in which there is inscribed this myth that is entirely invented by Freud, of the primordial father in so far as he enjoys all the women, it is all the same here that we ought to question a little further from the point of view of logic and of writing, what it means.

在精神分析的真理論述,維持所謂的伊底普斯情結的這個殘餘的神話,天曉得為什麼,事實上,在「圖騰與禁忌」,完全由佛洛伊德構想的這個神話,被銘記在那裏,原始的父親享受所有的女人,仍然是在這裏,我們應該從邏輯與書寫的觀點,稍微深入地質疑,那是什麼意思。

It is a long time since I introduced here the schema of Peirce about propositions in so far as they are divided into four, universal, particular, affirmative and negative, the two terms, the two couples of terms interchanging. Everyone knows that to say that: every x is y, if the schema of Peirce, Charles Sanders, has an interest, it is to show, it
is to define as necessary that every something is provided with such an attribute, is a perfectly acceptable universal position without there being for all that any x. In Peirce‟s little formula, little schema, I remind you, here we have a certain number of vertical strokes, here we have none, here we have a little mixture of the two, and that it is from the overlapping of two of these boxes that there results the specificity of one or other of these propositions.

長久以來,我介紹皮爾斯關於這些命題的這個基模。它們被分成四個,普遍性,特殊性,肯定與否定。這兩個術語,兩對術語互相交換。眾所周知,說每個X,都等於Y,皮爾斯的這個基模的有趣之處,它是要顯示,它是要定義為必須:每一件被供應這樣一個屬性的東西,是一個完全可被接受的普遍性的立場,而不需要有任何的X給它們。在皮爾斯的小基模,我提醒你們,這個小基模,我們擁有某些數目的垂直的筆劃,目前我們沒有,目前我們只有這兩個的混合,從這些盒子的兩個的重疊,形成一兩個這些命題的明確性。

And that it is by bringing together these two quadrants that one can say: every stroke
is vertical. There is no stroke if it is not vertical. To give the negative, it is these two that must be brought together. Either there is no stroke, or there are none that are vertical.

將這兩組的四分之一聚集一塊,我們能夠說:每一筆劃都是垂直。假如它不垂直,它就不是筆劃。從否定來說,這兩組必須聚集在一塊。要就是:都沒有筆劃,要就是:沒有筆劃是垂直。

What the myth of the enjoyment of all the women designates, is that there are not all the women. There is no universal of the woman. Here is what is posed by a questioning of the phallus, and not of sexual relationship, as regards what is involved in the enjoyment it constitutes, because I said that it was feminine enjoyment.

「所有女人」的享樂的神話指明的是,沒有所謂「所有女人」。沒有普遍性的女人。對於陽具的質疑所提出的問題,不是性關係,關於性關係組成的享樂所牽涉的東西,因為我說,它是女性的歡爽。

It is starting from these statements that a certain number of questions can be radically displaced. After all, but it is possible that there is a knowledge of the enjoyment that is called sexual which is attributable to this particular woman. This is not unthinkable, there are like that, mythical traces of it in certain corners. The things called Tantra, it is said that this is practised. It is all the same clear that for a good while, if you will allow me to express my thinking in this way, the skill of female flute players is much more open to view. It is not to… play with obscenity that I am putting forward that at this point.

這是從這些陳述開始,某些的問題能夠完全地被更換。畢竟,這是可能的,有享樂的知識被稱為性,被歸屬於這個「特別的女人」。這是不可思議的,就像是,在某些的角落會有神秘的痕跡。被稱為「密宗佛教」的那些東西,據說,有歡喜佛男女雙修。這仍然是顯而易見,有一陣子,請容許我這樣表達我的思想,女性的吹簫的技巧,是更加公開討論的。在這個時刻,我提出這個問題,不是賣弄低俗下流。

The fact is, there is here, and I suppose there is at least one person who knows what it is to play the flute, it is the person who recently, pointed out to me in connection with this flute playing, but one can (69) say it also with respect to any use of an instrument, what division from the body the use of an instrument, whatever it may be, makes necessary.

事實上,在此我認為至少有一個人知道,吹簫是什麼意思。這個人最近跟我指出,關於這個吹簫。但是我們也能夠說到它,關於一種樂器的使用,這種樂器的使用,不管它是什麼,有需要跟身體區分開來。

I mean a breakdown of synergy. It is enough to play any instrument whatsoever. Get onto a pair of skis, and you will see immediately that your synergies have to be broken. Take up a golf club, I do this from time to time, I started again, it‟s the same
thing, huh? There are two types of movement that you have to make at the same time, at the beginning you will absolutely not succeed in doing it, because synergetically, it is not arranged like that.

我是指協調能力的瓦解,演奏樂器,我們點到為止。現在來談雪屐,你們將會立刻看出,你們的協調能力必須被瓦解。從事一個高爾夫球棒,我有時也玩一下,我重新開始,這是相同的事情,呵呵?有兩種的動作,你們必須同時做,在開始,你絕對不要設法做到,因為從協調能夠來說,它並不是這樣被安排。

雄伯譯
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: