无意识的形成 21

无意识的形成 21
13.11.57 32

(32) Nevertheless, after having indicated where I want to get to
on this precise, particular point, I would like to indicate that
even though in effect there is here indeed only substitution,
there is also metaphor. Every time there is substitution, there
is a metaphorical effect or induction. It is not quite the same
thing for a German speaker, to say Signor or to say Herr. I
would even go further: it is altogether different that those of
our patients who are bi-lingual or who simply know a foreign
language, and who at a certain moment when they have something to
tell us, tell it to us in a foreign language.

可是,当我已经指示我想要到达哪里,在这个明确,特殊的时刻,我想要指示,即使实际上,在此确实仅有替换,也有隐喻存在。每当有替换时,就会有隐喻的效果或推论。对于说德语者,说signor 或说Herr,这并不是相同的事情。我甚至想要更加深入 。这是完全不同的,那些具有双语能力的病人,或仅是知道一种外国语言的那些病人,在某个时刻,当他们有事情要告诉我们,请他们用外国语言告诉我们。

You can be certain
that it always suits them much better; it is never without reason
that a patient passes from one register to another. If he is
really a polyglot it has a meaning, if he knows the language he
is referring to imperfectly, that has naturally not got the same
meaning, if he is bilingual from birth that has not the same
meaning either. But in every case it has one, and in any case
here provisionally in the substitution of Signor for Herr, there
was no metaphor but simply heteronomyic substitution.

你们能够确定,这总是更加适合他们。一位病人从一个铭记到另外一个铭记,不是没有理由的。假如他确实是一位精通数种语言的人,这具有意义。假如他知道,他正在不完美地提及的语言,那确实没有相同的意义,假如他从诞生时,就是双语,那也拥有不相同的意义。但是在每个情况,它有一个意义。在此,无论如何,在用Signor替换Herr 时,并没有隐喻,而仅有同词异音的替换。

I return to this point to tell you that on this occasion Signor
on the contrary, despite the whole …………….. context that it
is attached to, namely to Signorelli, namely precisely to the
frescoes at Orvieto, namely that are as Freud himself tells us,
(33) the evocation of the last things, historically represent the
most beautiful elaboration there is of that reality impossible to
affront, which is death. It is very precisely by telling
ourselves a thousand fictions – taking fiction here in its truest
sense – about the last things, that we metaphorise, that we tame,
that we make enter into language this confrontation with death.

我回到这点,为了告诉你们,在这个场合,Signor,相反地,尽管整个的内容,它跟所谓的Signorelli 联接一块。换句话说,确实是跟在Orvieto 的壁画有关。也就是,依照弗洛依德告诉我们的,这些壁画召唤最后的事情,在历史上,它们代表有史以来最美丽的建构,关于那不可能冒犯的那个现实。那就是死亡。确实是凭借告诉我们自己上千的幻想—在此就幻想一词就其最真实的意义而言—关于那些最后的事情,我们予以隐喻,我们驯服它,我们让这个跟死亡的冒犯,进入我们的语言。

Therefore it is quite clear that the Signor here in so far as it
is attached to the context of Signorelli, is something that
really represents a metaphor.


Here then is what we arrive at. We arrive at this that we are
approaching something that allows us to reapply point by point,
because we find they have a common topography, the phenomenon of


At the point at which there was produced the positive
production of famillionaire, there is a phenomenon of parapraxis,
of a hole. I could take another one and demonstrate it for you
again, I could give you as an exercise to refer for example to
the next example given by Freud in connection with the Latin
phrase evoked by one of his interlocutors: “exoriare ex nostris

在这个时刻,famillionaire 的正面的产品就产生了。有一个空洞的失误的现象。我能够拿另外一个现象,再次跟你们证明。我能够给予你们作为譬如提到下一个例子,弗洛依德给予的例子,关于这个拉丁的片语,他的一位对谈者提出的拉丁的片语。

By arranging the words a little because the “ex” is
between “nostris” and “ossibus”, and by dropping the second word
that is indispensable for the scansion, “aliquis”, there results
the fact that he cannot make “aliquis” emerge.

凭借稍微安排这些字词,因为这个“ex“处于”nostris“与”ossibus“之间,凭借抛掉第二个字词,那是韵律上无可免除的,”aliguis“ 结果就是这个事实:他无法让”aliquis“这个字词出现。


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: