The Psychoses 14

The Psychoses 14
精神病患
Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康

Ill

PARANOID KNOWLEDGE
偏执狂的知识

GRAMMAR OF THE UNCONSCIOUS
无意识的文法

3
What is speech? Does the subject speak or does he not? Speech – let’s dwell
on this fact for a moment.

言说是什么?主体言说或是没有言说?言说—让我们详述这个事实一下子。

What distinguishes speech [une parole] from a registering of language? To
speak is first of all to speak to others. I have on many occasions brought to
the foreground of my teaching this characteristic which at first sight appears
simple – speaking to others.

是什么区别言说跟语言的铭杰?言说首先就是对别人言说。我在好几个场合,曾经将这个特性带到我的教学的前景。乍然一看,这个特性似乎简单,对别人言说。

The notion of what a message is has, for some time, been in the foreground
of the preoccupations of science. For us, the structure of speech, as I have
said to you whenever we have had to use this term in its strict sense here, is
that the subject receives his message from the other in an inverted form. Full
speech, essential, committed speech, is based on this structure. We have two
exemplary forms of this.

讯息是什么的这个观念,有一段时间,曾经处在被科学专注佔有的前景。对于我们而言,言说的结构,如同我曾经跟你们说过,每当我们在此必须以严格的意义使用这个术语。这个语言的结构就是,主体以倒转的形式从他者那里接收它的讯息。完整的言说,基本而奉献的言说,就是以这个结构为基础。我们拥有这个结构的两个典范的形式。

The first is fides, speech that gives itself, the You are my woman or the You are my master, which means – You are what is still within my speech, and this I can only affirm by speaking in your place. This comes from you to find the certainty of what I pledge.9 This speech is speech that commits you. The unity of speech insofar as it founds the position of the two subjects is made apparent here.

第一个典范是「坦诚告白」。言说表达它自己:「你是我的女人」,或是「你是我的主人」,它的意思是:「你是我的言说里面依旧存在的东西。仅有凭借站在你的位置,我才能够肯定这一点。这来自于你,为了要找到这个确定性,对于我宣称的东西。这个言说是奉献于你的言说。言说的一致性在此变得显而易见,因为它找到作为两个主体的位置。

If this doesn’t seem obvious to you, confirmation by its contrary is, as usual, so much more obvious.

假如对于而言,这并非显而易见,跟它相反的肯的,通常是如此更加显而易见。

The sign by which the subject-to-subject relation is recognized, and which distinguishes it from the subject-to-object relationship, is the feint, the reverse
of fides.

主体对于主体的关系被承认讯息,区别它跟主体与主体的关系,就是这个欺骗,这个坦诚告白的倒转。

You are in the presence of a subject insofar as what he says and does – they’re the same thing – can be supposed to have been said and done to deceive you, with all the dialectic that that comprises, up to and including that he should tell the truth so that you believe the contrary.

你们处于一个主体的在现场,因为他所说所为—他们都是相同的事情。他们能够被认为曾经被说被做,为了欺骗你,带着完整的辩证法。这个辩证法组成,甚至包括:他应该说出实话,这样你才会相信相反的东西。

You know the Jewish joke, recounted by Freud, about the character who says – / am going to Cracow. And the other replies – Why are you telling me you are going to
Cracow? You are telling me that to make me believe that you are going somewhere
else.9

你们知道弗洛伊德描述的犹太人的笑话,关于那些人物的说法:「我将要去克拉考。另外一人回说:「为什么你告诉我,你要去克拉考?你正在告诉我,为了让我相信,你正要告诉我你正要去某个其他地方。

What the subject tells me is always fundamentally related to a possible feint, in which he sends me, and I receive, the message in an inverted form.

主体告诉我们的,总是基本上是跟一种可能的欺骗有关。在这个欺骗里,他送给我们,我们接收这个讯息,以倒转的方式。

There you have both sides of the structure, foundational speech and lying 48
speech which is deceptive as such.

你们在那里拥有这个结构的两面,作为基本的言说,及作为谎言的言说,它的本身是欺骗性的。

We have generalized the notion of communication. In the present state of affairs, it’s touch and go whether the entire theory of what goes on in living beings will be revised as a function of communication.

我们曾经概念化沟通的观念。在事情的目前状态,这是非常冒险而不确定的情况,在生物正在进行的整个理论,是否将会被修正作为沟通的功用。

Read anything by Mr. Norbert Wiener; its implications are huge. Among his many paradoxes he presents this strange myth of transmitting a man by telegraph from Paris to New York by sending exhaustive information on everything that constitutes
his individuality.

阅的诺伯特、温奈的任何著作,它给予的暗示非常巨大。在他的众多的悖论当中,他呈现这个奇怪的神话:使用电报从巴黎将一个人传递到纽约,以送出所有的资讯,关于组成他的个人性的一切。

Since there is no limit to the transmission of information, the point-by-point resynthesis, the automatic recreation of his entire true identity at a distant place, is conceivable. Such things are curiously deceptive, and everyone wonders at them.

因为资讯的传递是永无止境的,这个点对点的重新综合,他的完整的真实的身份,在遥远的地方的这个自动的重新创造,是可以构想的。这些事情耐人寻味地具有欺骗性。每个人都想要知道它们。

They are a subjective mirage which collapses as soon as one points out that it would be no greater a miracle to telegraph over two centimeters. And we do nothing less when we move ourselves through the same distance. This extraordinary confusion is sufficient indication that the notion of communication has to be treated cautiously.

它们是主体性的幻觉,这个幻觉将会崩塌,当我们指出,将讯息传递两公分,并不是什么奇迹。我们所做的,充其量是将我们通过相同的空间移动。这个特别的混淆是充分的指示:沟通的观念必须谨慎地被处理。

For my part, within the generalized notion of communication, I state what speech as speaking to the other is. It’s making the other speak as such. We shall, if you like, write that other with a big O. And why with a big O? No doubt for a delusional reason, as is the case whenever one is obliged to provide signs that are supplementary to what
language offers.

就我而言,在沟通的一般的观念里面,我陈述跟他者言说是什么。它让他者作为本身言说。你们若愿意,我们将写下那个大者为大写字母O. 为什么要一个大写字母O呢?无可置疑的,是因为幻觉的理由,如同我们被迫供应讯息,来补充语言所提供的东西。

That delusional reason is the following. You are my woman – after all, what do you know about it? You are my master – in point of fact, are you so sure? Precisely what constitutes the foundational value of this speech is that what is aimed at in the message, as well as what is apparent in the feint, is that the other is there as absolute Other.

那个幻觉的理由如下:「你是我的女人」—毕竟,关于它,你知道多少?「你是我的主人」。事实上,你们如此地确定吗?确实是组成这个言说的基础的价值,是这个讯息所要到达的目标,以及在欺骗里显而易见的东西。那是那里的他者,是一个绝对的大他者。

Absolute, that is to say that he is recognized but that he isn’t known. Similarly, what constitutes the feint is that ultimately you do not know whether it’s a feint or not. It’s essentially this unknown in the otherness of the Other that characterizes the speech relation at the level at which speech is spoken to the other.

绝对,换句话说,他被承认,但是他没有被人知道。同样地,组成这个欺骗的东西是,最后你并不知道,是否它是欺骗。基本上就是大他者的这个另一面的这个未知,表现言说关系的这个特性。言说就是在这个层次,对大他者言说。

I am going to keep you at the level of structural description for a while, because it’s only here that the problems can be raised. Is this all that distinguishes speech? Perhaps, but surely it has other characteristics – it doesn’t speak only to the other, it speaks of the other as an object. And this is what is involved when a subject speaks to you of himself.

我将要保持你们在结构的描述的层次一阵子。因为仅在结构这里,问题能够被提出。这就是区别言说的一切吗?或许,但是的确,它拥有其他的特性。它不仅是对大他者言说。它言说大他者作为一个客体。这就是当主体对你言说他自己,所会牵涉到的东西。

Take the paranoiac of the other day, the one who used the term galopiner. While she talks to you, you know that she is a subject by virtue of the fact that she tries to take you in. This is what you are expressing in saying that you are simply dealing with what you clinically call a partial delusion.

拿前天的那个偏执狂为例。使用「galopiner」这个术语的那个人。当她跟你谈论时,你知道,她是一个主体,是凭借这个事实: 她尝试欺骗你。这是你正在表达的东西,当你说:你仅是在处理你的临床所谓的部分幻觉。

It’s precisely to the extent that it took me an hour and a half the other day to make her produce her galopiner, to the extent that during all that time she held me at bay and showed herself to be of sane mind, that she maintains herself at the limit of what can be clinically perceived as a delusion. What you call, in your jargon, the sane part of the personality derives from the fact that she speaks of the other, is capable of making fun of him. It’s by virtue of this that she exists as a subject.

确实到达那个程度,前天我花费一个半小时,让她言说出「galopiner」这个字词。到达这个程度,在所有的那段时间,他让我陷于困境,并且显示她自己跟我们的心灵相同。她维持她自己,处于临床感觉作为的幻觉的极限。随你们高兴用你们的术语,人格的清醒1部分是来自于这个事实: 她言说大他者,她能够开大他者玩笑。凭借这一点,她存在作为主体。

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: