Archive for the ‘精神分析基本技巧’ Category

Kant with Sade 004

October 14, 2011

Kant with Sade 02

Jacques Lacan

This shows that jouissance is that by which Sadean experience is modified.
For it only proposes to monopolize a will after having already traversed it in
order to instate itself at the inmost core of the subject whom it provokes
beyond that by offending his sense of modesty [pudeur].

这显示,欢爽是萨德的经验藉以被修改的东西。 因为它仅是提议要笼断一个意志, 在它已经全面研究它之后,为了要安置它自己在主题的最内层核心。 它挑激主体超越那个核心, 以冒犯他的稳重感。

For modesty is an amboceptor with respect to the circumstances of being:
between the two, the one’s immodesty by itself violating the other’s modesty.
A connection that could justify, were such justification necessary, what I said
before regarding the subject’s assertion in the Other’s place.

因为稳重感是一种溶血素,关于生命实存的情境。在两者之间, 一个人的不稳重本身,扰乱另一人的稳重。 若有需要证明,有一个关联能够证明我所说能够成立,关于主体代替大它者所作的主张。

Let us question this jouissance, which is precarious because it depends on
an echo that it sets off in the Other, only to abolish it little by little by attaching
the intolerable to it. In the end, doesn’t it seem to us to be thrilled only by
itself, like another horrible freedom?

让我们质疑这个欢爽, 这是不稳定的欢爽, 因为它依靠它在大它者身上触发的一种回响,结果逐渐给予它无法被忍受的东西,而废除它。最后, 仅是它的本身, 就像另外一个可怕的自由, 难道不是似乎会使我们感到興奋?

Thus we will see appear the third term that, according to Kant, is lacking
in moral experience—namely, the object that Kant, in order to guarantee it to
the will in the implementation of the Law, is constrained to relegate to the
unthinkability of the thing in itself. But is this not the very object we find in
Sadean experience, which is no longer inaccessible and is instead revealed as
the being-in-the-world, the Dasein^ of the tormenting agent?

因此,我们将会看到第三个术语出现,依照康德, 那就是道德经验的欠缺—也就是说, 康德不得不分配给真实界本身的不可思议性的客体, 为了保证它给予使用法则的意志。 但是这并不是我们在萨德的经验里找到的这个客体。这个客体不再能被接近, 代替的,它被显示作为世界里的生命实存, 折磨代理人的生命实存。

Yet it retains the opacity of that which is transcendent. For this object is strangely separated from the subject. Let us observe that the herald of the maxim need be no more here than a point of broadcast. It could be a voice on the radio recalling the right promoted by the supplemental effort the French would have consented to make in response to Sade’s appeal, the maxim having become an organic Law of their regenerated Republic.

可是, 它保留超验的内容的模糊性。 因为这个客体很奇怪地跟生命主体分开。 让我们观察,个人习性的宣布,在此道道地地是一个广播点。 它会像是收音机的一个声音,提醒法国人本来会同意去做辅助的努力以提升的权利,在回应萨德的诉求, 这个个人习性已经成为他们重生动共和国的有机法则。

Such voice-related phenomena, especially those found in psychosis, truly have this object-like appearance. And in its early days, psychoanalysis was not very far from relating the voice of conscience to psychosis.

诸如跟声音有关的现象, 特别是那些在精神病患身上被找到的那些现象, 确实拥有这个像客体一般的表象。 在它早期的日子, 精神分析差不多就是将良心的声音跟精神病联想在一起。

Here we see why Kant views this object as evading every determination of
transcendental aesthetics, even though it does not fail to appear in a certain
bulge in the phenomenal veil, being not without hearth or home, time in intuition,
modality situated in the unreal [irreel], or effect in reality. It is not simply
that Kant’s phenomenology is lacking here, but that the voice—even if
insane—forces [upon us] the idea of the subject, and that the object of the law
must not suggest malignancy on the part of the real God.

在此,我们看到, 为什么康德看待这个客体,当著是逃避超验美学的每个决定,即使它一定会以某种的突起出现在现象界的面纱, 因为它并不是每有火炉或家园。在直觉中的时间, 它的形式被定位在非真实界, 或在现实界的情感。 不仅是因为康德的现象学在此是欠缺, 而且那个声音—即使是疯狂, 会将主体的观念强迫在我们身上。法律的客体一定不要建议说, 它是真实上帝的恶意。

Christianity has assuredly taught men to pay little attention to God’s jouissance, and this is how Kant makes palatable his voluntarism of Law-for- Law’s-sake, which is something that exaggerates, one might say, the ataraxia of the Stoics.

基督教确实教人不要太注意上帝的欢爽。这就是为什么康德让他的志愿者的为了法则而法则的志愿者,那么讨人喜爱的地方。我们不妨说, 它是某件誇张力禁欲学派的「安详」。

One might be tempted to think that Kant feels pressured here by what he hears too close by, not from Sade but from some nearby mystic, in the sigh that muffles what he glimpses beyond, having seen that his God is faceless: Grimmigkeit? Sade says: supremely-evil-being.

我们可能会被引诱去认为,康德在此感觉有压力,由于太靠近听到的东西, 不是从萨德听到,而是从某个附近的神秘主体听到,在错过他所瞥见的东西的讯息里,因为他曾经看见,他的上帝是没有面貌的:Grimmigkeit ? 萨德说: 崇高的邪恶之神。

But humph! Schwarmereien, black swarms—I chase you away in order to
return to the function of presence in the Sadean fantasy.

但是,哼! 这些黑色的虫群—我总是追逐你们,为了回到萨德的幻见到存在的功能。

This fantasy has a structure that we will see again further on; in it the object is but one of the terms in which the quest it figures can die out [s’eteindre].

这个幻见拥有一个结构,我们随后将会再次看到, 在它里面, 这个客体仅是其中一个术语,它所扮演的追寻会逐渐消失。

When jouissance petrifies in the object, it becomes the black fetish, in which can be recognized the form that was verily and truly offered up at a certain time and place, and still is in our own time, so that one can adore the god therein.

在这个客体身上,欢爽惊呆时,它变成黑色的物神。在里面, 我们能够体认到这个形式:它道道地地是在某个时间及某个地方,在我们的时代,依旧被提供的形式。这样,我们能够崇拜这个内在的神。

This is what becomes of the executioner in sadism when, in the most extreme case, his presence is reduced to being no more than the instrument.

这就是在虐待狂里, 行刑者的遭遇。在最极端的情况里,他的存在被还原成为仅是一种工具。

But the fact that the executioner’s jouissance becomes fixated there does not spare his jouissance the humility of an act in which he cannot help but become a being of flesh and, to the very marrow, a slave to pleasure.

但是,行刑者的欢爽变成固定,这个事实并没有替他的欢爽,减免行动的卑下。 在行动里,他身不由己地成为一个肉体的生命实存。 追根究底来说,就是欢乐的奴隶。

This duplication neither reflects nor reciprocates (why wouldn’t it “mutualize”?) the duplication that took place in the Other owing to the subject’s two alterities.

这种复制既没有反射,也没有互惠。 ( 何不说是「彼此利用」?)这个复制发生在大它者,由于生命主体具有两个大它者。

Desire—which is the henchman of the subject’s split—would no doubt be willing to call itself “will to jouissance.” But this appellation would not make desire any more worthy of the will it invokes in the Other, in tempting that will [to go right] to the extreme of its division from its pathos; for when it does so, desire departs [part] beaten down, doomed to impotence.

欲望—是生命主体的分裂的忠实追随者—无可置疑地愿意称它自己是「欢爽的意志」。但是这个名称将不会使欲望配得上意志的价值, 它在大它者身上召唤的意志。它引诱那个意志从它的痛苦里,直接探究它的分裂的极端。因为当它这样做时, 欲望脱离, 被击败,注定无能为力。

For desire disappears [part] under pleasure’s sway, pleasure’s law being such as to make it always fall short of its aim: the homeostasis of the living being, always too quickly reestablished at the lowest threshold of tension at which he scrapes by, the ever early fall of the wing, with which desire is able to sign the reproduction of its form—a wing which here must nevertheless rise to the function of representing the link between sex and death. Let us lay that wing to rest behind its Eleusinian veil.

因为在欢乐的影响下,欲望消失。欢乐的法则是如此, 以致于使欲望总是没有到达它的目标。 人作为生物的体内平衡,总是太快就被重新建立在最低的紧张门槛。存活在那里,这个翅膀的早期掉落。使用这个翅膀, 欲望能够预示它的形式的复制—这一种翅膀在此必须被提升到代表性与死亡之间的联结的功能。 让我们将那个翅膀停靠在阿留辛尼安的面纱背后休息。

Pleasure, a rival of the will in Kant’s system that provides a stimulus, is thus in Sade’s work no more than a flagging [defaillant] accomplice. At the moment of climax [jouissance], it would simply be out of the picture if fantasy did not intervene to sustain it with the very discord to which it succumbs.

欢乐,在康德的系统里,是提供刺激的意志的敌对。在萨德的著作里,欢乐因此仅是一种下垂的共犯。在欢爽高潮的时刻,它仅是脱离画面, 假如幻见没有介入维持它,用它所屈服的不和谐。

Stated differently, fantasy provides the pleasure that is characteristic of desire. Let us recall that desire is not the subject, for it cannot be indicated anywhere in a signifier of any demand whatsoever, for it cannot be articulated in the signifier even though it is articulated there.

用不同角度来陈述, 幻见供应表现欲望特征的欢乐。 让我们回忆一下: 欲望并不是生命主体, 因为欲望无法在要求的能指的任何地方被指示。 因为它无法在能指里被表达,即使它存在那里。


精神分析技术的基本原则 p143

June 28, 2011

Fundamentals of Psychoanalytic Technique
精神分析技術的基本原則 p143

布魯斯 芬克

How to Handle Transference

He indicated, for example, that when the male analyst working with a man whom Gill called “Patient E” made an interpretation to the effect that the patient was worried that there was an intimate, homosexual component to his relationship with the analyst, the patient heard the interpretation “as a homosexual approach” or come-on (p. 1 05).


The analyst in that case had apparently been sensed for some time by the patient to be encouraging the patient to form a homoerotic 同性戀 bond with him, and the analyst’s interpretation was taken by the patient as confirmation of his preexisting sense.


Another analysand, whom Gill referred to as “Patient G,” had obviously felt for some time that he was in competition with his analyst and perpetually losing the contest. When his analyst commented at length on this, the patient “experience[d] every interpretation as an enactment 扮演 of the competition. Even interpretations that [were] about that very thing” for example, the analyst proffered, “My saying that you have experienced it as a competition in which I am besting you is yet another move in this game of besting you”–were “experienced as aloof, one-upmanship” on the analyst’s part (p. 1 70).


When his analyst told him he seemed to be seeking the analyst’s
approval, the patient concluded that this was just one more way he was messed up and failing. When the analyst commented that the patient felt the analyst was putting him down, the patient took the comment as another put-down (pp. 1 62-1 64).


The analyst’s speech is heard as coming from the person the analysand imputes the analyst to be, not as coming from the person the analyst
thinks he is or would like to be, or as coming from some objective outside
observer. In this sense, interpretation of the transference, which is allegedly engaged in so as to “resolve” or “liquidate” the transference, ends up merely feeding the transference, making it still more intense and unwieldy. 19


This is one of the reasons why Lacanians will often proffer very short interpretations that omit the subject of the statement (avoiding, for example, “[ think”) and that consist essentially of the analysand’s own words–perhaps strung together in a slightly different order–such that it is not entirely clear to the analysand who authored them. This makes it more difficult for such interpretations (see Chapter 5) to be experienced and rejected “as coming from the transferential Other.”


Despite an entire volume of theoretical considerations on the interpretation of transference and a second volume of transcriptions of sessions purporting to show the reader how to detect and interpret transference, Gill provided little if any evidence that the interpretation of transference led to enduring change in the analysands he presented.


The possible sources and evolution of Patient E’s fear of intimacy and homophobia were never even broached, nor were the probable causes of Patient G’s competition with authority figures. Both of these
patients made it quite clear that fear and competition characterized many of their relationships with others, yet the reader was never given so much as a glimpse of their connection with the patients’ histories.


As important as it may be for analysts to be attuned to “allusions to the transference” (Gill, 1 982, p. 2 1 ) in stories analysands recount during their sessions, and as important as it may be to get analysands to elaborate on such allusions in detail, virtually every direct interpretation of the transference in the sessions Gill and Hoffman collected led to a quandary, a messy soup that the analysts whose cases they presented extracted themselves from only with the greatest of difficulty.


Unwittingly, Gill and Hoffman appear to have provided ample evidence that it is ‘ counterproductive to interpret the transference.


Although one cannot see any great benefit accruing to the patients they
presented, one can see that the attempt on the part of some of the analysts
whose sessions were included in the volume to find allusions to the transference everywhere and to systematically interpret the transference led them to overlook the most basic facets of psychoanalytic technique:


• They overlooked slips of the tongue (Patient G said, “my being angry with me” instead of “my being angry with him,” implying something very
different, indeed;


• They failed to notice mixed metaphors (Patient G said, referring to the upcoming end of the’ therapy, ”Time is running out. The crystal ball
with the sand ends July 2 1 st,” obviously meaning “hourglass” instead of “crystal ball,” and thus referring quite transparently to his view that his analyst was, or at least believed he was, clairvoyant-if not a fortune
teller; p. 1 56).




June 27, 2011

Fundamentals of Psychoanalytic Technique
精神分析技術的基本原則 p141

布魯斯 芬克

How to Handle Transference

Nevertheless, the majority 大多數 of analysts seem to have fallen in with Freud’s ( 19 1 3/ 1 958) point of view that we must interpret the transference whenever it begins to lead to resistance 阻抗:


So long as the patients communications 溝通 and ideas run on 進行 without any obstruction 阻礙, the theme of transference should be left untouched 沒有碰觸. One must wait until the transference, [the handling of] which is the most delicate of all procedures 程式, has become a resistance 阻抗. (p. 1 39)


They seem not to have realized that an interpretation 解釋of the transference that comes from the transferential object herself, the analyst, is not a way out of the transference but simply reproduces 複製 the transference; for, as Lacan (2006, p. 59 1 ) said, ‘The analyst’s speech is [always] heard as coming from the transferential Other.”


If, for example, the analyst has become associated 聯想 with a critical重要的 parental figure, her interpretation will be heard as critical 重要; if she has become associated with a seductive誘拐 maternal 母親figure, her interpretation will be heard as seductive. We do not achieve some sort ‘of metaposition 形上位置 outside of the transference by interpreting it (the claims of therapists like Levenson, 1 995, p. 88, that we can “metacommunicate” 形上溝通 notwithstanding雖然).


We remain up to our ears 忙碌於 in the transference. As Lacan ( 1967-1968, November 29, 1 967) said, there is “no transference of the transference,” meaning that–just as there is no position outside o f language that allows us to discuss language as a whole without having to rely on language itself in our discussion-there is no way in which we can step completely outside the transference situation in order to discuss what is happening in the transference itself (see also Lacan, 1 998b, p. 428).


The interpretation of transference is a vicious cycle 惡性循環! Analysts have tried to get around this vicious cycle by dividing the analysand into two parts: the “experiencing ego” and the “observing 觀察 ego” (Sterba, 1 934).


The trick 竅訣, in their view, is to invite the observing ego, which they consider to be “rational 理性,” to step outside of the transference (which is presumably 假定 engaged in by the experiencing ego alone) into some kind of metaspace 形上空間 , a space outside of the transference where analyst and analysand can meet as “reasonable” observing egos and agree upon what is happening between the irrational, unreasonable, experiencing egos who are caught up in 忙於 the transference/countertransference. 16


It may sound like I am being ironic 反諷here, but many authors 作者speak in precisely 確實these terms, as if “rational 理性,” “irrational,” “reasonable,” and “unreasonable” were simple, serviceable服務 categories1 範疇7 that could be unproblematically associated with one or another of the psychical agencies 代理, and as if–even if an agreement as to what is going on could be reached between reasonable, “dispassionate 冷靜,” observing egos taking a “time out” from the hothouse 溫室 of the transference relationship–it would change anything when they return to the hothouse (apart from encouraging the analysand to suppress 壓抑 any and all transference reactions 反動 in the future) .


The analysand is likely to remain just as hypersensitive 過度敏感 to criticism as he was before, for example, but he may begin to “talk himself down” from his high dudgeon 生氣 when he remembers his discussion with the analyst to the effect that he constantly 不斷地felt criticized批評 by his father as a child, which is the origin 起源of his hypersensitivity to criticism today.


The upshot 結局 is that he will still get very angry but will learn how to suppress 壓抑 his anger after the fact instead of acting on it. Or he will still experience women’s comments to him as invariably 一成不變 seductive 誘拐 but will learn how to “reason with himself,” reminding himself on each occasion that he experiences their comments that way because of things that occurred with his mother. Such is the usefulness (or uselessness, as the case may be) of enlisting 徵召 the aid of the analysand’s observing ego!


Gill ( 1 982) is one of the foremost proponents 提議者, in the non-Kleinian analytic world (I will discuss Klein later in this chapter), of the systematic interpretation of transference, yet he acknowledged something (which he appeared to view as a simple anomaly or curiosity, even though he repeated it numerous times in the course of his book) that seems to corroborate Lacan’s view that it is generally pointless to interpret the transference.


Gill indicated that in the transcripts of complete sessions he provided in volume 2 of his work, one can see “how regularly the analysis of the transference has its own repercussions on the transference–often repercussions which result in an enactment of the very patterns of interactions to which the interpretations refer”



精神分析技术的基本原则 p139

June 26, 2011

Fundamentals of Psychoanalytic Technique

布魯斯 芬克

How to Handle Transference

As Freud ( 1 9 1 6- 1 9 1 7/1 963, p. 443) said, we “need not bother about [the transference] so long as it operates in favour of the joint work of analysis.” According to Gill ( 1 982, p. 8 1 ), Ferenczi, Rank, and Reich all maintained that “a strong positive transference, especially near the beginning of analysis, is only a symptom 病徵of resistance 阻抗which requires unmasking 揭發 ” hence they would presumably 假定argue that it is necessary to intervene 介入 in such a way as to temper 緩和 the analysand’s enthusiasm 熱心. Reich, in fact, believed that positive transference always hides a more fundamental, primordial 原初, negative transference.


Recall that psychoanalysis began with a love story: Anna O. (whose real
name was Bertha Pappenheim) came up with 想出 the “talking cure” out of love for Joseph Breuer, the attentive young doctor who made house calls morning and night to work with her for hours at a time. He was the only person whose presence she would notice and the only person she would speak with during certain phases 時期 of her treatment (Freud & Breuer, 1 893-1 895/1955, pp. 2 1-47).


In the beginning (of psychoanalysis) was love. And her love was inspired 啟發 by a man who, whether she found him good-looking or not, was a well-respected physician whom she could assume 假定 knew something about her condition and how to heal 治療 her (even though, as history shows, she was the one who had virtually all the knowledge and he was simply smart enough to follow her lead ).


Even though the parties to the love story from which psychoanalysis was born did not live happily ever after together, the fact remains that love, inspired by a belief that the other party possesses 擁有 knowledge, was the mainspring 主要動機 of the treatment Anna O. invented.


Many of the graduate students in clinical psychology whom I supervise 督導 are quick to try to dispel 驅散 a patient’s belief that they have considerable 相當 knowledge of what ails 苦惱 him. They often do so in the interest 利益, so they say, of honesty and to assure the patient that he has as much power in the relationship as the clinician 臨床醫生.


As laudable 讚賞 as their goals may be-and it is indeed the patient who has the lion’s share of the knowledge, the practitioner having very little, especially at the outset of the treatment-they often end up undermining 損壞 the patient’s faith in their ability to help him. Rather than “empowering” him, they end up disempowering 解除力量 him, making him feel dejected 沮喪 and despondent 沮喪. He feels that he has no knowledge that is of any use in this domain; if he did, he would not be in the predicament 困境 in which he finds himself in the first place.


It is often very important for him to believe that someone else has the knowledge that can help him; dispelling 驅散 that belief is to take away his last shred 一點 of hope.


Hence, this attempt to intervene 介入in the patient’s transference of knowledge onto the analyst can lead to despair 絕望.


Trying to convince the patient right from the outset 開始that he has as much, if not more, knowledge than the clinician is most likely to succeed when the clinician herself is young and working in a training facility 能力 where all the therapists are either seeing their very first patients or have only a year or two of experience.


“For in such cases, patients are usually aware that they are getting
what they are paying for, so to speak–that their therapist has comparatively 比較 less “expertise” 專門知識 than other therapists they might seek out in the community who have been practicing for many years.

Nevertheless, in numerous cases the patient simply feels that the clinician “doth protest 抗議 too much” and is just being modest 謙虛 or trying to spare 省掉 his feelings of inferiority.


Socrates’s claim 宣稱to know nothing (except about love) never convinced his disciples 門徒 , who continued to believe that he was a veritable 可驗證的 fount 泉源 of knowledge. This points to an extremely important facet of psychoanalytic technique: The attempt to dissipate 驅散 or “liquidate” 消除the analysand’s transference is doomed 駐定 to failure, because the analyst’s disclaimer 拒絕–for example, “I can’t possibly know what the problem is, you’re the one who has the knowledge here”-is heard by the analysand as coming from the person whom he projects her to be: a very knowledgeable person (otherwise, he asks himself, why would she be a clinician in the first place?).

蘇格拉底宣稱什麼都不知道(除了關於愛),但是他的門徒從來不這樣認為。他們繼續相信他,他是知識的可驗證的來源。這指向精神分析技術一個極端重要的面貌:企圖驅散或「消除」受分析者的移情是註定失敗,因為分析師的拒絕承認,例如,「我不可能知道問題是什麼,你才是這裏擁有這個知識的人。」在受分析者聽起來,會當著來自他投射她在上面的這個人:一位非常有知識的人 (否則,他問他自己,為什麼是她首先當臨床醫生?)

The attempt to mitigate 緩和 some of the more cumbersome 麻煩的aspects of the transference by commenting on 評論 or interpreting 解釋it from within the transference (that is, when one is the object of the􀒡 analysand’s transference as opposed to 相對 a third party, such as a friend, colleague同事, or consulting 諮商 physician 醫生) is generally doomed to failure for the very same reason. Should, for example, the analysand have the sense that the analyst is angry at him and the analyst deny 否認 any such anger, her denial will nevertheless be heard by the analysand as coming from someone whom he presumes 假定to be angry; indeed, he may take the denial 否認itself as a sign 跡象 of anger!




June 25, 2011

Fundamentals of Psychoanalytic Technique

布魯斯 芬克

How to Handle Transference

If psychoanalysis is a means, it situates itself in the place of love.
–LAcan (i973-i974, December 1 8, 1973)

–拉康(1973-i974, December 1 8, 1973)

Having said a little now about how to recognize what in the analytic situation is owing to transference and what is not (owing instead to countertransference) , let us now turn to the so-called handling of transference.


Although the parameters 參數 of transference that I have thus far outlined may strike 給印象 the reader as abstract抽象, the experience of transference is anything but, whether considered from the vantage point of the analyst who is on the receiving end of it or from that of the analysand who is in the grips of 掌控it.


Positive Transference

I would say that positive transference is when the person in question, the analyst in this case, is in our good graces 恩典, negative transference is when we keep an eye on 觀看 him.
— Lacan (1 978, p. 1 24)


In certain cases, the analysand finds himself thinking about the analyst a great deal of the time, wondering about her life, and perhaps even trying to find out more about her; in a word, he has become enamored of 傾心於 or even somewhat obsessed with 迷戀 someone he barely 免強 knows and who very likely has few if any of the characteristics 特性 of the women who have been of interest to him in the past (if indeed any women have been of interest to him in the past).


Note that even the basic constraints 約束 of the analytic situation itself, such as meeting at scheduled 預定行程 times in a specific 明確location 位置, making regular payments, and so on, can be fodder 飼料for transference, since analysands who refuse to be part of the “system” may rebel against 反叛 such constraints 約束 as representing 代表 Establishment 體制 , authoritarian 權威的values and hold the analyst personally responsible for them.


The analyst may not be physically 生理上 attractive to him, may be several decades older or younger than he is, may dress in a manner he finds unflattering不討好 or indicative of 指示 a cultural or class 階級 milieu 環境 that is repugnant to 令人厭惡 his sensibilities 感官, and yet for some reason he may find himself feeling very enthusiastic about 熱心 her and eagerly looking forward to each of his sessions 諮商 with her. (This kind of infatuation迷戀 often occurs among analysands who are of the same sex as their analysts as well.)


The analysand feels he has found someone who truly listens to him, can
understand him, and may possibly be able to help him in his time of need. She strikes 給印象 him as knowledgeable–as already knowing or likely to know what his problem is and how to solve it. In a word, he sees her like a positive figure 人物 from his past, like someone who, at least at one point in time, seemed open to him and willing and able to help.


Nevertheless, he does not experience his transference as transference.
He does not say to himself, “The only reason I feel this way about my analyst is because she reminds me of the way my mother was when I was little and she still acted like a mother to me.” Instead, he experiences it as a strong feeling for this particular person, right here, right now. He is caught up in 感到強烈興趣 it, not observing himself at a distance from it: His passion 激情 for his analyst feels very real to him.


As long as his transference takes this form and does not interfere with 干涉 the work he is doing in the therapy, there is no need to intervene 介入 in any way to temper 緩和 his enthusiasm 熱心. Psychoanalysis harnesses 利用 the kind of excitement (libidinal energy) generated 產生by the analytic situation and the case of mistaken identity that it fosters 培養 ; it does not try to neutralize 中立 or dissipate 驅散it as certain other forms of treatment do.


When one of my supervisees 受督導者 said she was troubled by the fact that a male analysand of hers had told her, “Sometimes I think the only reason I get on the bus to come to therapy is because you’re good looking,” I replied, “At least you’ve got that going for you.” She later indicated to me that it was very helpful to her and to the therapy as well to realize that whatever aesthetic 美學 or erotic 性愛 interest brought her analysand to therapy was fine, as long as it inspired 啟發 him to engage in the work of exploring and changing his life.


When the analysand has this kind of positive transference to the analyst, the analyst strives to get the analysand to begin the laborious 費力的 process of the analysis out of love for her, to begin recalling certain parts of his past, as well as daydreams and fantasies 幻見 that he usually pays no attention to, and to begin associating to them. This is hard work, and the analysand needs all the motivation 動機 he can get.




June 19, 2011

Bruce Fink

“Free-floating Attention”

秦譯「懸浮注意」,彭譯「自由浮動的注意力」。有鑒於它是「自由聯想的對應物」a counterpart to free associations,雄伯認為保留「自由」兩字,較為貼切。

As soon as anyone deliberately 刻意地 concentrates 專注 his attention to a certain degree 某個程度, he begins to select from the material材料 before him; one point will be fixed 固定 in his mind with particular clearness 清楚 and some other will be correspondingly 對應 disregarded忽略, and in making this selection he will be following his expectations or inclinations 傾向. This, however. is precisely 確實 what must not be done. In making the selection, if he follows his expectations 期待he is in danger of never finding anything but what he already knows.
– Freud ( J 9 1 2/IJ958, p. 112)

—佛洛伊德 (1912/1958, 112 頁)

What does the analyst listen for? This question presumes 預先假定 that there is something in particular 特別 that the analyst should be listening for, whereas experienced analysts generally 一般 agree that no matter what they might expect to come out in any given 特定 analysis, they are always surprised by what they find.


Freud ( 1 9 1 2b/1958, p. 11 1 ) rightly recommended 推薦 that we approach each new case as though it were our first, in the sense that we should presume nothing about what will transpire 透露, employing 使用”evenly-suspended 平均懸置 attention,” also known as “evenly 平均 hovering盤旋 attention” or “free-floating attention,” so that we will be able to hear whatever appears in the analysand’s “free associations 聯想.”


Freud rightly recommended that we ( should )approach each new case as though it were our first,

Recommended 後面接子句,作「建議」「推薦」解,帶有假設法定「虛擬」語氣,子句裏的should 時常省略,動詞變成原形動詞。但是中譯時,應該將省略的should (應該)翻出。

Rightly 的意思是「理由充分地」for a good reason, 及「正確地」 in a correct or accurate way 彭譯取「正確地」。

「我們應該接近每一個新的個案,好像都是我們的第一次個案。」這句話說來容易做來難。就像我們永遠無法複製我們的「初戀」及「初夜」一般,「純真」 innocence 就是只有那一次,往後就是越來越麻木了。不過哀莫大於心死也不好。佛洛伊德建議的僅是「好像」,則是還可以勉為其難!

“Free-floating attention” is what allows us to hear what is new and different in what the analysand says–as opposed to 相對於simply hearing what we want to hear or expect in advance 預先 to hear.


We cultivate 培養 the practice 練習 of such attention (which is not at all easy to sustain 維持) as part of our attempt 企圖to recognize the otherness of the other, the other’s differences from ourselves. 13


But what exactly is “free-floating attention”? It is not a kind of attentiveness that latches on to 理解 one particular statement the analysand makes and–in the attempt to etch it 深印 in one’s mind, think it through, or connect it to other things —misses the analysand’s next statement.


It is rather an attentiveness that floats from point to point, from statement 陳述to statement, without necessarily trying to draw any conclusions from them, interpret 解釋them, put them all together, or
sum them all up.


It is an attentiveness 注意力 that grasps 理解at least one level of meaning and yet hears all the words and the way they are pronounced 發音as well, including speed, volume 音量, tone 音色, affect 情意, stumbling 結結巴巴, hesitation 猶豫, and so on.


Free-floating (or evenly hovering) attention is, as Freud ( 1 9 1 2b/1958, p. 1 1 2) said and Lacan (2006, p. 471) reiterated 重複, supposed to be the analyst’s counterpart 對應物 to the analysand’s “free association.”

第13 注釋

Yet one of the first things one notices 注意as a practitioner 從業者 is that the analysand’s associations seem to be anything but 絕非 free. The analysand finds himself obliged不得不 to dance circles around certain topics 主題 rather than 而不是 go directly toward them, or to veer away from 改變方向them altogether when the memories and thoughts associated with聯想 them are overly charged 過分負荷.


Bruce Fink

“Free-floating Attention”

Lacan (2006) ironized about 反諷 certain analysts’ search for a third ear (above all, Theodor Reik),with which to presumably 假定 hear an occult 奧秘 meaning, a meaning beyond the meanings that can already be found in the analysand’s speech:


But what need can an analyst have for an extra 額外 ear, when it sometimes seems that two are already too many, since he runs headlong 向前 into the fundamental misunderstanding brought on 導致 by the relationship of understanding?




the analysand’s speech 受分析者的「話語」,是指無意識的「話語」。

I repeatedly tell my students: “Don’t try to understand !” . . . May one of your ears become as deaf as the other one must be acute敏銳 . And that is the one that you should lend to listen for sounds and phonemes 音素, words, locutions 慣用語, and sentences, not forgetting pauses, scansions 韻律, cuts, periods 句點, and parallelisms 對比.
(p. 47 1 )


Lacan’s point here is that when the analyst becomes obsessed with understanding the meaning that the analysand is consciously trying to convey 傳達, with following all the intricacies 複雜of the story he is telling, she often fails to listen to the way in which the analysand conveys 傳達 what he says–to the words and expressions he uses and to his slips and slurs.


she often fails to listen to the way in which the analysand conveys 傳達 what he says–to the words and expressions he uses and to his slips and slurs.

She often fails to listen to the way in which the analysand conveys what he says.
She often fails to listen to the words and expressions he uses
She often fails to listen to his slips and slurs.

Better to plug up the ear that listens only for meaning, he suggests, than to render the ear that listens to speech itself superfluous by adding a third one. When, for example, the analysand begins a sentence with “on the one hand,” we can be pretty sure he has another “hand” in mind; yet by the time the first “hand” is laid out, he may well have forgotten the second “hand,” in which case he is likely to say, “Well anyway,” and blithely turn to something else.


The analyst must not, however, take it so lightly: What, indeed, was that other hand? Its importance derives from the very fact that it has been (at least momentarily) forgotten.



精神分析技術的基本原則 p13

June 16, 2011

Fundamentals of Psychoanalytic Technique

精神分析技術的基本原則 p13



布魯斯 芬克



Listening and Hearing




布魯斯 芬克 BRUCE FINK 的「精神分析技術的基本原則」 The Fundamentals of Psychoanalytic Technique,我才譯了幾頁,讀書會的C,就給我一份彭榮邦教授的翻譯手稿。由於彭教授的翻譯相當精確,而且文詞順暢,我再重譯似乎沒有什麼意義。於是臨機一動,改為注釋與對照。



The Story Makes No Sense (or Too Much Sense)






The unconscious is not about losing ones memory; it is about not recalling what one knows.

-Lacan (1 968b, p. 35)









The analysand tells a story about himself that is highly partial, in both senses of the term: He leaves out a great deal of the story–feeling that it is not important, germane, or flattering to himself, or having simply “forgotten” it and he presents the story as though he played a crystal-clear role in it as the hero, the victim, “the good guy,” or (less commonly) the jerk or criminal.







The story he tells is always piecemeal, fragmentary, riddled with gaps and holes, and essentially comprehensible to no one but him, for only he is privy to what has been left out (although sometimes he, too, is in the dark) and only he fully embraces his own perspective on his predicament.






Riddled with gaps and holes 充满差距与破绽


The story is essentially comprehensible to no one but him.

= No one but him can essentially comprehend the story.



Only he is privy to what has been left out (although sometimes he, too, is in the dark)



Privy to 的意思是「被告知某件秘密及通常不为人所知的事情 」(followed by ‘to’) informed about something secret or not generally known


Only he fully embraces his own perspective on his predicament.



Embrace 的意思是「接纳目标,意识形态,做法,方法,当著是自己的」Take up the cause, ideology, practice, method, of someone and use it as one’s own


Even then, he himself may be of two minds (or even more) about his own participation in the story: In session, he may try to convince the analyst, and thereby convince himself, that he was nothing but a victim in the situation, but he may not fully endorse that view in his heart of hearts.



甚至在当时,他对自己怎么参与了这个故事,他可能早有贰心( 甚至更多)。在晤谈中,他可能试着说服分析师,从而说服自己,他在当时的情境中只是个受害者,然而他自己却不见得全心全意地为这样的说法背书。



of two minds (about someone or something)

Fig. holding conflicting opinions about someone or something; being undecided about someone or something.




I am of two minds about whether I should go to the convention.




Part of the analyst’s job is to ensure that the part of him that does not endorse this view has a chance to speak its piece and gets a fair hearing, so to speak.






Speak your piece means “state your opinion or view.”



He’d planned to speak his piece at the next meeting.


( Merriam-Webster Learner Dictionary)



Often the story as told simply makes no sense to a listener, no matter how creative or intuitive, because too much is being left out; the analyst’s task, in such cases, is to draw the analysand out in an attempt to fill in the gaps (which recalls Freud’s notion that the main purpose of an analysis is to fill in the gaps in the analysand’s history ).






Often the story as told simply makes no sense to a listener, no matter how creative or intuitive, because too much is being left out.

= Often the story ,as it is told by the analysand,  simply makes no sense to a listener, no matter how creative or intuitive it may be, because he is leaving out too much .



The analyst’s task, in such cases, is to draw the analysand out in an attempt to fill in the gaps.




draw  someone out 的意思是「鼓励某人说出话」to encourage ( someone ) , esp. to talk,不是彭译的「引蛇出洞」。



Mary is very quiet; try to draw her out at the party.


( 见 Longman Dictionary of Phrasal Verbs )


in an attempt to fill in the gaps. (设法填补这些罅隙)




which recalls Freud’s notion that the main purpose of an analysis is to fill in the gaps in the analysand’s history




which 指的是前面的The analyst’s task



In other cases, however, the story is wrapped up very nicely and neatly, with a pretty bow on top, and yet it seems incommensurate with the affect attached to it, does not make any sense in the context of the analysand’s life as it has thus far been portrayed, or seems too cut and dried.





Wrapped up—包裹

Nicely and neatly—整齐漂亮

Incommensurate with—格格不入

The affect attached to it

= the affect which is attached to it




Cut and dried 的意思是「没有弹性,可预测出来,不可能適应改变,情感的压力」inflexible; predictable; not likely to adapt to change, emotional pressure


( 见 Oxford Dictionary of Current Idiomatic English)



Indeed, the analysand may seem extremely content with his explanation of the event in question and yet the analyst may wonder why, if he is so at peace with the explanation, it is being mentioned at all.








Something about it does not fit, does not make any sense-it is not a problem with the story itself, but with the fact that it is being told in an analytic session at this particular point in the therapy.











精神分析技術的基本原則 p12

June 15, 2011

Fundamentals of Psychoanalytic Technique
精神分析技術的基本原則 p12

布魯斯 芬克

Listening and Hearing

Getting caught up in the story being told is one of the biggest traps for new analysts and, not surprisingly, they get most easily caught up in the story the closer it seems to their own interests or the more closely it seems to concern or reflect upon them as individuals or clinicians.


Get caught up in 的意思是 「深深感到興趣並且忙碌於」to be deeply interested in and busy with

Getting caught in the story 是動名詞片語,充當is 的主詞

being told 是分詞片語,修飾前面的story,可改為形容詞子句,which is being told

Getting caught up in the story being told is one of the biggest traps for new analysts


Not surprisingly, they get most easily caught up in the story.
= It is not surprising that they get most easily caught up in the story.


Not surprisingly,they get most easily caught up in the story the closer it seems to their own interests or the more closely it seems to concern or reflect upon them as individuals or clinicians.

=Not surprisingly, when the story seems to be closer to analysts’ own interests, or the story seems to more closely concern or reflect upon analysts as individuals or clinicians, they get more easily caught up in the story.


這個句子容易混淆的地方在於「the more、、、the more」 的句型被倒置。一般的寫法是將the +比較級的副詞子句置前,the closer it seems to their own interests or the more closely it seems to concern or reflect upon them as individuals or clinicians,主要主句置後they get most easily caught up in the story。本句則是因為承接前面句子的關係,主要子句被放置在前,而the+比較級放置在後。中譯時,應該先從the+比較級的副詞子句翻譯,才符合「越是、、、越是、、、」的句型。

另外一個混淆的原因是Bruce Fink 將主要子句的比較級the more 改用most 來強調,這樣的用法是否合乎常規,還有待更多的例證。

What is most important to the analysand, especially at the beginning of the analysis, is that the analyst–like anyone else he talks to in other walks of life–grasp his point, the conceptual point he is trying to make.

What is most important to the analysand (對於受分析者最重要的事情)
名詞子句,充當後面的is ,當主詞

that the analyst grasp his point, the conceptual point he is trying to make


雄伯譯: 分析師應該瞭解他的觀點,他正在設法表達的觀點。

Grasp 是有「掌握」Hold firmly及「瞭解」Get the meaning of something解釋。依雄伯之見,對於「觀點」the conceptual point,「瞭解」應比「掌握」來的說得通。

What is most important to the analysand, especially at the beginning of the analysis, is that the analyst–like anyone else he talks to in other walks of life–grasp his point, the conceptual point he is trying to make.


仔細再審視,這個grasp 不加s 的道理,應該是帶有「虛擬」的語氣,grasp 前面省略should 的關係,


It is essential that the analyst should ( grasp)  his point.

It is important that the analyst should ( grasp) his point.

What is important is that the analyst should ( grasp) his point.



He rarely begins analysis with the explicit hope that the analyst will hear something in what he is saying that is different than the point he is consciously trying to get across.



that the analyst will hear something 名詞子句,充當the explicit hope 的同位語
what he is saying 名詞子句,充當介係詞in 的受詞
that is different than the point 形容詞子句,修飾前面的something
he is consciously trying to get across 形容詞子句,修飾前面的the point

get across 的意思是「讓人瞭解或接受」become understood or accepted

The analyst, on the other hand, must wean herself from listening in the conventional way and realize that it is often of far less importance to understand the story or point than it is to hear the way in which it is delivered.


Wean from 的意思是「使某人漸漸脫離(某個觀念,習慣,或惡友)」 to turn ( someone) gradually away from ( an idea, habit, bad companions, etc)


Free-floating attention is a practice–indeed, a discipline–designed to
teach us to hear without understanding .



To hear without understanding 跟前面的標題 deferring understanding (不急於理解)對應

Apart from the fact that understanding generally tends to bring the analyst herself front and center, introducing a plethora of imaginary phenomena (for example, comparing herself to the analysand and
worrying about her self-image as reflected back by the analysand’s speech, as I indicated earlier), there is often precious little that could be understood anyway in the analysand’s discourse. Why is that?



Apart from the fact 不僅是這個事實
Apart from 作「以及」as well as 解釋,不作「除外」except for 解釋
Apart from the cost, the hat doesn’t suit me.

Front and center 的意思是「處於最重要的位置」in or into the most important position
Plethora 過多的,多餘的The property of being extremely abundant

Precious little 的意思是「非常少」very little, 跟「值得」沒有關係
(見Oxford Dictionary of current Idiomatic English )

Precious 的意思是「非常地,極端地」very, extremely (The New American Heritage Dictionary of The English Language)

拉岡的discourse 非一般的「話語」,而是指「真理論述」。他分為Master discourse 主人真理論述, hysteric discourse 歇斯底里患者真理論述, university discourse 大學真理論述, psychoanalysis discourse 精神分析真理論述(見Jacques Lacan,The Other Side of Psychoanalysis)

布魯斯 芬克 BRUCE FINK 的「精神分析技術的基本原則」 The Fundamentals of Psychoanalytic Technique,我才譯了幾頁,讀書會的C,就給我一份彭榮邦教授的翻譯手稿。由於彭教授的翻譯相當精確,而且文詞順暢,我再重譯似乎沒有什麼意義。於是臨機一動,改為注釋與對照。

精神分析技術的基本原則 p6

June 14, 2011

Fundamentals of Psychoanalytic Technique
精神分析技術的基本原則 p6

布魯斯 芬克

Listening and Hearing


Listening for all this makes the analyst constitutionally incapable of hearing a great many things that the analysand says–first and foremost slips of the tongue, which, as they are often nonsensical, do not immediately reflect upon the analyst and thus are generally ignored by her.


listen for 的意思是「注意聽,為了要確定聽到的內容」 to pay attention so as to be sure of hearing

Listen for the moment when the music changes. 注意聽,聽音樂何時響起。

listen for all this 的 all this 是指前段所說When operating in the imaginary dimension of experience, the analyst is focused on her own self-image as reflected back to her by the analysand and hears what the analysand says only insofar as it reflects upon her.(當分析師在經驗的想像維度運時,她所關注的是由分析者所映照回來的自我意象,而分析者所說的話,她也聽到反映出自己的部分。)

constitutional的意思是「身心有關的」of a person’s body‘mind
a constitutional weakness 則是「身心的弱點」

constitutionally incapable of hearing a great many things
身心體質上無法聽到許多事情(彭譯為「根本無力去聽分析者說出來的許多東西」) 「身心體質上」與「根本」有段距離

first and foremost slips of the tongue, which, as they are often nonsensical, do not immediately reflect upon the analyst

which 是關係代名詞,代替slips of the tongue,充當do not immediately reflect upon the analyst 的主詞。彭譯:「其中最重要的是說溜嘴,由於說溜嘴往往沒有意思,分析師無法立即映照出些什麼。」analyst 在句子原來是受詞,現在變為主詞,理論上句子應該改為被動語態。

slips of the tongue do not immediately reflect upon the analyst「說溜嘴並沒有立即反映在分析者身上」,直接照英文的主動語態翻譯不行嗎?

When the analyst is operating primarily within the imaginary dimension or register, everything that cannot easily be compared with her own experiences (her own sense of self–in short, her own “ego,” as I shall use the term) goes unattended to and, indeed, often remains simply unheard?


within the imaginary dimension or register「在想像界的維度之內」,within是「之內」,不是「之上」。Imaginary 應該是指拉康的三個維度:「象徵界」the symbolic, 「想像界」the imaginary,「真實界」the real。

go unattended to 「沒有受到注意」的主詞,是第二行的everything,that cannot easily be compared with her own experiences 是形容詞子句,修飾everything

indeed 的意思是「的確」,in fact 才是「事實上」

Everything often remains simply unheard? 是「有聽,但是沒有聽進去」,不是「連聽都沒有聽到」。


7 Lacan (2006, p. 595) referred to this as the “dyadic relation,” by which he meant that the analytic relationship is construed in such cases as nothing more than a relationship between two egos.


拉岡心目中理想的分析關係應該是「四元關係」quadratic relation。也就是分析者,分析者的無意識,分析師,分析師的無意識四元關係的交叉互動。

A supervisee of mine once let a patient break off his therapy after a slight lifting of his deep depression.

When I asked her why she had not tried to keep him in therapy to see if his depression could be further dissipated, she explained that it seemed to her that there were good reasons to think life depressing. Isn’t some depression, she retorted, a sensible response to life in our times?


there were good reasons to think life depressing
「認為人生是令人沮喪,是具有充分的理由。」彭譯漏「good reasons」


I pointed out to her that, regardless of her theoretical perspective on the matter, she seemed to be assuming that her patient’s reasons for being depressed were the same as hers (or what she believed to be hers), when his might well have been entirely different from hers.


regardless of her theoretical perspective on the matter,
= whether her theoretical perspective on the matter is right or wrong

Regardless of 的用法跟 in spite of 或 despite 不一樣。In spite of 及 despite 引導的內容,會跟主要字句內容相反。但是regardless of 引導的內容卻是中性的。

In spite of their low intelligence, I did my best to educate them.
= Though their intelligence was very low, I did my best to educate them.

Regardless of their intelligence level, they are extremely difficult to educate.
= Whether their intelligence is high or low, they are extremely difficult to educate.

when his might well have been entirely different from hers.
= when his reasons for being depressed might well have been entirely different from her reasons for being depressed。

when 在這裏的解釋是「雖然」「儘管」although
She stopped trying, when she might have succeeded next time.

Might well 的意思「很有可能」to be likely to ,後面接完成式時態,代表對於過去的推測,所以我翻譯時,多加「本來」兩字,作為強調。

his 是所有格代名詞,充當句子的主詞。
Mine is a big family. = My family is a big family.

In comparing his reasons to her own, she was excluding or failing to hear the ways in which they potentially differed.


See Lacan’s ( 1 990) highly original take on sadness and depression as a moral failing or moral weakness, at times going as far as a “rejection of the unconscious” (p. 22), which is equivalent in this context to foreclosure (see Chapter 10).

請參閱拉岡高度原創性的觀點,他將悲傷和憂悒視為良心的失敗或良心的脆弱,有時甚至達到「對無意識的拒斥」的程度,而「對於無意識的拒斥」在此脈絡下相當於除權棄絕( foreclosure)。


See Lacan’s ( 1 990) highly original take on sadness and depression as a moral failing or moral weakness

首先要注意的是,highly original take 的這個take,是名詞,不是動詞,可譯為「嘗試」any attempt or try ,而不是彭譯的「觀點」(見The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language )

棄絕贖回( foreclosure) 是拉岡介紹的一個術語,有位學者就以它作為一篇論文的題目,要詳說當然不容易。簡單說,就是對於無意識的拒斥,僅限於潛抑作用repression階段,通常發生在神經症患者neurosis,棄絕贖回foreclosure則是發生在精神病患psychosis 身上,狀況比較嚴重。



June 14, 2011

For example, a “hmm” sound I occasionalIy make to indicate simply that
I have heard something an analysand has just said is sometimes interpreted
as a skeptical sound by an analysand who is not too comfortable with the
perspective he has been propounding–that is, he believes I am caIling his perspective into question.




I occasionalIy make 是形容詞子句,修飾前面的 a “humm” sound,應譯為:我偶爾發出的「嗯」聲音。而不是「偶而用來表示為」。

to ndicate simply「僅僅為了指示著」,不定詞片語,表目的,可改成 in order that I may indicate simply,,,,

that I have heard something 名詞子句,充當 indicate 的受詞

an analysand has just said 形容詞子句,前面省略一個that,修飾前面的something

is not too comfortable with the perspective 裏的is 的主詞是前面的a “hmm” sound (嗯的聲音)

perspective 「觀點」「看法」「視野」,大陸翻為「視角」。

an analysand who is not too comfortable with the perspective he has been propounding (對於他一直在提供考慮的觀點不太自在的受分析者)‘

is sometimes interpreted as a skeptical sound (有時被詮釋為可疑的聲音)

that is, he believes I am caIling his perspective into question.


Call into question的意思是「懷疑」doubt

I often have had no such intent when making that particular sound, but the “hmm” is sufficiently ambiguous that an analysand who is suspicious of his own motives or perspectives can “hear” it as a request for him to explore the latter.



when making that particular sound= when I am making that particular sound

I often have had no such intent
我並沒有這樣的意圖 他he intended meaning of a communication。「意圖」intent跟「意思」meaning,有段距離。

an analysand who is suspicious of his own motives or perspectives

can “hear” it as a request for him to explore the latter.

it 指的是前面的“ hmm ” 「嗯」的聲音。 彭譯漏譯「for him」及「the latter 」。him 指的是受分析者,而the latter 指的是his own motives or perspectives(自己的動機或看法)

He projects his own suspicions onto me, and his own suspicions can only come to the fore and be discussed when they are attributed to me first.




Only,,,when they are attributed to me first.


they 指his own suspicions (他自己的懷疑),attribute to 歸屬於,或歸咎於

come to the fore 的意思「成為重要或受人注意」「扮演重要地位 」to be or become important and noticed by people; to play an important part,不是彭譯的「浮上枱面」

sufficiently、、、that 有點類似so、、、that 及such、、、that 的副詞子句,that 是連接詞,引導副詞子句,表示結果。有sufficiently 就不再用
so 或 such 。這是蠻特殊的句法。

布魯斯 芬克 BRUCE FINK 的「精神分析技術的基本原則」 The Fundamentals of Psychoanalytic Technique,我才譯了幾頁,讀書會的C,就給我一份彭榮邦教授的翻譯手稿。由於彭教授的翻譯相當精確,而且文詞順暢,我再重譯似乎沒有什麼意義。於是臨機一動,改為注釋與對照。