可能不是類似 210e

可能不是類似 210e

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 3: Wednesday 10 February 1971

Or again it means, in so far as that refers to something which is even more into metaphor, in so far as it refers to something, (47) namely, precisely, it is not one because one is forced to refer to it.

而且,它意味著,它提到某件東西,甚至更加進入比喻,因為它提到某件東西。換句話說,準確地,它並不是比喻,因為我們被迫提到它。

When one thing refers to another, the greatest possible breadth, the greatest possible flexibility is given to the eventual use of this term wei which nevertheless means to act.

當一件事物提到另一件事物,最大的可能寬度,最大的可能彈性被給予這個術語「為」的最後使用。它仍然意味著「行動」。

It is not bad, a tongue like that! A tongue where the verbs and the plus-verbs – to act, what is more of a plus-verb, what more active plus-verb is there? – is transformed into tiny conjunctions.

這並不糟糕,一個像這樣的語言!在一種語言,動詞與這個另加動詞被轉變成為小小的連接詞–「行動」,而且是一個另加動詞,還有怎樣的主動的另加動詞?

That is the usual thing. This helped me a lot all the same to generalise the function of the signifier, even if it fits in badly with some linguists who do not know Chinese.

那是尋常的事情。這仍然幫助我將能指的功用概念化,即使對於不懂中文的語言學家,它適應得很不好。

For my part I would really like to ask a particular one, for example how for him the double articulation that he keeps talking about for some years – I tell you this double articulation is killing us – what does he make of the double articulation in Chinese? Huh?

就我而言,我真的想要問一個特別的問題。譬如,對於他而言,他好幾年了一直在談論的這個雙重的表達—我告訴你們這個雙重表達把我們搞慘了—他如何以中文來解釋這個雙重表達?呵呵?

In Chinese, you see, it is the first that is all alone, and then finds itself like that producing a meaning which from time to time means that, since all the words are monosyllabic, one cannot say that there is a phoneme which means nothing, and then the word that means something, two articulations, two levels.

你們瞧,在中文,第一個在那裏的是全然孤獨,然後發現它自己就像那樣產生一種意義。這個意義有時意味著,因為所有的字是單音節,我們無法說,有一個音素意味著空無。意味著某件東西的這個字,有雙重表達,雙重層次。

Well then, yes, even at the level of the phoneme, that means something. This does not prevent when you put several phonemes together, which mean the same thing, this gives a big word of several syllables, just like with us, which has a meaning that has no relationship with what each of the phonemes mean. So the double articulation looks rather funny there!

呵呵,沒錯,甚至就是在音素的層次,那意味著某件東西。這並沒有阻礙,當你將好幾個音素聚在一塊,這意味著相同的事,這形成好幾個音節的長字,就像跟我們在一起。這具有一種意義,跟每一個音素的意義沒有關係。所以這個雙重表達,在那裏看起來很好笑。

It is funny that it is not remembered that there is a tongue like that, when one states as general a function of the double articulation as characteristic of language. I don‟t mind if all I‟m saying is pure stupidity, but explain it to me!

好笑的是,它並沒有被記得,有一個像那樣的語言,當我們陳述,當著跟語言的特性作為雙重表達一般的功用。假如我正在說的東西純然都是蠢話,我並不介意,但是請替我解釋一下。

Let a linguist come here who can tell me how the double articulation holds up in Chinese [cf. André Martinet, Eléments de linguistique général, new edition, Paris 1967.]

請一位語言學家來告訴我,這雙重表達在中文裏能夠成立。

So then, this wei like that, to get you used to it I am introducing it, but very gently. I will bring you a minimum of other things, which may in fact be of some use. It illuminates many things moreover that this verb is at the same time to act and the conjunction of the metaphor.

因此,這個「為」就像那樣,讓你習慣於它。我是正在介紹它,但是方式溫和。我將會稍微跟你們介紹其他東西,它們事實上是有些用途。而且,它啟明許多事情:這個動詞同時要行動,這個比喻的連接詞也要行動。

Perhaps the Im Anfang war die Tat, as your man says, there where the act was right at the beginning it is perhaps exactly the same thing as to say en arché, in the beginning was the word. There is perhaps no other act than this.

或許這個「開始時是行動」,如你們所說的,在開始行動是正確的地方,這或許是確實相同的事情,如同說「開始」,在開始就是這個字。或許除了這個以外,沒有別的行動。

The terrible thing is, is that I can lead you like that for a long time with metaphor and the further I go, the more you will go astray because precisely, what is proper to the
metaphor is not to be all alone.

可怕的事情是,我能夠像那樣引導你們,長久以來使用比喻。我進行得越遠,我就越迷失。因為確實比喻的本體,不能夠全然是孤獨。

There is also metonymy which functions at this time and even while I am speaking to you , because it is after all the metaphor, as very competent, very friendly people called linguists tell us; they are even so competent that they have been forced to invent the notion of competence.

也有一種換喻,在這個時候發揮功用。甚至當我正在跟你們言談的時刻,因為畢竟,所有的比喻,如同所謂語言學家的勝任而友善的人們告訴我們,他們是如此的勝任,所以他們一直被迫要杜撰勝任的觀念。

The tongue is competence in itself. What is more it is true. One is competent in nothing else. Only, since they have also perceived, there is only one way to prove it, which is performance.

這個語言本身就是勝任。而且,它是真實的。我們並沒有勝任任何其他東西。只是,它們既然也如此感覺,只有一個辦法證明它,那就是實踐。

They are the ones who call it that, performance. I don‟t, I have no need of it. I am in the process of giving it, the performance, giving the performance of speaking to
you about metaphor, naturally I confuse you, because the only interesting thing, is what happens in the performance, it is the production of surplus enjoying, of yours and of the one that you impute to me when you reflect.

它們是那些人稱呼它為實踐,我沒有這樣稱呼,我沒有這個實踐的必要。我處於正在給予它的過程,實踐的過程,實踐我跟你們的言說關於這個比喻。自然地,我會讓你們感到混淆。因為唯一有趣的事情是在實踐時發生的事情。那就是剩餘享樂的產物,屬於你們的產物,屬於當你們反思時歸屬於我的產物。

That happens to you. That happens to you especially when you ask yourselves what I am doing here. It must be that this gives you some pleasure, at the level of this surplus
enjoying that pressurises you; as I already explained to you, it is at that level that the operation of metonymy is carried out, thanks to which you can be more or less led anywhere at all, led by the nose, naturally not simply to go along the corridor. But this is not what is interesting, to lead you into the corridor, nor even to beat you in the
public square.

你們會發生這樣的事。會發生到你們身上,特別是當你們詢問自己,我正在這裏做什麼。那一定是,這給予你們快樂,在剩餘享樂的層次,它給予你們壓力,如同我已經跟你們解釋的。在那個層次,換喻的運作被執行。由於這個運作,你們會被引導到任何地方,被牽著鼻子走,當然,不僅是沿著走廊前進。但這並不是有趣之處,引導你們進入走廊,甚至沒有在公共廣場控制你們。

The important thing, is to keep you there, well arranged, close together, well pressed against one another. As long as you are there, you are doing nobody any harm!

重要的是要維持你們在那裏,秩序井然,緊靠在一塊,互相緊密挨擠。只要你們在那,你們就不會造成任何人的傷害。

This will take us rather far, this little banter, because it is all the same starting from
there that we are going to try to articulate the function of yin. You understand, I remind you of this business of the surplus enjoying, I remind you of it anyway as I am able; it is quite certain that it was only definable by me starting from what?

這將會引導我們走更遠,這個小玩笑,因為它仍然是從那裏開始。我們將嘗試表達「陰」的這個功用。你們瞭解,我提醒你們這個剩餘享樂的事情。我盡我所能提醒你們關於它。相當確定的是,我能夠替它定義,是從哪里開始?

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: