精神病 170

精神病 170

The psychoses

My thesis, and perhaps it will give the answer to the enigma that for some
of you my purple passage of last time on the peace of the evening seems to
have consisted in, is as follows – reality is at the outset marked by symbolic
nihilation [neantisalion].

我的主题如下:现实界从一开始就被象征的虚无主义所标示。或许这会回答这个谜团,对于你们有些人,上次我那个眩丽的段落,讨论「黄昏的宁静」似乎引起的谜团
169

Although all of last year’s work prepared us for it, I’m nevertheless going
to iUustrate it once again, even if only so as to come back to this peace of the
evening that got such a mixed reception.

虽然我们去年所有的探索就是为了这个主题而准备,我仍然将再次地说明,即使仅是为了回到这个受到毁誉交交的「黄昏的宁静」。

This is not a detour that, as Plato says, is discordant or lacking in analytic
tone. I don’t think I’m being at all innovative. If you read Freud’s text on
President Schreber you will see that, as a clinical argument for understanding
the said President, he explores the function that Nietzsche’s saga in his Zarathusira,
called Before the dawn, played for another patient of his.4 If you
refer to this moment – it was precisely so as not to read it out to you that I
indulged in this invocation of the peace of the evening – you will see the same
thing represented I wanted to bring to your attention a week ago, which I’m
going to put to you again now in speaking to you about daytime.
The day is a being distinct from all the objects it contains and manifests,
it’s probably even more weighty and more present than any of them, and it’s
impossible to think of it, even in the most primitive human experience, as
the simple return of an experience.

用精神分析的语调来说,这并不是一种不协调或欠缺的迂回,如同柏拉图所说的。我不认为我在标新立异。假如你们阅读弗洛依德讨论许瑞伯庭长的文本,你们将会看见,作为临床的主张,理解所提到的许瑞伯庭长,弗洛依德探索这个功能,尼采在他的「扎拉特拉如是说」的那段奇遇,标题是「黎明之前」,替他的一位病人扮演的功能。假如你们提到这个时刻—那确实是为了跟你们朗读出来,我陶醉于这个黄昏的宁静的召唤。你们将会看出这个相同的事情被再现,一周前,我想要提醒你们注意的这个再现的事情。当晚们跟你们谈论有关白天时,我想要再次跟你们提及。这个白天跟它所包含与证明的所有的东西并不相同,比起这些东西的任何一个,白天可能更加沉重,更加出现。我们不可能思想到它,即使是在最原始的人类的经验,作为是一种经验的单纯回归。

It suffices to mention the prevalence of a rhythm of sleep in the first few
months of human life for us to have all sorts of reasons to believe that it isn’t
due to any empirical apprehension that at a given moment – this is how I
illustrate the initial symbolic nihilations – the human being detaches itself
from the day. The human being is not, as everything leads us to think is the
case for the animal, simply immersed in a phenomenon such as that of the
alternation of day and night. The human being poses the day as such, and
the day thereby becomes presence of the day – against a background that is
not a background of concrete nighttime, but of possible absence of daytime,
where the night dwells, and vice versa moreover. Very early on, day and night
are signifying codes, not experiences. They are connotations, and the empirical
and concrete day only comes forth as an imaginary correlative, originally,
very early on.

我们只要提到,在人类生命的前几个月,睡眠的节奏的盛行,就足够让我们拥有各种的理由相信,这并不是由于任何实验性的理解,在某个特定时刻—这是我说明这个最初的象征的虚无主义。人类的生命实存将它自己跟白天隔开。依照每样东西引导我们认为的,人类的生命实存并不是动物的情况。动物仅是沉湎于一种现象,譬如白天与夜晚的轮替。人类提出白天,作为就是白天的样子,白天因此就成为白天的存在。白天衬托的背景,并不是具体的夜间时间的背景,而是白天时间的可能欠缺。夜晚就驻居在那里。而且,反过来说,白天就驻居在夜晚时间的可能欠缺那里。在早期,白天与夜晚都是能指化的符码,而不是经验。它们具有外延意义,这个经验到的具体的白天的来临,仅是作为想象的相关因素,原先,在最早期时。

4 SE 12:54-55.
On the refection of a primordial signifier 149

That’s my supposition, and seeing that I speak from the genetic point of
view, I don’t otherwise have to justify it in experience. It’s structurally necessary
to admit a primitive stage in which the world of signifiers as such appears.

那是我的假设,既然我是从起源的观点来谈论,我就没有这个必要在经验里自园其说。但是承认一个原初的阶段,在结构上是有必要的。在这个阶段,各种能指本身的世界会出现。

Since this level leaves you somewhat confused, I will put things to you
dogmatically, which I detest doing – you know my style is dialectical.
Before a child can learn to articulate language, we have to assume that
signifiers, which are already of the symbolic order, have appeared. When I
speak of a primitive appearance of the signifier, this is something that already implies language. All this does is link up with the emergence of this being
that is nowhere, the day. The day qua day is not a phenomenon, the day qua
day implies symbolic connotation, the fundamental alternation of the vocal
connoting presence and absence, on which Freud hinges his whole notion of
beyond the pleasure principle.

因为这个层次让你们相当感到困惑,我将武断地跟你们说明,虽然我并不喜欢这样做—你们知道,我的风格是辩证方式。在小孩能够学习表达语言之前,我们必须假定,各种能指已经出现,已经是属于象征界的秩序。当我谈了能指的原初的出现,这是某件已经暗示是语言的东西。所以的这一切作为,跟这个白天的生命实存的出现息息相关,白天作为是乌何有之地。白天作为白天,并不是一种现象。白天作为白天暗示着象征的外延意义,指明是存在与不存在的声音的基本的轮替。弗洛依的将他的「超越快乐原则」的整个观念,就是凭借这个轮替。

170

It’s exactly this field of symbolic articulation that I’m currently aiming at
in my discourse, and it’s here that Verwerfung occurs.

我目前在我的辞说所要到达的目标,确实就是象征表达的这个领域。就在这里,除权弃绝Verwerflung出现。

I’m delighted by the fact that some of you are bothered by this subject of
Verwerfung. After all, Freud doesn’t mention it very often, and I have gone
and dug it out of the two or three crannies where the tip of an ear is showing,
and even sometimes those where nothing at all is showing, but where the
comprehension of the text demands that one assume it is there.

我对这个事实感到欣悦。你们有些人们对于除权弃绝的这个主体感到困扰。毕竟,弗洛依德并没有经常提到它。我曾经从两三个犁沟里将它挖掘出来。在那里,有个耳朵的尖端显现,甚至有时候,根本就没有东西显现。但是在那里,对于文本的理解要求,我们应该认为这种除权弃绝存在那里。

On the subject of Verwerfung, Freud says that the subject did not want to
know anything about castration, even in the sense of repression.5 As a matter of
fact, in the sense of repression one still knows something about the very thing
one doesn’t want, in some sense, to know anything about, and the whole of
analysis consists in showing us that one knows it very well indeed. If there
are things the patient wants to know nothing about, even in the sense of
repression, another mechanism is implied. And as the word Verwerfung appears
in direct connection with this sentence as well as several pages before, I grab
it. I set no great store by the term, I set store by what it means, and this is
what I believe Freud meant.

探讨除权弃绝的这个主体时,弗洛依德说,主体并不想要知道任何有关阉割的事情,即使它的意义仅是潜抑。事实上,从潜抑的观点,我们仍然知道关于这个我们并不想要知道的东西的某件事情。整个的精神分析就在于跟我们显示,我们确实清楚地知道它。假如有些事情,病人根本不想要知道,即使仅是潜抑的意义,这暗示着另外一种机制。当「除权弃绝」这个字出现时,直接跟这个句子及前面几页有关,我理解它。我并没有刻意保留这个术语,我仅是保留它的意涵。这是我相信是弗洛依德的意思。

It has been objected to me, most pertinently I must say, that the closer one
gets to the text the less one manages to understand it. This is indeed why a
text has to be brought to life by what follows and by what precedes. It’s
always by means of what follows that a text has to be understood.

有人对我提出反对意见,非常中肯地,我必须承认。我们越是靠近这个文本,我们就越是无法成功地理解它。这确实是为什么文本必须凭借前面以及后续发生的东西,来给予生命力。总是凭借后续发生的事情,文本必须被理解。

Those who make the most objections to me suggest, incidentally, that I
look in some of Freud’s other texts at something that might not be Verwerfimg
but, for instance, Verleignung – it’s strange to see the proliferation of
this Ver in Freud. I have never given you any purely semantic lesson on
Freud’s vocabulary, but I assure you that I could serve up a good dozen of
them straightaway.

那些对我提出最强烈反对意见的人们,偶然地建议:我应该在弗洛依德的其他文本,观看某件可能并不是除权弃绝的东西。譬如,否认 Verleugnung。耐人寻味地,我们看见这个「除去」ver 在弗洛依德,如此频繁地出现。我从来没有跟你们谈论弗洛依德的辞汇的纯粹语意的教导。但是我告诉你们,我马上就能够累计好几十个。
150 The psychoses

I would begin by talking about the banking connotations
of all these terms, conversion, displacement,6 etc., and this would take us a
long way, right into the major implications of this direct approach Freud had
to the phenomena of neurosis. But we can’t spend forever on these different
approaches. Trust me a bit concerning this work on the sense. I have chosen
Verwerfimg to make myself understood because it’s the fruit of long reflection,
my work leads me to it. At least for a while, take my honey such as I
offer it to you and try to put it to some use.

我开始谈论有关其他这些术语的累积的外延意义,诸如转换conversion,替换displacement 等等。这将让我们进行很久,直接进入这个直接方法的主要的暗示,弗洛依德拥有探讨神经症的现象的方法。但是我们不能老是花时间探讨不同的方法。关于这个现场的这个研究,请你们信任我。我曾经选择除权弃绝Veerwerflung这个术语,来让你们理解,因为在是经过长久反思的成果。我们研究引导我获得它。至少,有一阵子,请你们接纳为提供它给予你们的这个蜂蜜,应用它一下。

171

This Verwerfimg is implicated in the text the Verneinung, which At. Jean
Hyppolite presented here two years ago, and this is why I have chosen to
publish his presentation in the first number of the review La Psychanalyse.7
There you will be able to see, with text in hand, whether or not we were
right, Hyppolite and I, to set off down the path of Verneinung.
Freud’s text, undeniably brilliant, is far from being satisfactory. It mixes
everything up. This has nothing to do with a Verdrangung.

在否认Verneinung的文本里,这个除权弃绝Verwerfung被暗示。两年前,海普来特在此发表这个文本。这就是为什么我选择发表他的文章,在「精神分析」评论的第一期。在那里,你们将能够看出,手里拿着文本。无论我们是否正确,海普来特与我,为了从(否认Verneinung)的途径出发探究下去。无可否认地,弗洛依的的文本非常杰出,但是根本不令人满意。因为它混淆一切东西。这跟(潜抑Verdrangung)没有丝毫关系。

What is at issue when I speak of Verwerfimg? At issue is the rejection of a
primordial signifier into the outer shadows, a signifier that will henceforth be
missing at this level. Here you have the fundamental mechanism that I posit
as being at the basis of paranoia. It’s a matter of a primordial process of
exclusion of an original within, which is not a bodily within but that of an
initial body of signifiers.

当我谈论到除权弃绝时Verwerflung,受到争议的是什么?受到争议的是拒绝原初的能指进入这些外在的阴影。在这个层次,这个能指因此将是失落。在此,你们拥有这个基本的机制,我提出作为是偏执狂的基础的机制。问题是,一个原先的内部的排除的原初的过程,这并不是身体的内部,而是能指的最初的身体的内部。

It’s inside this primordial body that Freud posits the constitution of a world
of reality, which is already punctuated, already structured, in terms of signifiers.
Freud then describes the entire operation by which representation
and these already constituted objects are brought together. The subject’s initial
apprehension of reality is the judgment of existence, which consists in
saying – This is not my dream or my hallucination or my representation but an
object.

就在这个原初的身体的内部,弗洛依德提出现实的世界的构成,它已经是被插入,已经是被结构,用能指的术语而言。弗洛依德因此描述整个的运作,凭借这个运作,再现表象,以及这些已经是被构成的客体被汇集一块。主体的最初的对现实的理解,就是生命实存的判断。这种生命实存的判断说:「这并不是我的梦,或我的幻觉,或我的再现表象,而是一个客体。」

It’s a matter of testing the external by the internal – it’s Freud saying this,
not me-, a matter of the constitution of the subject’s reality in a refinding of
the object. The object is refound in a quest, and moreover the object one
refinds is never the same. This constitution of reality, essential to the explanation
of all mechanisms of repetition is registered on the basis of an initial
bipartition, one that curiously coincides with certain primitive myths that
evoke something primordially crippled that has been introduced into the sub-
ject’s access to human reality. Here you have what is presupposed by this
unusual priority that in th Verneinung Freud attributes to what he explains
analogically as a judgment of attribution, as distinct from a judgment of existence.
There is in Freud’s dialectic an initial division into the good and the
bad that can only be understood if we interpret it as the rejection of a primordial
signifier.

问题是要凭借内部测试外部—这是弗洛依德这样说,不是我说的—问题是,主体的现实界的构成,在对于客体的重新发现上。在追寻当中,这个客体被重新发现。而且,我们重新发现的这个客体,从来就不是相同的客体。现实界的这个构成,对于重复的所有的机制的解释,是非常重要的,它被铭记,根据最初的两份区隔。一份耐人寻味地巧合于某种原始的神话。这个原始神话召唤某件原初就剥夺的东西,当它被介绍进入主体的接近人类的现实界。在此,你们拥有这个预先被假设的不寻常的优先性。在(否认Verneinung)一文,弗洛依德将它归属于他类比解释的东西,作为是归属地判断,作为是跟生命实存的判断不同的东西。在弗洛依德的辩证法,有一个最初的区分善与恶。仅有当我们理解将它诠释为原初的能指的拒绝时,我们才能理解善与恶的这种区别。

What does primordial signifier mean? It’s clear that it quite precisely means
nothing.

这个原初的能指意味着什么?显而易见地,它确实意味着空无。

What I’m explaining to you here has all the characteristics of the myth that
I was tempted to mention on that occasion and that M. Marcel Griaule
recounted to you last year – namely, the division into four of the primeval
placenta. The first was the fox who, tearing out his portion of the placenta,
introduced an imbalance from which there stemmed the cycle that would
involve the division of the fields, the bonds of kinship, etc.8 What I’m
recounting to you is also a myth, for I in no way believe that there is anywhere
at all a moment, a stage, at which the subject first acquires the primitive
signifier, that subsequently the play of meanings is introduced, and that
after that, signifier and signified having linked arms, we then enter the domain
of discourse.

我在此正在跟你们解释的东西,具有这个神话的所有特性。在那个场合,我忍不住地提到这个神话,马赛尔、格瑞乐去年跟你们叙述的神话。原始的胎盘被区分成为四份。第一份是狐狸,它撕开它在胎盘的部分,介绍一种不平衡。从这个不平衡,就产生牵涉到领域的区分,亲属的契约,等等的循环。我现在正在跟你们叙述的东西,也是一种神话。因为我根本就不相信,有任何地方,有一个时刻,一个阶段,主体首先获得这个能指,随后,各种意义的运作就被介绍。经过这个阶段之后,能指与所指就手臂相连,我们因此就进入辞说的领域。

All the same, there is a representation here that is so indispensable that I
feel comfortable about giving it to you, so as to satisfy your demands, but
also because Freud himself tends in this direction – we shall have to wait and
see how.

尽管如此,在此会有一个再现表象是如此的不可或缺,所以我觉得很自在地将它给予你们,为了满足你们的要求。但是也是因为弗洛依德自己倾向朝这个方向。我们将必须等着瞧,那是怎样的再现表象。

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: