seminar final 37

seminar final 37

Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康

Moment to conclude
结论的时刻

10.1.78 (CG Draft 2) 1
Seminar 4: Wednesday 10 January 1978

I was a little jaded because Saturday and Sunday there was a congress of my School. Since people preferred that, anyway Simatos preferred that there should only be members of this School, we went a bit far and I only got back with difficulty.

我有点身心俱疲,因为周末及周日,我的学校有聚会。因为人们比较喜欢无论如何,西马托人比较喜欢,应该仅有这个学校的成员,我们弄得有点过分,我回家时身心俱疲。

Someone – someone who was speaking to me – was expecting from it, given that the subject was nothing other than what I call the Passe, someone was expecting from it some light about the end of analysis.

某个人—某个人跟我谈论到—他从那个聚会期盼听到,假如考虑到,主体实实在在就是我所谓的「通过」的东西。某个人从它那里期盼看到,精神分析结束时会有的光辉。

One can define the end of analysis. The end of analysis is when one has gone round in circles twice, namely, rediscovered that of which one is prisoner. Rebeginning twice the turning round in circles, it is not certain that it is necessary. It is enough for one to see what one is captive of.

我们能够定义精神分析的结束。精神分析的结束是当我们已经绕过这些圆圈两次,重新发现我们是其中的囚犯。两次重新开始这些圆圈的旋转。没有确定说这是必要。我们只有看出我们是什么的囚犯就足够了。

And the unconscious, it that: it is the face of the Real – perhaps you have an idea, after having heard me numerous times, perhaps you have an idea of what I call the Real – it is the face of the Real of that in which one is entangled.

无意识,这是实在界的脸孔。或许你们拥有这个观念,在你们已经听我讲过无数遍,或许,你们拥有一个观念,我所谓的实在界是什么。就是这个实在界的脸孔,我们被纠缠在里面。

There is someone called Soury who is kind enough to pay attention to what I stated about the rings of string and he questioned me, he questioned me about what that means, what was meant by the fact that I was able to write like that the rings of string.

有某个人名叫邵瑞。他非常好心,专注我陈述的东西,关于他质疑我的绳之环圈。他质疑我们关于那是什么意思。根据这个事实,我能够像绳之环圈那样地书写,那意味着什么。

For this is how he writes them.

因为这是他书写它们的方式。

Analysis does not consist in being freed from one’s sinthomes, since that is how I write symptom. Analysis consists in knowing why one is entangled by them.

精神分析并不是在于从未们的圣状被解放,因为那是我书写病征的方式。精神分析在于要知道我们为什么被它们纠缠在里面。

This happens because there is the Symbolic.

这种情况的发生,是因为符号界存在。

The Symbolic is language; one learns to speak and that leaves traces. That leaves traces which are nothing other than the symptom and analysis consists – there is all the same progress in analysis – analysis consists in realising why one has these symptoms, so that analysis is linked to knowledge.

符号界就是语言。我们学习言谈,然后留下痕迹。那会留下痕迹,这些痕迹实实在在就是病征。精神分析在于—精神分析仍然是有进展—精神分析在于体会到,为什么我们有这些病征,所以精神分析跟知识有关。

It is very suspect. It is very suspect and it lends itself to every kind of suggestion. That’s the word that must be avoided

这是非常可疑的。它有助于每一种的暗示。那就是必须被避免的文字。

That’s what the unconscious is, the fact that one has learned to speak and by that very fact one has allowed all kinds of things be suggested to one by language.

那就是无意识是什么。事实上,我们已经学习到言谈,而且根据这个事实:我们容许语言对我们建议各种的事情。

What I am trying to do is to elucidate something about what analysis really is. About what analysis truly is, one cannot know unless you ask me for an analysis. That is how I conceive of analysis.

我正在尝试做的,是要说明某件事情,关于精神分析确实是什么。关于精神分析确实是什么,我们无法知道,除非你们要求我做个人分析。那就是我如何来构想精神分析。

This indeed is why I traced out once and for all these rings of string that, of course, I ceaselessly make mistakes in their depiction.

这确实是为什么我一劳永逸地追踪这些绳之环圈。当然,我不停地犯错误,对于它们的描述。

I mean that here (IV-1), I had to make a cut here and that this cut, I had nevertheless prepared, it nevertheless remains that I have to remake it.

我的意思是,图形(IV-1)这里,我必须在此做一个切割,而且我曾经准备的这个切割,它仍然是,我必须重新做它。

Counting is difficult and I am going to tell you why: the fact is that it is impossible to count without two kinds of figures. Everything starts from zero. Everything starts from zero and everyone knows that zero is altogether capital.

计算是困难的,我正要告诉你们为什么。事实上,我们每次计算,就会牵涉到两种的图形。每件东西都是从零开始。每件东西都是从零开始,每个人都知道,零是非常重要的。

Two lines of numbers

两条数目的线

The result, is that here it is (O) is 1. This is how this begins at 11, how the 1 here (*), and the 1 there (O) are distinguished. And of course, it is not the same type of figures which function to mark here the 1 which permits 16.

结果是,在此,这个(0)是 1 。 这就是在11 开始的方式。在此的这个 1 及那里的(0)里的 1, 被区别出来。当然,这并不是相同的图形,它们发挥功用,为了在此标示,这个 1,容许 16 。

Mathematics makes reference to the written, to the written as such; and mathematical thought is the fact that one can represent for oneself a writing. 10.1.78 (CG Draft 2) 3 What is the link, if not the locus, of the representation of writing? We have the suggestion that the Real does not cease to be written. It is indeed by writing that forcing is produced. The Real is all the same written; for, it must be said, how would the Real appear if it were not written?
That indeed is how the Real is there. It is there through my way of writing.

数学会提到这个被书写的东西,提到被书写的本身。数学的思想就是这个事实:我们能够替自己代表一种书写。这个连接,若不是书写再现的的圆环面,还会是什么?我们拥有这个建议: 实在界并没有停止被书写。确实是凭借着书写,力量才被产生。实在界仍然被书写,因为,我们必须说,假如没有被书写,实在界如何会出现?那确实是实在界在那里的方式。通过我的书写方式,实在界存在那里。

Writing is an artifice. Therefore writing only appears by an artifice, an artifice linked to the fact that there is speech and even saying. And saying concerns what is called the truth. This indeed is why I say that one cannot say the truth.

书写是一种欺瞒巧计。因此,书写仅是凭借欺瞒巧计出现,跟这个事实息息相关的欺瞒巧计。有言谈存在,甚至有言说存在。言说关系到所谓的真理。这确实是为什么我说,我们无法言说真理。

In this business of the passe¸I am lead, since, as they say, it is I who produced the passé, produced it in my School in the spirit of knowing what might well arise in what is called the mind (l’esprit) of an analysand to be constituted, I mean receive people who come to him to ask for an analysis.

在「通过制度」的这件事情,我被引导,如他们所说的,这是我产生这个「通过制度」,在我的学派产生它,根据这个精神知道什么将会产生,在所谓的应该被组成的分析者的心灵。我的意思是,接受前来他这里要求做个人分析的人。

That might perhaps be done in writing, I suggested it to someone who moreover was in complete agreement. To proceed by way of writing has a chance of getting a little bit closer to the Real than what is currently done, since I tried to suggest to my School that the passeurs could be named by a few people.

那或许可以用书写来进行。我跟某个人建议这样,而且他完全同意。凭借着书写继续,拥有这个机会更加靠近这个实在界,比目前所做的。因为我尝试跟我们学派建议,这些「通过者」能够由少数人命名。

The trouble is that these writings will not be read. Why so? Because people have read too much about writing. So what chance is there that they would be read. They lie there on paper; but paper is also toilet paper.

麻烦的是,这些书写将无法被阅读。为什么会是这样呢? 因为人们曾经阅读过太多的书写。所以,它们将会被阅读的机会有多大?它们存在于纸面上,但是纸也是卫生纸。

The Chinese realised that there was toilet paper, the paper with which you wipe your bottom. It is impossible therefore to know who reads. There is surely writing in the unconscious, if only because the dream, the principle of the unconscious – that’s what Freud said – the lapses and even the witticism are defined by the readable. One has a dream, one does not know why, and then subsequently it is read; the same with a slip, and everything that Freud says about the witticism is quite notorious as being linked to this economy which is writing, economy as compared to speech.

中国人体会到,有卫生纸存在,你们用了搽屁股的卫生纸。因此,我们不可能知道是谁阅读。确实是有无意识的阅读,即使是因为这个梦,这个无意识的原则—那是弗洛伊德所说的东西—口误,甚至机智语,都是被可阅读物所定义。我们做过梦,我们并不知道为什么。因此它随后被阅读,跟口误一样被阅读。弗洛伊德所说,关于机智语的一切,相当恶名昭彰,因为它跟书写的经济息息相关,跟言谈比较起来,它算是是经济。

The readable – that is what knowledge consists of. And in short, it is limited. What I say about the transference is that I timidly advanced it as being the subject – a subject always supposed, there is not subject, of course, there is only the supposed – the supposed-to-know. What could that mean? The supposed-to-know-how-to-read-otherwise (autrement). The otherwise in question, is indeed what I write, for my part also in the following way: S(Ø). Otherwise, what does that mean? Here it is a matter of the O, namely, the big Other. Does otherwise mean: otherwise than this spluttering called psychology? No, otherwise designates a lack.

可阅读物—这是知识的内涵。总之,它是有限制的。我所说的关于这个移情是,我胆小地提出它,作为是这个主体—一个总是被认为的主体,当然并没有真正的主体,仅有被认为的主体,被认为是知道的主体。那会是什么意思?这个被认为是知道如何阅读的主体,否则就是、、、这个受到质疑的否则就是,确实是我所书写的东西。就我而言,它也是以下的方式:S(Ø) 大他者被划槓的主体。 否则,那会是什么意思? 在此的问题是这个O,也就是这个大他者。「否则」意味着什么?「否则」意味着所谓心理学的侃侃而谈。不,「否则」意味着一种欠缺。

It is a matter of lacking differently (autrement). Differently on this particular occasion, does that mean, differently to anyone else? It is indeed in this way that Freud’s speculations are truly problematic. To trace the paths, leave the traces of what one formulates, this is what teaching is, and teaching is also nothing other than going around in circles. It has been stated, like that, we do not know why, there was someone called Cantor who constructed set theory. He distinguished two types of set: the set which is innumerable and – he points out – within writing, namely, that it is within writing that he makes the series of whole numbers, for example, equivalent to the series of even numbers.

问题是欠缺的方式并不一样。在这个特别的场合,不一样,难道意味着,对于每一个其他的人,都不一样?确实是以这种方式,弗洛伊德的推想确实是问题重重。为了追踪这些途径,留下我们所说明的这些途径,这是教学所在。教学也实实在在就是环绕圆圈打转。它曾经像那样被陈述,我们并不知道为什么,有某个名叫康特的人,他建构集合理论。他区别两种的集合:一种是无法计算的集合—他指出—在书写里。换句话说,在书写里面,他制作整体数字的系列,譬如,相等于偶数的系列列。

A set is only numerable starting from the moment when it is demonstrated that it is bi-univocal. But precisely in analysis, it is equivocation that dominates. I mean that it is from the moment that there is a confusion between this Real that we are indeed led to call ‘thing’, there is an equivocation between this Real and language, since language, of course, is imperfect – this indeed is what is demonstrated about everything which is said to be most certain – language is imperfect. There is someone called Paul Henri who published that in Klincksieck. He calls that, language, ‘a bad tool’. One could not say it better. Language is a bad tool and this indeed is why we have no idea of the Real. It is on this that I would like to conclude.

另外一种集合可以计算,仅是从它被证明是一致性的时刻开始。但是确实是在精神分析里,模糊暧昧佔优势。我的意思是,从这个混淆的时刻开始,从我们确实被引导称为「物」的时刻开始,在这个实在界与语言之间有一种模糊暧昧。当然,因为语言并非是完美—这确实是关于一切据说是最确定的东西,所被证明的东西—语言是并非是完美。有某位名叫保罗、亨利的人,他以克林西科语言出版它。他称它为语言,一个「糟糕的工具」。我们无法表达得比他跟贴切。语言是一个糟糕的工具,这确实是为什么我们并不知道实在界。就是针对这一点,我想要做个结论。

The unconscious, is what I have said, that does not prevent us counting, counting in two ways which are only for their part ways of writing. What is most real, is writing and writing is confused.

无意识是我曾经说的东西。那并没于阻止我们不能计算,以两种方式计算。就它们而言,这两种方式都是书写的方式。最真实的东西是书写,而书写会被混淆。

There you are, I will stay with that for today, since, as you see, I have reason to be tired.

你们瞧! 我今天在此告一段落。你们看出,我很有理由感到疲倦。

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: