Seminar IX :Identification 32

Seminar IX :Identification 32
第九研讨班 :认同

Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康

Seminar IX :Identification 11
第九研讨班 :认同

Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康

Seminar 6: Wednesday 20 December 1961

What we always see every time that one can bring into play this label of ideogram, is something which presents itself as being in effect very close to an image, but which becomes an ideogram in the measure that it loses, that it effaces more and more this
character of image. Such is the birth of cuneiform writing: it is for example a bouquet in s limb or head, in so far as after a certain moment this takes on an aspect for example like the following for the arm: namely nothing about its origin is recognisable anymore.

每一次我们能够运作这个象形文字的标签,我们总是看到的是,某件呈现它自己,作为实际上靠近一个意象。这个东西变成一种象形文字,随着它丧失,它越来越抹除意象的这个特性。契形文字书写的诞生就是这样:譬如,它的头及肢是一种花束。过了某个时间之后,它形成,譬如像是以下手臂的西。换具话说,关于它的起源已经无法辨认。

That transitions exist here, has no importance other than to strengthen us in our position, namely that what is created, at some level where we see writing emerging, is a baggage, a battery of something which one has no right to call abstract, in the sense that we employ it in our own day when we speak about abstract painting.

转移存在这里,这并无关紧要,除了强化我们的立场。换句话是,所被创造的东西,在某个层次,我们看到书写出现。这是一个行李,一组没有权利称为是抽象的东西,在我们的时代,当我们谈论到抽象图画的意义。

For they are in effect traits which emerge from something which in its essence is figurative; and that is the reason why it is believed that it is an ideogram. But it is
something figurative that is effaced, let us say the word which necessarily comes here to our minds: repressed, even rejected. (21) What remains is something of the order of this unary trait in so far as it functions as distinctive, that it can on occasions play the role of brand. You are not unaware – or you are unaware, it does not matter – that at the Mas d’Azil, another site dug by Piette of whom I spoke to you the other day, pebbles and stones were found on which you see things like the following
for example:

因为它们实际上是从某件东西出现的特征,在它的本质,这个东西是比喻。那就是为什么有人相信,这是一个象形文字。但是这是某件被抹除的比喻。我们不妨说,这个字词必然是来到我们的心里,被潜抑,甚至被拒绝。剩余的是属于这个单一特征的秩序的东西,当它发挥功用作为区别性。它有时扮演品牌的角色。你们并不是不知道—或是你们不知道,这无关紧要。在Mas dAzil,另外一个皮阿忒挖掘的地点,我前天跟你们谈论到,有石砺及石头被发现,在那里,你们看到譬如像是以下的东西。

This would be in red, for example, on rather polished type of stones which have taken on a greenish colour. On another one you will even plainly see this £ which is all the more polished in that this sign,£ is what is used in set theory to designate the belonging of an element; and there is another one of them: when you look at it from a distance it is a dice; one sees five points, from the other you see two points, when you look from the other side it is again two points, it is not a dice like the ones we have and if you ask the curator, if you have the glass case (22) opened for you, you see that on the other side of the five there is a bar, a 1. It is therefore not altogether a dice, but
it has an impressive appearance at first sight so that you might have thought that it was a dice.

譬如,这个将是用红色,在这些光滑的石头上,这些石头已经形成绿色的颜色。在另外一组石头上,你们甚至清楚地看出这个£ 形状。它更加的光滑,因为这个£形状,在集合理论里,被指明是一个要素的所有物。还有它们的另外一组:当你从某个距离观看它,它是一个骰子,我们看到五点。这并不是一个像我们拥有的骰子。假如你们询问馆长,假如你们有这个玻璃柜子,在你们面前展开,你们看到,在这个五的另外一边,是这条划槓,一个「一」。因此,这不完全是一个骰子,但是乍然一看,它拥有一个令人印象深刻的外表,让你们本来以为那是一个骰子。

And when all is said and done you would not be wrong, because it is clear that a collection of moveable characters – as we can describe them – of this kind is
something which in any case has a signifying function. You will never know what that was used for, if it was for drawing lots, if they were objects of exchange, tesserae properly speaking, objects of recognition or whether that was used for anything
whatsoever that you can lucubrate on in terms of mystical themes.

当一切都说都做了,你们将不会是错误。因为显而易见,一组可移动的特征—如同我们能够描述它们—属于这一种,是某件无论如何具有能指化的功用。你们将永远不会知道那是做什么之用。它是做抽签之用。假如它们是可交换的东西,譬如瓷砖,适当地说,是辨认的东西,无论它被用在任何东西,你们能够以神秘的主题润饰它。

That changes nothing in the fact that what you have here are signifiers.
That the aforesaid Piette should have subsequently drawn Salomon Reinach into deliberating the tiniest little bit about the extremely archaic and primordial character of occidental civilisation because supposedly this is already an alphabet, is another affair: but this is to be judged as a symptom, but also to be criticized for its real import.

那并没有改变什么,对于你拥有的东西是能指的这个事实。以上提到的这位皮阿忒本来应该随后就将萨洛门、瑞那奇吸引来描绘这个微小的碎片,关于西方文明的这个极端过时而原始的特征,因为这被认为已经是一种字母,那是另外一回事。但是这应该被判断作为一个病征,而且因为它的真实意义被批评。

That nothing of course allows us to speak about an extremely archaic writing in the
sense that these moveable characters would have been used to make a sort of cave printing press, this is not what is in question.

当然,没有一样东西让我们能够谈论一个极端过时的书写,从这些可移动的特征本来会被使用的意义,为了形成某种的洞穴的印刷机。这并不是受到质疑的地方。

What is in question is the following in so far as one or other ideogram means something: to take the little cuneiform character that I drew for you earlier, this at the level of a very primitive stage of Accadian writing designates the heavens, there
results from this that it is articulated “an”; the subject who looks at this ideogram names it “an” in so far as it represents the heavens.

受到质疑的是以下,因为某个象形文字意味着某件事情,将我早先跟你们所绘的这个小小契形文字。这是处于阿卡地点原始阶段,书写指明这些天上,从这里它被表达,作为「一」,主体观看这个象形文字,命名它为「一」,因为它代表天上。

But what is going to result from it is that the (23) position is reversed, that from a certain moment on this ideogram of the heavens is going to be used in a writing of a syllabic type, to support the syllable “an” which will at that time no longer have any relationship with the heavens.

但是从这个「一」所造成的结果是,这个立场被颠倒,从某个时刻开始,天上的这个象形文字将会被使用在音节的书写上,为了支持「一」的这个音节,在当时,它不再跟天上拥有任何的关系。

All ideographic or so-called ideographic writings without exception, carry the trace of the simultaneity of this use which is called ideographic with what is called the phonetic usage of the same material.

所有的象形文字,或所谓的象形书写,毫无例外地,都带着所谓的象形文字的这个用途的同时性痕迹,都具有所谓的相同材料的语音的用途的东西。

But what is not articulated, what is not highlighted, what it seems nobody has dwelt on up to now is the following: it is that everything happens as if the signifiers of writing having first of all been produced as distinctive marks, and we have historical
attestations of this, because someone called Sir Flanders Petrie showed that well before the birth of these hieroglyphic characters, on the pottery which remains to us from what is called predynastic industry, we find as a brand on the pottery more or less all the forms which are found to be used subsequently, namely after a long historical evolution in the Greek, Etruscan, Latin, Phoenician alphabets everything that interests us to the highest degree as being characteristics of writing.

但是所没有被表达的东西,所被强调的东西,迄今似乎没有人曾经详述的东西如下: 每一件事情发生,好像书写的这些能指首先曾经被产生,作为区别的标记。对于这一点,我们拥有历史的证明,因为某位名叫弗朗德、培瑞爵士显示: 就在这些象形文字的诞生之前,在从遗留给我们的所谓的朝代之前的工艺品的陶器上,在作为陶器的品牌上,我们发现各式各样的形式,被发现随后被使用。换句话说,经过一段漫长的进化,在希腊,亚鲁斯肯,拉丁,菲尼西恩的字母,我们感到興趣的每一样东西,有很大程度是作为书写的特征。

You see what I am trying to get to. Even though in the final analysis what the Phoenicians at first, then the Greeks did most admirably, namely this something which allows a notation apparently as strict as possible of the functions of the phoneme with the help of writing, it is from a completely contrary perspective that we should see what is in question.

你们看出我正在尝试到达的东西。即使终归到底,起初是菲尼西恩人,然后是希腊人,令人崇拜地从事,也就是这个某件东西,凭借着书写的帮助,将音素的这些功用,尽可能严谨地让它成为显著的标记。从一个完全是相反的观点,我们应该看出,是什么受到质疑。

Writing as material, as baggage, was waiting there – following on a certain process to which I will return: that of the formation, let us say (24) of the brand, which today incarnates the signifier that I am speaking to you about: writing was waiting to be phoneticised and it is in the measure that it is vocalised, phoneticised like other objects, that writing learns, as I might say, to function as writing.

书写作为材料,作为行李,在那里等待着—遵照我将回头谈论的某种的程序:这种形成的程序,我们不妨说说品牌的程序。今天,它具体表现我正在跟你们谈论的这个能指。书写正在等待被发出声音,随着它被发出声音,像其他客体一样发出声音,书写学习发挥作为书写的功用,我不妨这样说。

If you read this work on the history of writing you will find at every instant the confirmation of what I am giving you here as a schema. Because every time there is a progress in writing it is in so far as a population tried to symbolise its own language, its own phonematic articulation with the help of a writing material borrowed from another population, and which was only in appearance well adapted to another language – because it was not better adapted, it is never well adapted of course, because what relationship is there between this modulated and complex thing and a spoken articulation – but which was adapted by the very fact of the interaction that there is between a certain material and the usage that is given to it in another form of language, of phonematic, of syntax, whatever you wish, namely that it was in appearance the least appropriate instrument at the beginning for what one had to make of it.

假如你们阅读对于书写历史的这个研究,你们随时将会发现,我在此给予你们作为一个基模的证实。因为每一次,在书写有一个进展,当某个地区的人们尝试将它自己的语言,它自己的语音的表述符号化,凭借从另外一个地区的人们的书写的帮助。仅有在外表上,它跟另外一种语言密切配合。因为它并没有配合得更好,当然它从来没有完全的配合,因为在这个被调节而复杂的东西,与口说的表述之间,具有一种关系。但是它根据互动的这个事实是配合了。在某个材料与被给予它的用途之间,有另外一种形式的语言,语音的语言,句法的语言,随便你怎么说。换句话说,在外表上,在开始时,这是最不适合的工具,作为我们必须解释它的东西。

In this way there takes place the transmission of what is first of all forged by the Sumerians, namely before it arrives at the point that we are at here; and when it is picked up by the Accadians all the difficulties come from the fact that this
material fits in very badly with the phonematics that it has to enter into, but on the contrary once it has entered into it, it influences it as far as we can see and I will have to come back on this.

以这种方式,首先有萨马利亚人所铸造的这个东西的转移就发生了。换句话说,在它到达我们在此的这个点。当它被阿卡狄安人所接收,所有的困难就跟随这个事实而下。这个事实跟它必须进入的这个语音配合得并不融洽。但是相反地,一旦它进入这个语音,它影响到它。据我们所能看见的,我将必须回头谈论它。

In other words, what the advent of writing represents is the following: that something which is already writing if we consider that the characteristic is the isolation of the
(25) signifying trait, when it is named, manages to be able to serve as a support for this famous sound on which Mr Gardiner puts the whole accent concerning proper names.

换句话说,书写的来临所代表的如下:某件东西已经是书写,假如我们考虑到,这个特性是能指化特征的这个孤立。当它被命名,它成功地能够充当是著名的声音的支持。那是噶帝那有关专有名字,全部的强调点。

What results from this?

从这里获得的结果是什么?

There results from it that we should find, if my hypothesis is correct, something which proves its validity. It has been thought of more than once, there are swarms of them; but the most accessible, the most obvious, is the one that I am going to give you right away, namely that one of the characteristics of the proper name – I will of course have to come back on it and in a thousand forms, you will see a thousand demonstrations of it – is that the characteristic of the proper name is always more or less linked to this trait of its liaison not to the sound, but to the writing; and one of the proofs, the one that today I want to put in the forefront before you, is the following: it is that when we
have writings which are undeciphered because we do not know the language that they incarnate, we are very embarrassed, because we have to wait to have a bilingual inscription, and this does still not take us very far if we know nothing at all about the nature of its language, namely about its phonetics.

从它获得的结果是,我们应该发现,假如我的假设是正确的话,某件东西证明它的正确性。曾经不仅一次,有人想到,会有成群的专有名字,但是最可靠近,最显而易见的是我马上要给予你们的这个。换句话说,专有名字的其中一个特征。当然,我将必须回头谈论它。用上千的形式,你们将会看出它的上千的证明。这个专有名字的特征总是多少有点关系,不是它跟声音的关系,而是跟书写的关系。其中一个证据,今天我想要将这个证据放置在你们的面前。那就是底下: 当我们拥有无法被解释的书写,因为我们并不知道它们具体代表的语言,我们非常尴尬,因我们必须等待拥有双语的铭记。我们这样做依旧没有多大进展,假如我们什么都不知道,关于它的语言的特性,也就是它的语音结构。

What are we waiting for when we are cryptographers and linguists; it is to discern in this undeciphered text something which could indeed be a proper name because there is this dimension to which I am astonished Mr Gardiner did not have recourse, he who all the same has Champollion as the chief, the inaugural leader of his (26) science, and that he does not remember that it is in connection with Cleopatra and Ptolemy that the whole deciphering of the Egyptian hieroglyphs began because in every language, Cleopatra is Cleopatra, and Ptolemy is Ptolemy.

我们正在等待的东西,当我们解密码专家及语言学家,那是要在没有被解码的文本里,觉察出某件确实会是专有名词的东西。因为我很惊奇,噶帝那没有诉诸于的这个维度。他仍然拥有张伯伦作为领导,这门科学的开创领袖。他并不记得,关于克丽奥佩特拉及托勒密,埃及象形文字的整个解码开始,因为在每个语言里,克丽奥佩特拉就是克丽奥佩特拉,而托勒密就是特勒密。

What distinguishes a proper name despite little appearances of borrowings – Cologne is called Koln – is that from one tongue to another its structure is preserved, its sonant structure no doubt; but this sonant structure is distinguished by the fact that precisely we should respect it above all others, and this by reason precisely of the affinity of the proper name with the brand, with the direct designation of the signifier as object,
and here apparently we fall again and even in the most brutal fashion on the “word for particular”. Does that mean that for all that I think Mr Bertrand Russell is correct here?

尽管各种借用的些微外表,区别一个专有名词的东西—科伦尼被称为科恩—从一种语言到另外一种语言,它的结构被保存,无可置疑的,那是它的声音结构,但是这个声音结构是根据这个事实来区别:我们确实应该尊敬它,超过于其他。确实是凭借专有名词跟这个品牌的亲和力,这个能指的直接被指明作为客体,在此显而易见地,我们再一次掉落,甚至以最残酷的方式,掉落在「特殊性」的这个字词。那难道不是意味着,尽管那样,我认为布兰、罗素在此是正确的。

Certainly not as you know. Because in the interval is the whole question precisely of the birth of the signifier starting from that of which it is the sign. What does that mean? It is here that there is inserted as such a function which is that of the subject, not of the subject in the psychological sense but of the subject in the structural sense.

的确并不是如你们所认为,因为从它就是能指的符号开始,这个能指的诞生的整个的问题,就在这个间隔地带。那是什么意思?就在此,一个主体的功用本身被插入,不是心理学意义的主体,而是结构意义的主体。

How can we, under what algorithms can we, because it is a question of formalisation, place this subject? Is it in the order of the signifier that we have the means to represent that which concerns the genesis, the birth, the emergence of the signifier itself? It is towards this that my discourse is directed and I will take it up next year.

我们如何能够,在怎样的轨迹,我们能够放置这个主体,因为这是形式化的问题?它难道处于这个能指的秩序,我们拥有方法代表跟这个能指点开始,诞生,与出现有关的事情?我的论述的方向,就是朝向这里。明年,我将探讨它。

雄伯译
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: