eminar final 38

eminar final 38

Jacques Lacan
雅克、拉康

Moment to conclude
结论的时刻

17.1.78 (CG Draft 2) 1
Seminar 5: Wednesday 17 January 1978

There is nothing more asymmetrical than a torus. That leaps to the eyes.
I have just seen Soury – where is he? – I have just seen Soury and I shared this idea with him. He right away illustrated to me what was at stake by marking for me, through a little construction of his own, the cogency of what I cannot say: I was stating. Because in truth…

没有一样东西,比原环面更加地不均称。我们张眼马上就看到。我刚刚看见过邵瑞,他在哪里?我刚刚见过邵瑞,我跟他分享这个观念。他立刻跟我解释什么东西岌岌可危。他跟我标示,通过他自己的一点小建构,我无法言说的真言:我正在陈述。因为在真理里、、、

There you are. So then I am going to show you this. I am going to have it passed around. It is a construction that Soury was good enough to make for me. You are going to see that here there is a passage, that there is, in what is constructed there, a double thickness and that, to mark the whole of the paper, here there is a double thickness, but here there is only one, I mean: at this level here which is continued into the whole of the sheet.

你们瞧!我正在跟你们显示这个。我将要将它给给各传看。这是邵瑞好心跟我制作的一个建构。你们将会看出,在此有一个通过。在那里被建构的东西,一个双重的厚度,为了标示整张纸,在此有双重的厚度。但是在此仅有一个厚度。我的意思是:在这个层次,它被继续到整张纸。

Therefore behind what here constitutes a double thickness, there is only a third. There you are. I am going to pass around this piece of paper.

因此,在形成一个双重的厚度的东西,仅有一个第三者。你们瞧,我正要将这张纸给各位传看。

Fig. V-1

17.1.78 (CG Draft 2) 2 There is a passage at the back. We introduce a pencil which goes underneath the pencil introduced in the front. [See the details of this diagram at the end of the session]

在背后,有一个通道。我介绍一隻粉笔,它延伸到前面被介绍的铅笔之下。(请看这个图形的结果,在下课之后。)

I recommend you to take advantage of the double thickness so that you can see that it is a torus. In other words that this, (V-1), is constructed more or less like that, (V-2), namely, that one passes a finger through this, but that here is what one can call the outside of the torus which continues with the rest of the outside – I am giving it to you – this is what I call asymmetry. There you are.

我推荐你们利用这个双重的厚度,这样你们才会看出,这是一个圆环面。换句话说,这个图形(V-1),有点像这样被建构,(V-2)。换句话说,我们穿过这里,通过一个手指,但是在此,我们所谓的圆环面的外面,它跟外面的部分继续下去—我正在给予你们—这是我所谓的不均称。你们瞧!

This is also what I call ‘what makes a hole’, for a torus makes a hole.

这是我所谓的「形成空洞的东西」,因为圆环面形成一个空洞。

I succeeded – not right away, after a certain number of approximations – I succeeded in giving you the idea of the hole. A torus is considered, quite rightly, to be holed. There is more than one hole in what is called man; he is even a veritable sieve. Where do I enter?

我成功地,虽然不是马上,经过某些的探索之后—我成功地给予你们这个空洞的观念。一个圆环面被考虑成为是一个空洞,不是没有道理的。在所谓的人身上,有不仅是一个空洞,他甚至是一个可验证的筛虑器。我进入哪里?

This question mark has its response for every ‘tétrume un’ [perhaps a pun on être humain, human being]. I do not see why I would not write it like that on this particular occasion. This question mark, as I have just said has its response for every tétrume u’.

这个问号拥有它的回应,对于每个人类。我不明白为什么我不想要像那样书写它,在这个特别的场合。这个问号,如我刚刚说的,拥有它的回应,对于每个人类。

I would write that: l’amort [death\love] what is bizarre in the – because why not also write like that: les17.1.78 (CG Draft 2) 3 trumains [a play on trumeau: a dodderer]; there, I am putting them in the plural – what is bizarre in les trumains, why not write it like that also, since moreover using this orthography in French is justified by the fact that les, the sign of the plural, is well worthy of being substituted for being which, as they say, is only a copula, namely, is not worth much. Is not worth much by the usage that one amphest amphigourique! Yeah!

我将书写那个:死亡与爱情。古怪的是—因为为什么我不也书写为:年老体衰。在那里,我正在给予它们复数形。古怪的是,年老体衰,为什么不像那样地书写,因为使用法文的拼音法,根据这个事实能够自圆其说,复数的这个符号,是非常值得被替代,如他们所说,这仅是一个连缀动词。换句话说,它并没有多大价值。它并没有多大价值,由于我们没有意义地书写 amphest amphigourique!没错!

What is curious, is that man is very keen on being mortal. He hoards death! While all living beings are destined to die, he only wants it to be so for him. Hence the activity deployed around burials. There were even people formerly who took care to perpetuate what I write as laïque hors la vie. They took care to perpetuate that by making mummies of them.

耐人寻味的是,人对于成为会死掉动物,深感興趣。他贮存死亡!虽然所有生物都终归一死,只有人类想要对于他而言,终归一死。因此,这个活动环绕着葬礼在进行。先前甚至有些人小心要强调我所书写的东西为:laïque hors la vie。他们凭借将它们形成木乃伊,小心地强调它,

It must be said that les néz-y-après (the later-born?)) afterwards put a proper order on it. Mummies were seriously shaken. I got the information from my daughter, – because, in my French-Greek dictionary, there were no mummies – I got the information from my daughter who was good enough to go out of her way, to wear herself out to find a French-Greek dictionary.

必须说到的是,这个后来出生者,后来给予它一个适当的秩序。木乃伊受到严重的动摇。我从我的女儿获得资讯—因为,在我们法文与希腊文的字典,并没有木乃伊。我从我的女儿获得资讯,她足够好心刻意费心去寻找一本法文与希腊文的字典。

I was informed by my daughter and I learned that this mummy, is called like this in Greek: to skeleton soma, the skeleton body. Mummies are precisely designed to preserve the appearance of the body to teretichomenon soma. This is also what she brought me. I mean that the to teretichomenon soma means ‘to prevent rotting’.

我被我的女儿告知,我学习到,这个木乃伊在希腊文像这样被称为「骷髅身体」to skeleton soma。木乃伊确实被设计要保存身体的外表,到阻挡肉身腐烂teretichomenon soma。这也是她带给我的东西。我的意思是,这个to teretichomenon soma 意思是阻挡肉身腐烂。

No doubt the Egyptians liked fresh fish and it is obvious that before carrying out a mummification on the dead person – this at least is the remark that was made to me on this occasion – mummies are not especially attractive. Hence the lack of ceremony with which people manipulated all these eminently breakable mummies. This is what those born afterwards devoted themselves to.

无可置疑的,埃及人喜欢新鲜的鱼。显而易见地,对于死人执行木乃伊化时–在这个场合,所给予我的谈论是—木乃伊并没有特别的吸引人。因此,典礼的欠缺,人们以典礼来操控所有这一切都显然会瓦解的木乃伊。这就是那些后来出生的人专心致力的东西。

That is called in Quetchua, namely, around Cuzco – Cuzco is written like: CUZCO – sometimes people speak Quetchua there. People speak Quetchua there thanks to the fact that the Spaniards, since everyone speaks Spanish, the Spanish are careful to preserve this tongue.

在魁查语,那个被这样称呼,换句话说,在秘鲁的库兹克附近,库兹克被书写为:CUZCO。有时,人们在那里讲魁查语。那里的人们讲魁查语,由于这个事实:西班牙人,因为他们讲西班牙语,西班牙人小心地保存这个语言。

Those that I am calling the les néz-y-après, are called in Quetchua, ‘those who are formed in the belly of the mother’, and that is written, since there is a Quetchua writing. This is called: Runayay. This is what I learned with, good God what I would call a velar which teaches me to produce Quetchua, namely, to act as if it were my natural tongue, to give birth to it. It should be said that this velar had the opportunity to explain to me that in Quetchua this is produced by the palate. There is a ferocious amount of aspiration in it.

我正在称为les néz-y-après,,在魁查语里,被称为是那些在母亲的肚子里被形成的东西。那个被书写,因为有一种魁查语的书写。这被称为:跑走。这是我学习到的东西,我的天,我将所谓的软腭音。这个软腭音教导我讲出魁查语。换句话说,好像它就是我自然的母语,产生它。应该说的是,这个软腭音拥有这个机会跟我解释,在魁查语,这个音是有上腭发出。在这个声音,有一种残酷数量的渴望。

A frightful person by the name of Freud knocked into shape some stammerings that he qualified as analysis, we don’t know why, to state the only truth that counts: there is no sexual relationship among human beings (les trumains). It is I who concluded that, after had an experience of analysis, I succeeded in formulating that. I succeeded in formulating that, not without difficulty, and this is what led me to notice that I had to make some Borromean knots.

一位可怕的人物,名字叫弗洛伊德,他将一些结结巴巴的话语整理成型,他给予特质,作为精神分析。我们不知道为什么,陈述这个重要的唯一真理:在人类之间,性的关系并不存在。这是我的结论,经过一段精神分析的经验后。我成功地说明,我成功地说明,千辛万苦地,这是我为什么被引导注意到,我必须从事某些的博罗米恩环结。

Suppose that we follow the rule, namely, that, as I say, above the one which is above and below the one which is below.

假如我们遵照这条规则,换句话说,如我所说,在上面这个的上面,在底下的这个底下。

Well then, it is manifest that as you see it does not work. Namely, that it is enough for you to lift that (1) [V-3] to notice that there is a one above, one in the middle and one below and that as a consequence the three17.1.78 (CG Draft 2) 5 are freed from one another. This indeed is why this must be asymmetrical. It must be like this to reproduce the way in which I drew it the first time; here it must be below, here above, here below and here above [V-4].

It is thanks to this that there is a Borromean knot. In other words, it must alternate [V-5]. It can just as well alternate in the opposite direction [V-6], in which there consists very precisely the asymmetry.

由于这个,有一个博罗米恩环结。换句话说,它必须轮换。它也能够朝相反的方向轮换 (V-6)图形。在那里,这个不均称确实是在那里。

I tried to see what was involved in the fact that…it is just as well not to make the black line cross the red line more than twice. One could moreover make them cross one another more than twice. One could make them cross four times, that would change nothing in the veritable nature of the Borromean knot. 17.1.78 (CG Draft 2) 6 There is a sequence to all of that. Soury, who is responsible for some of it, has developed some considerations about the torus. A torus is something like that. Suppose that we make a torus be held inside another one [V-7].

我尝试看出,在这个事实会牵涉到什么。我们最好不要让这条黑线越过红线,不仅一次。而且,我们能够让它们互相越过,不仅一次。我们能够让它们越过四次。在这个博罗米恩环结的可验证的特性,那并没有改变任何东西。对于所有这一切,有一个系列。邵瑞负责制作一些,他发展一些的考虑,关于这个圆环面。一个圆环面是某件像那样的东西。假如我们让一个圆环面被包括在另一个圆环面里面(图形V-7)。

That’s where the business of inside and outside begin. Because let us turn over the one which is inside in that way. I mean: let us not only turn over this one, but at the same time let us turn over that one [V-8 & 9]. There results something which is going to make what was first of all inside come to the outside and, since the torus in question has a hole, what is outside of it is going to remain outside of it and is going to end up with this form that I called the rod-like shape, where the other torus is going to come inside. 17.1.78 (CG Draft 2) 7 How should we consider these things? It is very difficult to speak here about inside when there is a hole inside a torus. It is completely different to what is involved in the sphere.

这就是内部与外部的事情的开始的地方。因为让我们以那个方式,翻转在内部的这一个。我的意思是: 让我们不但翻转这一个,但是同时让我们翻转那一个(V-8&V-9)
结果是某件东西,将会让起初是内部的东西,来到外部。因为这个受到置疑的拓扑图形,拥有一个空洞,属于外部的东西,将会始终是在外部。并且将会以这种形式结束,我称为是像棍子的形状。在那里,另外一个圆环面,将会来到里面。 我们应该如何考虑这些东西呢?在此,我们很难谈论到内部,当有一个空洞在一个圆环面里面。这是完全不同于在球形所牵涉的东西。

A sphere, if you will allow me to draw it now, is something like that. The sphere also can be turned over. One can define the surface as aiming at the inside. There will be another surface which aims at the outside. If we turn it over, the inside will be outside, by definition, the sphere. The outside will be inside; but in the case of the torus, because of the existence of the hole [V-12], of the inside hole, we will have what is called a great disturbance. The hole on the inside, is what is going to disturb everything that is involved in the torus, namely, that there will be in this rod, there will be a necessity that what is inside becomes what? Precisely the hole. And we will have an equivocation concerning this hole which from then on becomes an outside. 17.1.78 (CG Draft 2) 8 Fig V-12

一个球形,假如你们容许我现在画它,是某件像那样的东西。这个球形也能够被翻转。我们能够定义这个表面,作为目标朝着里面。还有另外一个表面,目标朝着外面。假如我们翻转它,里面将会是外面。在定义上,这个球形。外部将是内部,但是在圆环面对情况,因为这个空洞的存在(V-12),内部空洞的存在,我们将会拥有所谓的大困扰。在内部的这个空洞,是将要扰乱到圆环面会牵涉的一切。换句话说,在这个棍子里,将会有一个必要性,内部的东西变成什么?确实就是变成这个空洞。我们将会拥有一种模糊暧昧,关于这个空洞。从那时开始,它变成外面。

In this rod there will be a necessity that what is inside becomes the hole.
The fact that the living being is defined almost like a rod, namely, that it has a mouth, indeed an anus, and also something which furnishes the inside of his body, is something which has consequences that are not unimportant. It seems to me that this is not unrelated to the existence of the zero and the one. That the zero is essentially this hole, is something that is worth exploring.

在这个棍子,将会有一个必要性,内部的东西变成空洞。事实上,生物被定义,几乎就像是一根棍子,它有一个嘴巴。确实是一个肛门,也是某件供应他的身体的内部的东西。这个东西拥有并非不重要的这些结果。我觉得,这跟这个零跟这个一的存在并非没有关系。这个零基本上是这个空洞,是某件值得探索的东西。

I would really like here if Soury took the floor. I mean by that, if he were willing to speak about the one and the zero it would be very agreeable to me. That has the closest relationship with what we are articulating concerning the body. The zero is a hole and perhaps he could tell us more about it, I am speaking about the zero and of the one as consistency.

我很想要知道邵瑞是否上台来讲演。我的意思是,假如他愿意言谈有关这个一,这个零,我将会感到欣慰。那跟我们正在表达的关于身体,有最密切的关系。这个零是一个空洞,获许他能够告诉我们,更多关于它。我正在言谈关于这个零,这个作为一致性的一。

Are you coming? I am going to give you that. Off we go. In this rod there is a necessity that what is inside becomes the hole.

你过来吗?我将给予你这个讲台。我们开始吧。在这个棍子,有一个必要性,内部的东西变成这个空洞。

Soury: There you are. On the zero and the one of arithmetic, there is something which is analogous to the zero and to the one of arithmetic in the chains. Therefore, what makes the zero and the one exist, are preoccupations about systematisation. 17.1.78 (CG Draft 2) 9 In the case of numbers, good, it is operations on numbers that make the zero and the one hold up. For example, with respect to the operation of summation, with respect to addition, the operation of summation, the zero appears as a neutral element – these are terms which are in place – the zero appears as a neutral element and the one appears as a generating element, namely, that by summation, one can obtain all the numbers starting from the one, one cannot obtain any number starting from zero. Therefore what locates the zero and the one, is the role that they play with respect to addition.

邵瑞:你们瞧。在这个零,算术的这个零,有某件东西类同这个零,类同锁链里的算术的这个零。因为,形成这个零的东西,这个零存在。它们是专注于系统化。在数字的情况,呵呵,数字的运算让这个零,这个一能够成立。譬如,关于总结的运算,关于这个加,这个总结的运算,零出现作为一个中立的因素—这些都是正在运作的术语。这个零出现作为一个中立的要素,这个一出现作为一个产生的要素。换句话说,凭借作为总结,我们获得所有的数字从这个一开始。我们无法获得从零开始的任何的数字。因此,这个零跟这个一的位置,就是它们扮演的角色,关于这个加。

Good then, in the chains, there are things analogous to that. But then it is indeed a matter of a systematic point of view about the chains, anyway a point of view on all the chains, all the Borromean chains; and the chains as forming a system.

呵呵,在这个锁链,有西东西类似那个。但是这确实是一件系统的观点关于这些锁链。无论如何,一种观点,在所有这些锁链,所有的博罗米恩环结。这些环结,作为形成一个系统。

X: What does systematising mean? [Laughter]

听众:系统化是什么意思?(哄堂大笑)

Soury: Good already I do not believe in the possibility of presenting these things, namely, that these things depend on writing and I think it’s scarcely possible to talk about these sorts of things. So then the possibility of answering…, in short, for those things, I do not think that speech can take these sorts of things in charge. Anyway systematisation depends on ways of writing (écritures) and precisely speech cannot practically take charge of anything that is systematic. Anyway what would be systematic and what would not be, I don’t know, but it is rather what ways of writing can carry and speech, is not the same thing. And any speech which wants to give an account of writing appears to me to be acrobatic, risky.

邵瑞:呵呵,我已经不相信呈现这些东西的可能性。换句话说,这些东西依靠书写。我认为这几乎是不可能的,谈论有关这些东西。所以回答的可能性、、、总之,对于那些东西,我并不认为,言谈能够负责这些种类的东西。无论如何,系统化依靠书写的方式。确实地,言谈无法实际上负责任何系统性的东西。无论如何,属于系统的东西及不属于系统的东西。我不知道,但是书写能够执行的方式跟言谈并不相同。任何想要给予书写的描述的言谈,我觉得都是卖弄技巧,冒险。

So then systematisation, what is typical of systematisation, is the number: it is numbers and arithmetic. Namely, numbers, all we know are operations on numbers, namely, that we only know systems of numbers, we do not know numbers, we only know the system of numbers. Good, there is a bit of systematisation in the chains, anyway there is something in the chains which behaves like summation, like addition. It is a certain operation of interlacing, which means that one chain and one chain gives another chain, just as one and one number gives another number. Anyway, I will not try to define this operation of enlacing I am not going to try to present it, to introduce it.

所以,这个系统化,作为系统化典型的东西,就是这个数字:数字跟算术。换句话说,算术,我们所知道的,都是对数字的运算。换句话说,我们仅是知道数字的系统。我们并不知道数字。我们仅是知道这个数字的系统。呵呵,在这些锁链有一点系统。无论如何,在锁链里,有某件东西,行为像个总结,像加法。这是某交织的运算,意味着,一个锁链跟一个所链给出另外一个锁链。正如一跟一个数字给出另外一个数字。无论如何,我将不会尝试定义这个交织的运算。我并没有将要尝试呈现它,介绍它。

But then with respect to this operation of enlacing, the Borromean chain, the threefold chain appears as the generating case, the exemplary case, the case which engenders all the rest, namely, that the exemplarity of the threefold chain can be demonstrated. Relying on an article by Milnor which is called Links groups in English, the exemplarity of the Borromean chain can be demonstrated, namely, that any Borromean chain can be obtained starting from the threefold chain. In particular the chains of any number of elements whatsoever can be obtained starting from the threefold chain. Anyway, what ensures that the threefold chain is something which engenders everything. It is something which is generative and which is comparable to the one of arithmetic. In the same sense that the one is generative in the numbers system, the threefold Borromean chain is generative.

但是由于这个交织的这个运算,这个博罗米恩锁链,这个三重折叠的锁链出现,作为产生的情况,作为典范的情况,这个情况产生所以其余的东西。换句话说,这个三重折叠的锁链的典范能够被证明。依靠著米尔诺的一篇文章,在英文里被称为「连接团体」,博罗米恩锁链的这个典范能够被证明,换句话说,任何的博罗米恩锁链能够被获得,从这三重折叠的锁链开始。特别是,任何数目的要素的锁链能够被获得,从这个三重折叠的锁了。无论如何,保证这个三重折叠的锁链的是某件产生一切的东西。某件东西是具有生产性的,它可比喻为数学的这个一。以同样的意义,这个一是具有生产性的,在数字的系统里,这个三重折叠的博罗米恩环结是具有生产性的。

All the Borromean chains can be obtained starting from the threefold chain by certain operations. Therefore the threefold chain plays the same role as the one.

所有的博罗米恩锁链能够被获得,从这三重折叠的锁链开始,凭借某种的运作。因此,这三重折叠的锁链扮演跟这个一相同的角色。

So then there is something which plays the same role as the zero, it is the twofold chain which is a degenerated case, anyway which is a degenerated case of the Borromean chain. So then I’m going to draw the twofold chain. I am going to draw it because it has been less often drawn than the twofold chain.

所以,有某件东西跟这个一扮演相同的角色。这个两重折叠的锁链是一个退化的情况。无论如何,这是博罗米恩环结的一个退化的情况。所以,我将要画这个两重折叠的锁链。我将要画它,因为比起这两重折叠的锁链,它比较没有常被画。

Twofold chain, the chain of two interlaced circles: Fig V-13

两重折叠的锁链,两个交织的圆圈的锁链。(图形V-13)

The chain two interlaced tori: Fig V-14 This is a plane presentation of the twofold chain. It is two circles caught up in one another, you can do it with your fingers.

这个锁链是两个交织的圆环面,图形 V-14。这是两重折叠的锁链的平面呈现。它是两个圆圈互相套陷在一块。你们能够用你们的手指来做它。

The twofold chain is a degenerate case. In the preoccupations of systematisation, degenerate cases take on an importance. They are quite analogous to the zero. The zero is a degenerate number, but it is from the moment on that there are preoccupations of systematisation on numbers that the zero takes on its importance, namely, that…anyway that does not allow us to respond to this business of systematisation, it is only a criterion, anyway quite simply a sign of what is systematic or non-systematic. It is according to whether the degenerate cases are excluded or not excluded. So then I could respond that systematisation is when one includes degenerate cases and non-systematisations when one excludes degenerate cases.

这两重折叠的锁链是一个退化的情况。在专注于系统化时,退化的情况具有一种重要性。它们相当类似于零。这个零是一个退化的数字。但是从专注于数字的系统化的专注的这个时刻开始,这个零具有一种重要性。换句话说,无论如何,这个零并没有让我们能够回应系统化的这个问题。这仅是一个标准,无论如何,这仅是一个符号,属于系统或不属于系统。依照是否这个退化的情况被排除或是没有被排除。所以,我能够回应,那个系统化是当我们包括一个退化的情况。而没有系统化则是当我们排除退化的情况。

Anyway the zero is a degenerate case which takes on importance. While for the chains, the operations of interlacing on the chains or the operation of interlacing on Borromean chains, what plays the role of zero, is the twofold chain, namely, the twofold chain does not generate anything, it only generates itself; the twofold chain function like a zero, namely, zero + zero = zero; interlacing the twofold chain with itself still gives a twofold chain. From the point of view of interlacing, the fourfold chain is obtained starting from two threefold chains, namely, 3 and 3 make 4.

无论如何,这个零是一个具有重要性的退化的情况。而对于锁链而言,对于锁链的交织的那些运作,或是对于博罗米恩环结的交织的运作,它们都扮演零的这个角色。它是这个两重折叠的锁链。换句话说,这两重折叠的锁链并没有产生任何东西。它仅是产生它自己。这两重折叠的锁链就像零一样地发挥功用。换句话说,零加零等于零。将这两重折叠的锁链跟它自己交织,给出一个两重折叠的锁链。从交织的观点而言,这四种折叠的锁链被获得,从两个三重折叠的锁链开始。换句话说,三加三等于四。

The fourfold chain is obtained by interlacing of two threefold chains. Anyway it’s analogous to arithmetic; but by locating oneself with respect to the number of circles, that gives 3 and 3 make 4, like that, that could be described as 2 and 2 make 2. Anyway the fact that 2 is neutral, is a degenerate neutral – the terms which exist on this subject, namely, generative element, neutral element anyway terms in mathematical culture.

这四重折叠的锁链被两个三重折叠的锁链的交织所获得。无论如何,它类似于数学。但是凭借着定位它自己,关于圆圈的数字。它给出三加三等于四。就像那样,那能够被描述为二加二等于二。无论如何,这个二是中立,是一个退化的中立。存在于这个主体身上的这些术语,换句话说,产生的要素,中立的要素,无论如何,那些是数学文化的术语。

The one is a generative element, the zero is a neutral element. I reinforce these terms a little by saying, instead of saying generative and neutral, exemplary and degenerate, namely, that the one would be an exemplary number and the zero a degenerative number. The threefold chain is the exemplary Borromean chain and the twofold chain the degenerate Borromean chain.

这个一是一个退化的要素,这个零是一个中立的要素。我凭借言说,稍微强调这些术语。我并没有言说产生跟中立,典范及退化。换句话说,这个一将是一个典范的例子,而这个零是一个退化的数字。这三重折叠的锁链,是典范的博罗米恩环结。这个两重折叠的锁链是这个退化的博罗米恩环结锁链。

One can see degenerate in different ways. It is also that, the fact that this chain is degenerate one can see in different ways; in different ways, it is too much. I have several reasons for qualifying the twofold chain as degenerate and several reasons is too much. One reason, is that the neutral element for interlacing, is that interlaced with itself, it only gives itself. It does not generate anything other than itself; it is degenerate in the sense in the sense that to be a neutral element with respect to the operation of interlacing. That’s one meaning.

我们能够看出不同方式的退化。这也是,事实上,这个锁链是退化,我们能够以不同的方式看出。以不同的方式,这是太过分了。我有好几个理由,因为给予这两重折叠的特性,作为退化,好几个理由是太过分了。一个理由是,这个中立的因素作为交织。跟它的本身的交织,它仅是给出它自己。它并没有产生任何跟它自己不同的东西。它是退化的意义,是成为中立的因素,关于这个交织的运算。那是一个意义。

A second meaning of being degenerate, is when the Borromean property degenerates to two; the Borromean property, the fact that each element is indispensible, that, when one removes an element, the others no longer hold together, that one element makes all the others hold together; each one is indispensible, they all hold together, but not without each one. The Borromean property, means something starting from 3, but with 2 everything is Borromean.

成为退化的第二层意义是,当博罗米恩环结的特性退化成为二。这个博罗米恩环结的特性。事实上,每个要素都是无法被免除的,当我们移除一个要素,其余的要素不再聚集在一块。一个要素使其他的所有要素聚集在一块。每一个要素都是无法免除的。它们都聚集一块,但是每一个还是独立存在。博罗米恩环结的特性,意味着某件东西从三开始,但是在二这里,每一样东西都是博罗米恩环结。

At 2 everything is Borromean because holding together, anyway holding together in 2’s, anyway ‘each one is indispensible’ at 2 is automatically realised, while starting from 3, the ‘each one is indispensible’ is not automatically realised, namely, that it is a property which can be either true or false, it is yes or no: yes or no the chain is Borromean.

这二这个地方,每一样东西都是博罗米恩环结,因为聚集在一块,无论如何,以二的方式聚集在一块,无论如何,在二这个地方,每一个环结都是无法免除的。它自动地被实现。而从三开始的地方,每一个环结都是无可免除的,并没有自动地被实现。换句话说,这是一个特性,要就是真实,要不就是虚假。要就是肯定,要不就是否定。这个锁链是博罗米恩环结。

In 2’s, all the chains are Borromean, therefore the Borromean property degenerates in 2’s. So then a third reason why this chain is degenerate, is that in this chain a circle is the reversal of another circle. Another way of saying it is that these two circles have the same neighbourhood, anyway this is the business of surface.

在二这个地方,所有的锁链都的博罗米恩环结,因此,这个博罗米恩环结的特性在二的这个地方恶化。所以,第三个理由,为什么这个锁链是恶化是,在这个锁链里,一个圆圈是另外一个圆圈的倒转。另外一种方式来说它是,这两个圆圈拥有相同的邻近。无论如何,这是表面的事情。

The fact is, that if these two circles are replaced by their two neighbourhood surfaces, it is the same surface, these two circles are only the redoubling of one another, but it is a pure redoubling, it is a pure complementing, but that can be seen on the surfaces. That can be seen on the surface chains, and not on the circular chains. That can be seen on the surface chains which are associated with this chain of circles, namely, if this chain of two circles [V-15] corresponds to a chain of two tori, this chain of two tori corresponds to the redoubling of the torus.

事实上,假如这两个圆圈被它们两个邻近的表面取代,这是相同的表面。这两个圆圈仅是互相的重叠加倍。但是这是一种纯粹的重叠加倍,这是一种纯粹的互补,但是在表面上,那能够被看得出来。从表面的锁链,那能够被看得出来,但不是从循环的锁链。那能够被看得出来,在表面的锁链,这些表面的锁链跟圆圈的这个锁链互相连接。换句话说,假如两个圆圈的这个锁链,对应于两个圆环面的一个锁链,两个圆环面对这个锁链对应于这个圆环面对重叠加倍。

Now that is not obvious; it is not obvious that two interlaced tori is the same thing as two tori which are the redoubling of one another just as the tyre and the tube. The tyre and the tube, is the redoubling of one torus into two tori, two tori which are only two versions of the same torus it is a redoubled torus. That two tori being the redoubling of the torus, is the same thing as two interlaced tori is not obvious. It is the reversal which will say that and the reversal in not obvious. Which means that the two circles [V-15], is the same thing as these two interlaced tori [V-16]; these two interlaced tori is the same thing as a redoubled torus [V-17] and that, that is a reason for saying that it is a degenerate chain.

现在,这并不是显而易见,这并不是显而易见,这两个互相交织的圆环面,跟这两个圆环面是相同的东西。这两个圆环面是互相的重叠加倍,正如轮胎与管子。轮胎与管子是一个圆环面重叠加倍成为两个圆环面。两个圆环面仅是相同的圆环面的两个版本,那是一个重叠加倍的圆环面。两个圆环面是这个圆环面的重叠加倍,它跟两个互相交织的圆环面是相同的东西,这一点并没有显而易见。这意味着,这两个圆圈(V-15)跟这两个互相交织的圆环面(V-16)是同样的东西。这两个互相交织的圆环面跟一个重叠加倍的圆环面(V-17)是相同的事情。那是一个理由,说这是一个退化的锁链。

A degenerate chain because that only means, these two, the two of these two circles, is not the division of space in two halves. There you are, that is a criterion for saying that a chain is degenerate: it is that the elements of the chain only represent one division of space. These two circles here are valid for the division of space into two halves. It is in this sense that it is degenerate: it is that these two here, are only two halves of space. So then why two circles which only represent two halves of space, why is this degenerate? Well then because in the general case of chains, the several circles of chains only represent a division of space in several parts, but it happens that here these two circles only represent a division, a partition, a separation of space into two parts.

这是一个退化的锁链,因为那仅是意味著,这两个,这两个圆圈的这两个,并不是这个空间区分成为两半。你们瞧,那是一个标准来说,一个锁链是恶化的。这个锁链的这个要素仅是代表空间的一个区分。在此的这两个圆圈是有效的,作为空间被区分成为两半。以这样意义而言,它是退化的。就是这里的这两个,仅是空间的两半。所以,为什么两个圆圈仅是代表空间的两半?为什么这是退化?呵呵,因为在锁链的一般情况,这些锁链的好几个圆圈仅是代表空间在好几个部分的区分,但是恰巧的是,在此的这两个圆圈,仅是代表空间的一种区分,一种间隔,一种分离成为两个部分。

Lacan: I would like all the same to intervene to point out to you that if you reverse this circle there for example, the right-hand circle [V-15], you free at the same time the left hand circle. I mean that what you get, is what I call the rod [V-18], namely, that this rod is free from…and it is all the same very different from the torus inside the torus.

拉康: 我仍然想要介入,跟你们指出,假如你们倒转这个圆圈,譬如,右手的这个圆圈 (图形V-15),你们同时解放左边的圆圈。我的意思是,你们所获得的,是我所谓的棍子(V-18)。换句话说,这个棍子被解放、、、这仍然不同于圆环面里面的圆环面。

Soury: It is different, but it is…Look that one, in order to disimplicate one from the other of these two tori, this can only be done by a cut; it is not simply by reversal; by reversal one cannot one cannot disimplicate the two tori, which will be seen for example, if one makes the reversal with a little hole, anyway by holing. If one makes the reversal of a torus by holing, one cannot, one cannot disimplicate the two tori, they can’t be disimplicated, unchained, unlaced.

邵瑞: 这是不同的,但是它、、、请看这个,为了让这一个跟这两个圆环面的另外一个脱离牵涉。这仅能够被做,凭借着切割。这不仅是倒转,凭借倒转,我们无法脱离这两个圆环面。譬如,这两个圆环面将会被看成,假如我们用一个小空洞,做这个倒转,无论如何,凭借着空洞。假如我们凭借空洞,做一个圆环面的倒转。我们无法将这两个圆环面脱离,它们无法被脱离牵涉,解开锁链,解开交织。

It is only when one makes a cut; but to make a cut is to do far more than a reversal. To make the cut, is to do more than holing, and holing is doing much more than reversal. Namely, that to make a cut is to do much more than a reversal.

仅有当我们做一切切割,但是做一切切割,不仅是从事倒转而已。从事这个切割,就是要不仅是从事这个空洞。空洞所做的不仅是倒转而已。换句话说,从事切割,要从事的不仅是倒转而已。

One can make a reversal by cut, but what is done by cutting is not representative of what is done by reversal. And that, would be precisely, it would be exactly an example of it: the fact is that by a cut one can disimplicate one can unchain the inside and the outside while by reversal, it is not a question of disimplicating the complementarity of the inside and of the outside. The fact is that what is done by a cut is much more than what is done by reversal, even though the cut may appear to be as a way to carry out the reversal. In that the cut, is more than holing and the holing is more than reversal.

我们能够凭借切割做一个倒转,但是凭借切割所被做的,并不是凭借倒转所做的代表。那将是确实的,它确实是一个例子。事实上,凭借一种切割,我们能个脱离牵涉,我们能够解开里面及外面的锁链。而凭借倒转,问题并不是解开里面与外面的互补。事实上,凭借切割所做的事情,不仅仅是凭借切割所做的事情,即使这个切割似乎是作为一种方式执行这个倒转。因为这个倒转,不仅是空洞,而这个空洞也不仅是倒转。

The reversal can be carried out by holing; the holing, no, I hesitate to say that holing could be done by a cut all the same. But in the cut there is a holing there is a holing implicit in the cut.

这种倒转能够被实现,凭借这个空洞,这个空洞。不,我犹豫地说,空洞仍然能个凭借切割来做。但是在这个切割,有一个空洞,有一个空洞牵涉到这个切割。

Lacan: In other words what you obtain by holing is in effect like that [V-19].

拉康: 换句话说,你们凭借空洞所能获得的,实际上就是像那样。(V-19)

Soury: Yes, yes.

邵瑞: 是的,是的。

Lacan: There is something which is all the same not mastered concerning that which…it is all the same a result different to that [V-17]!.

拉康:有某件东西,仍然没有被掌控,关于这个东西,它仍然是不同于那个的结果( V-17)。

Soury: No! No! It’s the same thing.

邵瑞: 不!不!这是相同的东西。

Lacan: It is precisely on this ‘it’s the same thing’ that I would like to obtain a response from you. This ‘it’s the same thing’…when we reverse the two tori [V-17], we obtain the following [V-20]. It is all the same something completely different to that [V-19] which is much more like this [V-16]. There is something there which does not appear to me to be mastered, because this [V-17] is exactly the same as that [V-7].

拉康:确实是关于这一点。这是相同的东西,我想要从你那里获得一个回应。这个「并非是相同的东西」、、、当我们倒转这两个圆环面(V-17),我们获得以下( V-20)。 这仍然是某件东西,完全不同于那个圆环面(V-19)。它更像是这个圆环面(V-16)。有某件东西,我觉得并没有被掌控。因为这个(V-17)确实就是相同一那个(V-7)。

Soury: Good! So then we have two interlaced tori [V-19]. Here [V-20] it is two interlocking tori. That is two interlaced tori [V-14]. That [V-18] is two tori freed from one another, independent. So then what is the same thing, is that: two tori, two interlaced tori. And that is two interlaced tori.

邵瑞: 呵呵! 因此,我们拥有两个互相交织的圆环面 (V-19)。这是两个互相交织的圆环面。那是两个互相交织的圆环面(4—14)。那个(V-18)图形是两个圆环面互相被解放,而独立。所以,相同的东西是:两个圆环面,两个互相交织的圆环面。那是两个互相交织的圆环面。

Lacan: These [V-19] are not interlaced: one is inside the other.

拉康: 这些(V-19)的圆环面并没有互相交织,一个是在另外一个的底下。

Soury: Ah good! Good, I thought that it was that. Ah good! It is a matter of two tori, of the black and the red. While there, it is a matter of two interlocked tori, a black and a red interlocked here, here of two interlocked tori [V-20] and here of two interlaced tori [V-14].

邵瑞:呵呵! 我以为它们是交织。呵呵!这是两个圆环面的情况,属于黑跟红。而在那里,问题是两个互相交织的圆环面,一个黑的,一个红灯,在这里互相交织。在此,两个互相交织的圆环面(V-20)。在此是两个互相交织的圆环面(V14)。

Lacan: This is what is not mastered in the categories, in the categories of interlacing and of interlocking. I will try to find the solution which is properly speaking like interlacing. Interlacing is different … (the end is inaudible).

拉康: 这是这那些范畴没有被掌控的部分,在互相交织与互相纠缠的范畴。我将尝试找出这个解答。适当来说,那就像是互相交织。互相交织是不同的、、、(末尾听不见)。

Schema proposed by Pierre Soury

皮尔、邵瑞建议的基模。

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: