可能不是類似 210h

可能不是類似 210h

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

I will tell you how man, it is untranslatable, that is how it is, he is a good chap, made up of curious little turns of juggling and exchange between hsing and ming. It is obviously much too subtle for me to speak about it to you today, but I put it at the horizon, at the point, in order to tell you that this is where we have to get to, because in any case, this xin, is something that does not work out, that is underdeveloped; we really have to know where to put it.

我將告訴你們,人究竟如何,這是無法翻譯的,他究竟如何由「性」與「命」之間的交互出現及交換的奇異翻轉所組成,他真是個好傢夥。顯而易見的,此事過於微妙,讓我今天無法言說它。我將它擺放在遠處,在這個點,為了告訴你們,這就是我們必須到達到地方。因為無論如何,這個「性」是無法獲得結果的東西。那是尚未開發的地區,我們確實必要知道要將它擺放在哪里。

That it can mean nature, is not very satisfactory given the state that things are at
as regards natural history. This hsing, there is no kind of chance that we will find it in this thing that requires great cunning to get, to get a close hold of, which is called the surplus enjoying. If it is so slippery, that does not make it easy to get one‟s hands on it. It is all the same not, certainly not to this that we refer when we talk about
underdevelopment.

它能夠意味著「自然天性」的說法並沒有很令人滿意,假如我們考慮事情所處的這種狀態,關於自然界的歷史。這個「性」,我們並沒有這種機會找到它,這個東西需要聰明狡詰,才能獲得,掌握所謂的剩餘的享樂。雖然它是如此的滑溜不定,讓我們難於掌握,當我們談論到這個尚未開發的地帶,我們提到的,仍然不是這個。

I know well that by ending now, because time is passing, I am going to leave you perhaps a little bit in suspense. All the same, I am going to go back, onto the plane of metaphorical acting and to tell you how, because today that was my pivot, linguistics properly filtered, criticised, focussed, in a word, on condition that we make of it
exactly what we want and what linguists do, good God, why not take advantage of it?

我心知肚明,在此作為結束,因為時間快要沒有了,我將讓你們或許稍微留在懸疑當中。我仍然將會回頭談論,這個比喻演出的層次,然後告訴你們,語言學如何巧妙地被滲透,被批評。被專注,因為今天那才是我演講的軸心。總之,我們確實地解釋它,成為我們所需要,及語言家所做的,我的天,我們為什麼沒有利用到它呢?

They may happen to do something useful. If linguistics is what I was saying earlier, a metaphor that is deliberately fabricated in order not to work, this may perhaps give you ideas about what may well be for us the goal.

語言學家可能恰好做了某件有用的事情。假如語言學是早先我所說的樣子,一個刻意被建構的比喻,為了不要運作,這或許會你們明白,我們的目標是什麼。

From where we situate ourselves with Meng-Tzu and then some other people at his epoch who knew what they were talking about, because you must not confuse all the same underdevelopment with the return to an archaic state, it is not because Meng-Tzu lived in the 3rd Century before Jesus Christ that I am presenting him to you as a primitive mentality. I am presenting him to you as someone who, in what he said, probably (53) knew part of the things that we do not know when we are saying the same thing.

從我們定位跟孟子立場一致,在他的時代的有些其他的人,知道他們當時正在談論什麼,因為你們一定不要混淆所有的尚未開發地帶,跟回轉到思古之幽情。這並不是因為孟子生活在紀元前第三世紀,我現在正呈現給與你們,作為原初的精神典範。我呈現給與你們,是從他所說的話。作為某位可能略有所知的人,因為當我們說同樣的話時,我們並不知是什麼。

So then, this is what may serve to teach us with him to sustain a metaphor, not fabricated in order not to work, but whose action we suspend. It is here perhaps that we will try to show the necessary path.

因此,他所說的話,可以充當給予我們的教導,跟隨他維持一種比喻,並不是為了不要運作而被建構。而是它的行動被我們懸置。或許就是在此,我們將會嘗試顯示必需要的途徑。

I will remain there today for a discourse that might not be a semblance.

今天我將停留在此,探討可能不是類似物的真理論述。
13.1.71 I 71

雄伯曰:
我後來發現,“a discourse that might not be a semblance”大陸發譯為「可能不是偽裝的辭說」。

拉康被其他的語言學家批評對於語言學僅是比喻地使用make a metaphorical use of linguistics。對此批評,拉康坦然面對,以他的觀點,精神分析目前所要探索的目標是「尚未被開發」underdeveloped 的無意識的「真實界」,我們卻必須憑藉語言文字作為詮釋的工具,本來就是力有所不逮。能夠比喻地使用,其實就是差強人意了。何況,對照於宇宙及無意識界的浩瀚廣裘,語言學本身本來就僅能是一種比喻。問題是那些語言學家,連這一點自知之明都沒有!

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: