Posts Tagged ‘null’

客体关系

June 26, 2014

THE SEMINAR OF

JACQUES LACAN

拉康研讨班

Edited by Jacques-Alain Miller

亚伦、米勒编辑

BOOK IV

第四研讨班

The Object Relation 1956-1957

客体关系 1956-1957

 

TRANSLATED WITH NOTES BY

L. V. A ROCHE

英译及注释者:洛基

 

CONTENTS

内容

 

A THEORY OF OBJECT LACK

客体欠缺的理论

 

I Introduction导论

II The three forms of object lack客体欠缺的三种形式

III The signifier and the Holy Spirit能指与神圣精神

IV The dialectic of frustration挫折的辩证法

V  On bundling as analysis, and its consequences

   论契合作为精神分析及其结果

 

PERVERSE PATHS OF DESIRE

欲望的变态途径

 

VI  The primacy of the phallus and the young homosexual girl

    阳具的原初性与年轻的同性恋女孩

VII 1.:, A Child is Being Beaten and the young homosexual girl

    小孩正在被打与年轻同性恋女孩

VIII WS Dora and the young homosexual girl

     朵拉与年轻同性恋女孩

 

THE FETISH OBJECT

物化的客体

 

DC The function of the veil

    面纱的功能

X Identification with the phallus

   阳具的认同

XI  The phallus and the unsatiated mother

    阳具与无法满足的母亲

 

A THEORY OF OBJECT LACK

客体欠缺的理论

 

I

INTRODUCTION

导引

The Z-shaped schema.

Z-形状的基模

 

The object, lost and refound.

客体,丧失及重新找到

 

珍珠

The object, anxiety, the hole.

客体,焦虑,空洞

 

The fetish and the phobic object.

物神化与恐惧的客体

 

This year we shall speak on a topic to which the historical evolution of

psychoanalysis, or what is thus named, might give a central position in

theory and in practice, whether in a way that is explicit or not.

 

今年我们将谈论的题目,是精神分析的历史的进展,或因此被给予命名的题目。这个题目在理论及实践可能具有中心的位置,无论是其方式明白表达与否。

 

This topic is the object relation.

 

这个题目就是客体关系

 

Why did I not choose that when we began these seminars, since it was

already current, primary, critical? Precisely for the reason which motivates

the second part of my title — and Freudian structures.

 

为什么当我们开始这些研讨班时,我并没有选择那个题目,既然它当时已经存在,作为初级及关键性?确实是因为触发我的标题的第二部分:弗洛依德的结构。

 

This topic could be treated, in effect, only after a certain distance had

been taken on the question. We had first to consider the structures in

which Freud has shown us that analysis takes place and operates,

especially the .complex structure of the relation between the two subjects

present in analysis, the analysand, and the analyst. It is to this that our

three years of commentary and criticism of Freud’s texts have been

dedicated, as I shall recall for you briefly.

 

实际上,只有针对这个问题保持距离,这个题目才能够被处理。我们首先必须考虑弗洛依德告诉我们的这个结构,精神分析发生与运作的这个结构,特别是存在于精神分析的两个主体之间的关系的复杂结构,分析者与分析家。我不妨简短地提醒你们,我们三年来的评论于批评弗洛依德的文本,就一直致力于这一点。

 

 

The first year dealt with the very elements of the technical management

of the cure, that is, with the ideas of transference and resistance. The

second year was concerned with the foundation of the Freudian experience

and discovery, namely, the idea of the unconscious, which I believe I have

sufficiently shown to be what obliged Freud to introduce the principles,

literally paradoxical on the dialectical plane, which figure in Beyond thePleasure Principle. Finally, during the course of the third year, I gave you aclear example of the absolute necessity of isolating that essential

articulation of symbolism which is called the signifier, in order to

understand anything at all, analytically speaking, of the strictly paranoiacfield of the psychoses.

 

第一年用在处理治疗的技术管理的元素,也就是,移情与抗拒的观念。第二年专注于弗洛依德的精神分析经验与发现的基础,也就是无意识的观念。我相信我已经充分表达它,作为是弗洛依德不得不介绍的那些原则,实质上在辩证法的层面是个悖论。对于这个绝对的必要,我曾经给出一个清楚的例子,要将所谓的能指的象征主义的那种基本表达孤立出来,为了理解任何东西。就精神分析而言,那就是精神病纯属妄想症的领域。

 

 

 

At the end of these three years of criticism, we are thus armed with a

certain number of terms and schemas. The spatiality of the latter is not to

be taken in the intuitive sense of the term schema, but in another perfectlylegitimate, sense, which is topological — it is not a matter of

localizations, but of the relations between places, interposition,

for example, or succession, sequence. Our elaboration culminates in a

schema that we can call the schema, which is the following –

 

在批评的这三年结束时,我们因此具备有某些的术语与基模。基模的空间无法用术语与基模的直觉意义来接纳,而是用另外一个非常合理的意义,也就是拓扑学的意义。这并不是各别的位置的问题,而是各个位置之间的关系的问题。譬如,交互位置,或连续位置,系列位置。我们的建构以我们所谓的这个基模,最为淋漓尽致。这个基模如下:

 

 

[Diagram, p. 12.]

(Es) S . . o’ other

(Ego) o . . 0 Other

 

THE SCHEMA

基模

 

This schema initially provides a notation of the relation of the subject

to the Other. As it is constituted at the beginning of analysis, it is a

relation, of virtual speech by  which he subject receives his own message

from the Other, in the form of speech which is unconscious.

 

这个基模最初供应主体跟大他者的关系的铭记。因为它在精神分析的开始被建构,这是虚拟言说的关系。主体凭借虚拟言说,接收他自己从大他者传递过来的讯息。

形式上是无意义的言说。

 

 This

message is, forbidden him, it is profoundly misconstrued [

meconnu] it is deformed, arrested, intercepted, because of the

interception of the imaginary relation

 

between o and o’, between the ego and the other, which is its typical

object. The imaginary relation, which is essentially an alienated relation,

interrupts, slows down, inhibits, usually inverts, and profoundly

misconstrues the speech relation between the subject and the Other, the

great Other, in so far as this is another subject, a subject par excellence

capable of deceiving.

 

这个讯息,由于被禁止给他,深深地被错误解释。这个讯息受到扭曲,组碍,拦截,因为在o o’之间,在自我与他者之间的想像的关系受到拦截,因为他者是自我的客体。想像的关系基本上是异化的关系。这个关系会干涉,缓慢,潜抑,通常还会逆转,深深地错误解释主体与大他者,这位伟大的大他者之间的言说关系。因为这是另外一个主体,能够欺骗的无与伦比的主体。

 

 

2

 

It is not in vain to have introduced this schema into analytic experience,

seeing how that is formulated today by an ever increasing number of

analysts, who give prevalence in analytic theory to the object

without, however, sufficiently commenting on it.

 

将这个基模介绍进入精神分析经验并非徒劳。因为我们看到,今天越来越多的精神分析家如何说明那个基模。那些精神分析家在精神分析理论里,优先探讨客体,可是,并没有充分地给予评论。

 

They recenter the

dialectic of the pleasure principle and the reality principle upon it, and

they found analytic progress upon a rectification of the subject’s relation to

the object, considered as a dual relation, which is, they then say, in

speaking of the analytic situation, extremely simple. This relation of

subject to object, which tends more and more to occupy the center of

analytic theory, is precisely what we shall put to test.

 

他们将快乐原则与现实原则对它的辨证法重新定为核心。他们将精神分析的进步的基础,建立在主体与客体的关系的矫正上。这个关系被认为是双重关系。他们因此说,当我们谈论到精神分析的情境时,这个双重关系极端简单。主体与客体的这个关系越来越倾向于佔据精神分析理论的核心。这个关系确实就是我们将要检验的的东西。

 

 

Once the object relation considered as dual is seen to correspond

precisely to line o-o’ of our schema, can one thus construct a

satisfactory whole from the phenomena offered to observation in analytic

experience? Does this instrument all by itself allow us to reply to the

facts? Can the more complex schema that we have suggested be put aside,

indeed, must it be discarded?

 

被认为是双重的客体关系,一旦被视为确实对应于我们基模的o-o’这条线,我们因此就能够根据精神分析经验提供作为观察的这些现象,来建构一个令人满意的整体吗?这个工具的本身让我们能够回答这些事实吗?我们曾经建议过的比较复杂的基模能够被搁置一旁吗?的确。这个基模必须被抛弃吗?

 

That the object relation has become, at least in appearance, the principal

theoretical element in analytical explanation, is something that I can

demonstrate to you from a recently published Collective work, to which, infact, the term collective applies particularly well.’ I cannot say that I am

inviting you to delve into it. You will see object relations overvalued and

promoted from one end to the other in a way that is not always very

satisfying in its articulation, but whose monotony and uniformity are

surely striking. You will see the object relation promoted in art article

entitled Evolution de la psychanalyse, and, as the final term in this

evolution, you will see in the article, La Clinique psychanalytique, a

presentation of clinical work which centers it entirely upon the object

relation. Perhaps I might give you some idea of where such a presentation

can lead.

 

至少在外表上,客体关系已经成为精神分析解释的主要的理论因素.这是我能够跟你们展示的东西,根据最近出版的集体的著作。实际上,「集体」这个术语应用在那里特别贴切。你们将会看出客体关系被过分高估,而且从一个极端被提升到另一个极端。使用的方式在表达上未必令人满意。但是它们的单调与步调一致确实是令人注目。有一篇题名「精神分析的进化」的艺术文章,你们将会看出客体关系被大力提倡,并且作为进化的最后术语。还有一篇文章,题名「临床精神分析」,你们将会看到临床工作的呈现将它的核心集中于客体关系。或许我可以告诉你们,这样的呈现会导致什么?

 

3

 

Taken as a whole, the collection is quite striking. One sees analytic

practitioners try to organize their thinking and the understanding they

might have of their own experience around the object relation, without its

seeming to give them full and complete satisfaction, but, on the other

hand, not without its orienting their practice and penetrating it most

profoundly. One cannot say that the fact that they conceive their

experience in these terms is without consequence in their modes of

intervention, in the orientation given to the analysis, and also its results.

 

「集体」,就整体而言,是相当令人注目的。我们看见精神分析的执业者尝试组织他们对自己的经验的思想与理解,环绕这个客体关系。但是这样的组织思想与理解并没有让他们充分及完整地满意。在另一方面,却仍然让他们的执业有所取向,并且相当深刻地透视。我们无法说,他们用这些术语构想他们的经验,作为介入的模式,是一无所得,作为被给予精神分析,也给予精神分析的结果的取向。

 

That is what one cannot possibly fail to recognize [meconnaitre], in simply

reading them. Analytic theory and practice, it has always been said, cannot

be dissociated, and from the moment that one conceptualizes the

experience in a particular way, it is inevitable that it will also be directed in

that way. Certainly, the practical results can only be partially glimpsed.

 

那就是我们一定会体认出来的东西,当我们仅在阅读它们时。据说,精神分析理论与实践无法被拆离,并且从我们以特殊方式构想精神分析经验的时刻开始,它无可避免地也被以那种方式引导。的确,精神分析实践的结果,有时仅能部分被瞥见。

 

 

To introduce the question of the object relation, and more precisely the

question whether or not it is legitimate and sound to give it a central place

in analytic theory, I shall remind you at least briefly of what this concept

owes, or does not owe, to Freud himself. I shall do so because for us

starting with a commentary on Freud is a sort of guide, and almost a

technical limitation that we have imposed upon ourselves.

 

为了介绍客体关系的问题,更贴切地说,为了介绍这个问题:在精神分析理论,给予客体关系一个中心的位置是否合理的问题。我至少将简短地提醒你们,这个构想要归功于弗洛依德自己的什么东西。我将这样做,因为对于我们,从凭论弗洛依德作为开始,是一种引导,几乎是我们赋加给我们自己的一种技术的限制。

 

Moreover, this year I have sensed in you some questions, if not

disquiet, as to whether I would or would not start off with Freudian texts.

And no doubt it is very difficult, with regard to the object relation, to start

from Freud’s texts themselves, because the object relation is not in them. I

am of course speaking of what is here very strictly taken to be a deviation

in analytic theory. I must therefore start with recent texts and at the same

time, with a critique of their positions. On the other hand, there is no

doubt that we must ultimately refer to the Freudian position, and, at the

same time, we cannot avoid dealing, even if very rapidly, with what

revolves around the very notion of the object in the fundamental themes

that are strictly Freudian.

 

而且,今年我已经在你们身上感觉到一些问题,甚至是令人不安的问题,关于我是否愿意从弗洛依德的文本开始。无可置疑地,关于客体关系,要从弗洛依德文本自身开始相当困难。因为客体关系并没有在那些文本里面。当然,我是谈论在精神分析理论,在此严格被认为是偏离的东西。因此,我必须从最近的文本开始,同时从批判这些文本的立场开始。在另一方面,无可置疑地,我们最后必须提到弗洛依德的立场。同时,我们无法避免去处理,即使是快速地处理,环绕客体的这个观念的东西,严格来说,这些是弗洛依德学派的基本主题。

 

4

 

We cannot do that at the beginning in a way that is fully spelled out. It

is precisely at the end that we shall come back to it, and that we shall be

able to articulate it.

 

我们无法从一开始,就以充分解释的方式来从事。确实在结束时,我们才会回到它。我们才能够表达它。

 

I want, therefore, simply to make a brief reminder that this would not

even be conceivable if there were not behind us three years of

collaboration in textual analysis, and if we had not already encountered

the theme of the object in its various forms.

 

我因此仅是简短地提醒,假如在我们背后,没有前三年对于文本分析的合作,假如我们不是已经遭遇到具有各种形式的客体的这个主题,我们甚至无法构想要从事它。

 

1

Freud, of course, speaks of the object. The final part of Three Essays on

the Theory of Sexuality is called precisely “The Finding of an Object”, “Die

Objektfindung”. One is implicitly speaking of the object each time that the

notion of reality comes into play.

 

当然,弗洛依德谈论到客体。「性学理论三论文」的最后部分,确实可被称为是「客体的发现」。每当现实界的观念运作时,我们暗示地谈论这个客体。

 

 

5

One speaks of it in yet a third waywhenever the ambivalence of certain fundamental relations is brought

into play — namely, the fact that the subject makes himself an object for the

other, the fact that there is a particular type of relation in which reciprocity

with regard to an object is patent, and is even a constituent fact.

 

 

每当某些基本的关系的爱恨交加被运作时,我们还以第三种方式谈论客体。换句话说,主体让他自己成为他者的客体的这个事实。关于客体,互惠成为专有的特殊种类的关系的这个事实,这甚至是结构组织的事实。

 

 

I would like to put the strongest emphasis on the three modes in which

notions relative to the object before us appear. If you look at Chapter Three

of the Three Essays, you will see something which was already there at the

time that Freud wrote the Entwurf, a text which, I remind you, was only

published by a sort of historical accident, for not only did Freud prefer not

to publish it, but one might say that it was published against his will. Still,

in looking at this first sketch of his psychology, we find the same formula

with regard to the object.

 

我想要特别强调这三种模式,在我们之前跟客体相关的观念出现的三种模式。假如你们阅读「性学理论三论文」的第三章,你们将会发现某件东西已经在那里,就是弗洛依德写作Entwurf(筹划)的文本时。我提醒你们,「筹划」这个文本仅是由于历史的意外才被出版。因为不仅弗洛依德宁可不要出版,而且我们可以说,是违背他的意志被出版。可是,当我们阅读他的心里的这个首次素描,我们找到跟客体相关的相同的公式。

 

 

 

Freud insists that for man, every means to

finding the object is, and is ever, only the pursuit of a drive [tendance] in

which what is at stake is a lost object, an object to be refound.

 

         弗洛依德坚持,每个发现客体的工具仅是,而且永远仅是冲动的追寻。在那里,岌岌可危的东西是失落的客体,应该被重新找到的客体。

 

It is not at all a matter of the object considered in modern theory as

being the fully satisfying object, the typical object, the object par excellence,

the harmonious object, the object that founds man in an adequate reality,

in the reality which gives proof of maturity — the famous genital object.

 

这根本就不是从现代理论考虑的客体的问题,作为充分令人满足的客体,这种典型的客体,无与伦比的客体,和谐的客体,在充足的现实界作为人的基础的客体,在给予成熟的证据的现实界—这个著名的生殖的客体。

 

 

It

is striking to see that at the moment when he fabricates the theory of

instinctual development as it was revealed in the earliest analytic

experiences, Freud indicates that the object is grasped by means of a search

for the lost object. The object that corresponds to an advanced state of

instinctual maturation is an object found again, the refound object of early

weaning, the object that first formed the point of attachment in the child’s

earliest satisfactions.

 

令人注目地,我们看见,弗洛依德在最早期的精神分析经验显示,他建构本能理论的发展的理论时,他显示,对于客体的掌握,是凭借对于失落客体的寻找。对应于本能成熟时的高度状态的客体,是再次被找到的客体,早期短奶的重新找到的客体,在小孩最早期的满足时,情感依附点首次被形成的客体。

 

It is clear that a discordance is established by the mere fact of this

repetition. A nostalgia binds the subject to a lost object, and directs the

entire effort of the search. It marks the newly found object

with the sign of

an impossible repitition since this is precisely not the same object — it could

never be.

 

显而易见,仅是重复的这个事实,就证明不和谐的存在。主体的怀旧跟失落的客体联接一块,并且引导这种寻求的整个努力。它用不可能的重复的记号,标示最近被找到的客体。因为这并不是相同的客体—它永远不可能是相同的客体。

 

 

6

 

The primacy of this dialectic puts a fundamental tension at the

center of the subject-object relation, which means that what is sought is

not sought in the same way as what will be found.

 

这个辩证的原初性将基本的紧张摆放在主体与客体的关系的核心。这意味着,所被寻求的东西,跟将会被找到的东西,方式并不一样。

 

It isthe search for a satisfaction past and outgrown that the new object is

sought and it is found and embraced elsewhere it was sought.

 

新的客体被寻求,就是为了寻求过去与瀰漫的满足。它在以前被找到地方之外被找到,被接纳。

 

There is a fundamental distance introduced by the essentially conflictual

element which all search for the object entails. This is the first form in

which the relation to the object appears in Freud.

 

这个基本的冲突的因素介绍一个基本的距离,对于这个客体的一切寻找涵盖这个因素。这就在弗洛依德那里,跟客体关系出现的第一个形式。

 

雄伯译

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

https://springhero.wordpress.com

精神分析中的侵凌性

May 24, 2014

精神分析中的侵凌性

雅克、拉康

 

THESIS IV

Aggressivity is the correlative tendency of a mode of

identification that we call narcissistic, and which

determines the formal structure of man’s ego and of the

register of entities characteristic of his world.

 

论点之四

侵凌性与我们所谓的自恋的认同模式的倾向息息相关。这个认同模式决定人的自我的正式结构,以及决定作为人的世界的特征的各种实体的铭记的结构。

 

The subjective experience of analysis immediately inscribes its results in concrete

psychology. Let us indicate simply what it brings to the psychology of the emotions by

showing the signification common to states as diverse as phantasmatic fear, anger, active

sorrow, or psychasthenic fatigue.

 

精神分析是主体性经验,在具体心理学,精神分析经验立即铭记它的结果。让我们仅是指出,精神分析经验对情感心理学的贡献。让我们揭示这些状态共通的这个意义。这些状态种类繁多,诸如幻想的恐惧、奋怒、涌动的悲伤、或是精神衰弱的疲乏。

 

To pass now from the subjectivity of intention to the notion of a tendency to

aggression is to make the leap from the phenomenology of our experience to

 

现在,我们从意图的主体性,转而谈论到侵凌性倾向的观念。这等于是从我们精神分析经验的现象学,跳跃到元心理学。

 

But this leap manifests nothing more than a requirement of thought which, in order to

objectify the register of aggressive reactions, and given its inability to seriate this leap in

a quantitative variation, must understand it in a formula of equivalence. This is the use

we make of it in the notion of libido.

 

但是这种跳跃仅是证明思想有此要求。为了将侵凌性的各种反应的铭记客观化,并且考虑到这种客观化并无法用数量的变数,将这种跳跃排成系列,思想必须用类同的公式来理解它。在解释生命力比多的观念时,我们就是採用这种跳跃的方法。

 

The aggressive tendency proves to be fundamental in a certain series of significant

states of the personality, namely, the paranoid and paranoiac psychoses.

 

在人格的某种系列的重要的状况,譬如,类偏执狂与偏执狂精神病,倾凌性倾向证明是至关紧要。

 

In my work I have emphasized that one could co-ordinate by their strictly parallel

seriation the quality of the aggressive reaction to be expected from a particular form of

paranoia with the stage of mental genesis represented by the delusion that is symptomatic

of this same form. A relation that appears even more profound when – I have shown this

in the case of a curable form, self-punishing paranoia – the aggressive act resolves the

delusional construction.

 

在我的著作中,我曾经强调,我们能够凭借这些重要状况的严格并列的系列,将特别形态的类偏执狂,所能预期的侵凌性反应的性质,跟具有相同形态的病征的妄想症所代表的精神病因的阶段,彼此协调对照。当侵凌性的行动显示具有妄想症的结构时,它们之间有一层看起来甚至是更加深刻的关系—在自我惩罚的个案,这是可治疗的形态,我曾经揭示这个关系。

 

Thus the aggressive reaction is seriated in a continuous manner, from the sudden,

unmotivated outburst of the act, through the whole gamut of belligerent forms, to the cold

war of interpretative demonstrations, paralleled by imputations of noxiousness which, not

to mention the obscure kakon to which the paranoid attributes his alienation from all

living contact, rising in stages from a motivation based on the register of a highly

primitive organicism (poison), to a magical one (evil spells), a telepathic one (influence),

a lesional one (physical intrusion), an abusive one (distortion of intention), a

dispossessive one (appropriation of secrets), a profanatory one (violation of intimacy), a

juridical one (prejudice), a persecutive one (spying and intimidation), one involving

prestige (defamation and attacks on one’s honour), and revenge (damage and

exploitation).

 

因此,我将侵凌性的反应,用连续方式排成系列。从突然的,无缘无故的行为的爆发,到各式各样的好鬥的形态,到以示威作为说明的冷战。除外,还有各种诋毁身心的诬蔑。更不用说是,类偏执狂将自己与各种人际来往的疏离,归咎于含混的劣性反应(kakon)。这些诋毁身心的诬蔑,分成几个阶段,先是高度原始的有机体(毒药)的铭记为基础的动机,然后是魔法的动机(邪恶的符咒),灵异的动机(著魔),病变的动机(生理的侵人),凌虐的动机(变态的意图),剥夺财物的动机(秘密的侵占),亵渎的动机(亲密性的背叛),司法的动机(偏见),迫害的动机(侦查与恫吓),维护尊严的动机(诬蔑与攻击人的荣誉),以及报复(损害与剥削)。

 

 

I have shown that in each case this series, in which we find all the successive

envelopes of the biological and social status of the person, retains the original

organization of the forms of the ego and of the object, which are also affected by this

series in their structure, even to the spatial and temporal categories in which the ego and

the object are constituted, experienced as events in a perspective of mirages, as affections

with something stereotypical about them that suspends the workings of the ego/object

 

我曾经显示,在每个个案,这些系列保留自我与客体的形态的原先组织。在这个系列里,我们发现这个人的生物与社会层面,都连续性地被涵盖在内。在这个结构里,自我与客体的形态也受到这个系列的影响,甚至影响到空间与时间的范畴。在时空范畴里,自我与客体被形成,被经验,作为幻影视象的各种事件,作为某个典型风格的东西的各种情怀。这个典型风格的东西将自我与客体的辩证的运作悬置起来。

 

Janet, who demonstrated so admirably the signification of feelings of persecution as

phenomenological moments in social behaviour, did not explore their common character,

which is precisely that they are constituted by a stagnation of one of these moments,

similar in their strangeness to the faces of actors when a film is suddenly stopped in mid-action.

 

雅内,如此令人赞赏地证明,受到迫害的各种感觉的意义,作为社会行为的现象的时刻。他并没有探索被迫害的各种感觉的共同特性。这个共同特性确实就是,受到迫害的各种感觉,由社会行为的现象的其中一个时刻的停滞所形成。受到迫害的这些感觉的怪异,类似影片放映中途突然停顿的那些演员的脸孔。

 

Now, this formal stagnation is akin to the most general structure of human knowledge:

that which constitutes the ego and its objects with attributes of permanence, identity, and

substantiality, in short, with entities or ‘things’ that are very different from the Gestalten

that experience enables us to isolate in the shifting field, stretched in accordance with the

lines of animal desire.

 

现在,这个形式的停滞类似人类知识的最通常的结构:形成自我与自我的客体的东西,具有永恒,身份与实质的属性,总之,这些实体或「东西」,跟精神分析经验让我们在这个转换的领域,能够孤立出来的格式塔行为,依照动物欲望的脉脉延伸出来的格式塔行为,相当地不同。

 

In fact, this formal fixation, which introduces a certain rupture of level, a certain

discord between man’s organization and his Umwelt, is the very condition that extends

indefinitely his world and his power, by giving his objects their instrumental polyvalence

and symbolic polyphony, and also their potential as defensive armour.

 

事实上,这个形式的固著介绍层面的某种断裂,人的机体组织与他的外在世界之间,有某种的不和谐。这个形式的固著就是这个情况不确定地延伸他的世界与他的力量。形式的固著给予他的各种客体,拥有工具性的多重价值与象征的多重声音,以及它们的潜力,作为防卫的盔甲。

 

What I have called paranoic knowledge is shown, therefore, to correspond in its more

or less archaic forms to certain critical moments that mark the history of man’s mental

genesis, each representing a stage in objectifying identification.

 

我所谓的偏执狂的知识因此被显示,以它相当过时的形式,跟某种关键时刻互相对应。这些关键时刻标示人的精神的开始存在的历史,每一个时刻代表一个阶段,让认同客观化。

 

By simple observation we can obtain a glimpse of these different stages in the child’s

development. A Charlotte Bühler, an Elsa Köhler, and, following in their footsteps, the

Chicago School have revealed several levels of significative manifestations; but only the

analytic experience can give them their true value by making it possible to reintegrate the

subjective relation into them.

 

凭借简单观察,我们就能够获得瞥见在小孩的发展的这些不同的阶段。夏洛特、布勒,埃尔泽、科勒,以及效法他们的芝加哥学派,都曾经揭露好几个具有指标性的展示的层面。但是仅有精神分析经验能够对于这些展示的层面,赋予它们真实的价值,凭借将主体的关系跟它们重新融合一块成为可能。

 

The first level shows us that experience of oneself in the earliest stage of childhood

develops, in so far as it refers to one’s counterpart, from a situation experienced as

undifferentiated. Thus about the age of eight months, we see in these confrontations

between children (which, if they are to be fruitful, must be between children whose age

differential is no more than two and a half months) those gestures of fictitious actions by

which a subject reconducts the imperfect effort of the other’s gesture by confusing their

distinct application, those synchronies of spectacular captation that are all the more

remarkable in that they precede the complete co-ordination of the motor apparatuses that

they bring into play.

 

第一个层面跟我们显示,儿童最早阶段,对于自己的经验的发展,是根据经验作为没有差别化的经验的情境,因为这个经验跟自己的经验相关。因此在大约八个月的年纪,我们在儿童之间的这些冲突,看见那些虚构的行动的姿态,(这些冲突若是要有成果,它们必须是在年纪差异仅是两个半月的儿童之间的冲突。.凭借那些虚构的行动的姿态,主体重新从事另外一个主体的这个不完美的努力。他混淆那些姿态的清楚的运用,混淆戏剧性的攫取的同时发生。这些同时发生更加引人注意,因为它们早先于它们触动的动力工具的完整协调。

 

Thus the aggressivity that is manifested in the retaliations of taps and blows cannot be

regarded solely as a playful manifestation of the exercise of strengths and their

employment in the mapping of the body. It must be understood in an order of broader coordination:

one that will subordinate the functions of tonic postures and vegetative

tension to a social relativity – in this regard, one might mention Wallon’s remarkable

work, which has drawn our attention to the prevalence of such a social relativity in the

expressive constitution of the human emotions.

 

在轻拍与打击的各种报复所展示的这个侵凌性,不能仅是被看作是力量的运用的遊戏展示,或是他们在探知身体的运用。这个侵凌性必须从更宽阔的协调的秩序来理解:这个侵凌性将自觉的姿态与不自觉的紧张的功能,隶属于社会的相对性。关于这点,我们可以推荐瓦隆的出色的研究。他的研究让我们注意到,对于人类情感的生动的形成,社会相对性具有优势力量。

 

Furthermore, I believed myself that I could show that on such occasions the child

anticipates on the mental plane the conquest of the functional unity of his own body,

which, at that stage, is still incomplete on the plane of voluntary motility.

 

而且,我自己相信,我能够揭示,在这样的场合,儿童在精神层面预期他自己身体的功能的一致性能够被克服。在这个阶段,他自己的身体依旧是不完整的,从自觉动力的层面而言。

 

What we have there is a first captation by the image in which the first stage of the

dialectic of identifications can be discerned. It is linked to a Gestalt phenomenon, thechild’s very early perception of the human form, a form which, as we know, holds the

child’s interest in the first months of life, and even, in the case of the human face, from

the tenth day.

 

在此我们拥有的东西,是初次由这个意象所攫取。在这个意象中,认同的辩证法的第一个阶段被辨识出来。它跟格式塔的现象息息相关。儿童对于人类形体的早期知觉,据我们所知,在诞生的前几个月,人类的形体吸引儿童的興趣。就人的脸孔而言,甚至第十天就吸引儿童的注意。

 

But what demonstrates the phenomenon of recognition, which involves

subjectivity, are the signs of triumphant jubilation and playful discovery that characterize,

from the sixth month, the child’s encounter with his image in the mirror.

 

但是牵涉到主体性的认知的现象,所展示出来的东西,则是得意洋洋与興高采烈的发现自己的迹象。这是从第六个月开始,儿童在镜中遭遇自己的意象表现的特色。

 

This behaviour

contrasts strikingly with the indifference shown even by animals that perceive this image,

the chimpanzee, for example, when they have tested its objectal vanity, and it becomes

even more apparent when one realizes that it occurs at an age when the child, as far as

instrumental intelligence is concerned, is backward in relation to the chimpanzee, which

he catches up with only at eleven months.

 

跟动物感知这个意象时所显示的冷漠,这个行为成为鲜明对照。譬如,当黑猩猩被测试它作为客体的虚荣心时。更加显而易见的是,当我们体会到,这个行为发生的年纪,就工具的智慧而言,儿童比起黑猩猩,相对地迟缓。仅是在十一个月时,儿童才迎头赶上黑猩猩。

 

What I have called the mirror stage is interesting in that it manifests the affective

dynamism by which the subject originally identifies himself with the visual Gestalt of his

own body: in relation to the still very profound lack of co-ordination of his own motility,

it represents an ideal unity, a salutary imago; it is invested with all the original distress

resulting from the child’s intra-organic and relational discordance during the first six

months, when he bears the signs, neurological and humoral, of a physiological natal

 

我所谓的镜像阶段,有趣之处在于它展示情感的动力结构。凭借这个情感动力结构,主体最初认同他自己的身体的视觉的格式塔。相对地,他自己的活动力量的协调还相当欠缺。镜像阶段代表一种理想的一致性,一种有益身心的自我形象。在最初的六个月,镜像阶段被投注各种最初的痛苦,因为儿童的内部有机体与相关的不协调所造成的最初的痛苦。在最初的六个月,儿童带着新生胎儿生理早熟的迹象,神经与性情的迹象。

 

It is this captation by the imago of the human form, rather than an Einfühlung the

absence of which is made abundantly clear in early infancy, which, between the ages of

six months and two and a half years, dominates the entire dialectic of the child’s

behaviour in the presence of his similars.

 

在六个月与两岁半年纪之间,在他的类似者面前,支配儿童行为的整个演变过程的,就是人类形体的自我形象的这个攫取,而不是移情作用。在婴儿早期,移情作用的欠缺是显而易见。

 

During the whole of this period, one will record

the emotional reactions and the articulated evidences of a normal transitivism. The child

who strikes another says that he has been struck; the child who sees another fall, cries.

Similarly, it is by means of an identification with the other that he sees the whole gamut

of reactions of bearing and display, whose structural ambivalence is clearly revealed in

his behaviour, the slave being identified with the despot, the actor with the spectator, the

seduced with the seducer.

 

在这整个时期,我们将会记录正常的「转嫁移情」transitivism 的情感的反应与表达出来的各种证据。小孩打到另外一个小孩时会说,他自己被打,小孩看见另外一位小孩摔倒,会哭喊。同样地,凭借认同于另外一位小孩,他体验到忍受与展示的全部反应。这些忍受与展示的结构的爱恨交加,清楚地显示在他的行为里。奴隶被认同是暴君,演员被认同是观众,被诱惑者被认同是诱惑者。

 

 

There is a sort of structural crossroads here to which we must accommodate our

thinking if we are to understand the nature of aggressivity in man and its relation with the

formalism of his ego and his objects. It is in this erotic relation, in which the human

individual fixes upon himself an image that alienates him from himself, that are to be

found the energy and the form on which this organization of the passions that he will call

his ego is based.

 

在此有某种的结构的十字路口。假如我们想要理解人的侵凌性的特性,以及侵凌性跟他的自我与他的客体的形式主义的关系,我们必须要让我们的思想适应这个结构的十字路口。就在这个情欲关系里,这个精力与形式应该能够被找到。在情欲关系那里,作为人的个体,替自己固著一种让他跟自己异化的形象。他称之为他的自我的各种激情的这个机体组织,就是以这个精力与形式作为基础。

 

This form will crystallize in the subject’s internal conflictual tension, which

determines the awakening of his desire for the object of the other’s desire: here the

primordial coming together (concours) is precipitated into aggressive competitiveness

(concurrence), from which develops the triad of others, the ego and the object, which,

spanning the space of specular communion, is inscribed there according to a formalism

proper to itself that so dominates the affective Einfühlung that a child of that age may

mistake the identity of the most familiar people if they appear in an entirely different

 

在主体的内部的冲突的紧张里,这个形式将会具体成形。主体的内部冲突的紧张,决定他对于他者的欲望的客体的欲望的觉醒:在此,原始的汇集,突然地被投入侵凌性的競争。从侵凌性的競争那里,别人,自我与客体的三角关系发展出来。当别人,自我与客体的三角关系跨越自我魅影的沟通的空间时,它被铭记在那里,依照自己作为本体的形式主义。这个三角关系如此支使著情感的「移情作用」,以致于那个年纪的小孩可能会认不出他最熟悉的人们的身份,假如他们出现在完全不同的情境里。

 

But if the ego appears to be marked from its very origin by this aggressive relativity –

in which minds lacking in objectivity might recognize the emotional erections caused in

an animal solicited, incidentally, in the course of its experimental conditioning, by a

desire – how can one not conceive that each great instinctual metamorphosis in the life ofthe individual will once again challenge its delimitation, composed as it is of a

conjunction of the subject’s history and the unthinkable innateness of his desire?

 

但是假如自我从它的起源,似乎就被这个侵凌性的相对性所标示,我们如何能够不构想,在个人的一生,每次伟大的本能的蜕变将会一再地挑战它的除掉限制?在侵凌性的相对性,欠缺客观性的心灵,可能体认出情感的勃起,在对动物从事的试验的制约的过程里,偶尔被欲望挑逗的动物,所引起的情感的勃起。每个伟大的本能的蜕变的除掉限制,好像是由主体的历史与他的欲望的不可思议的先天性的连接所组成。

 

This is why, except at a limit that even the greatest geniuses have never been able to

approach, man’s ego can never be reduced to his experienced identity; and in the

depressive disruptions of the experienced reverses of inferiority, it engenders essentially

the mortal negations that fix it in its formalism. ‘I am nothing of what happens to me.

You are nothing of value.’

 

这就是为什么,除了在即使是最伟大的天才也从来不曾抵达的极限,人的自我永远无法被还原到他经验过的身份。这个被经验过的自卑的相反物沮丧地爆发时,它必然产生这个对有限生命的否定,在它的形式主义修补它的有限生命的否定:“「我根本就不是我经历过的一切的我。你什么价值也没有。」

 

雄伯译

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

https://springhero.wordpress.com

无意识的形成 18

May 22, 2014

 

 

无意识的形成 18

雅克、拉康

13.11.57 29

 

I must now go a little more quickly, and point out to you that

(25) the whole economy of the analysis which is going to be made

of this forgetting of a name, of this slip in the sense that we

should give to the word slip the meaning that the name has

dropped down.

 

我现在必须加快一点,并且跟你们指出,精神分析的整个活动将要以忘记名字,这个口误来从事,因为没应该诶于口误这个字词的意义,名字已经丢掉的意义。

 

Everything is going to centre around what we can call a

metonymical approximation. Why? Because what will reemerge at

first, are replacement words: Boltraffio, Botticelli.

 

每件事情将会集中在我们所谓的换喻的近似。为什么?因为我们首先将会重新出现的东西,是替换的字词。Boltraffio,替换Botticelli.。

 

How does Freud show us that he understands them in a metonymical

fashion? We are going to grasp it in this fact, and this is why

I am making this detour by way of the analysis of a forgetting,

that the presence of these names, their emergence in place of the

forgotten Signorelli, is situated at the level of a formation, it

is no longer one of substitution, but of combination. There is

no perceptible relationship between the analysis that Freud might

make of the case between Signorelli, Boltraffio and Botticelli,

except the indirect relationships linked solely to phenomena of

the signifier. Botticelli he tells us, and I hold in the first

instance to what he tells us.

 

弗洛依德如何告诉我们,他用换喻的方式来理解它们?我们将会从这个事实理解它。这就是为什么我正在从事这个迂迴,凭借分析遗忘。这些名字的存在,它们的出现,替换被遗忘的Signorelli。它们的存在被定位在字词形成的层次,它不再是替换的层次,而是联接的层次。在弗洛依德可能从事的分析之间,并没有可感知的关系,对于signorelli, Boltraffio,以及Botticelli 之间的个案。除了仅是跟能指的音素关联的间接的关系。他告诉我们 Botticelli,在第一个例子,我坚持他告诉我们的东西。

 

 

I should say that it is one of the clearest demonstrations that

Freud ever gave of the mechanisms of the analysis of a phenomenon

of formation or deformation, linked to the unconscious. As

regards clarity it leaves absolutely nothing to be desired. I am

obliged for the clarity of my account, to present it to you in an

indirect fashion by saying that this is what Freud says.

 

我应该说,这是弗洛依德曾经给出的最清楚的展示,对于形成或扭曲的现象的分析,跟无意识息息相关。关于清晰,它绝对没有可挑剔之处。为了让我的叙述清晰,我不得不用间接的方式呈现它给你们,凭借说,这是弗洛依德所说的东西。

 

What

(26) Freud says makes its impact by its rigour, in any case what

he says is of this order, it is namely that Botticelli is there

because it is the remainder in its second half, is the “elli” of

Signorelli left incomplete by the fact that Signor is forgotten;

“bo” is the remainder, the something incomplete from Bosnia

Herzogovina, in so far as the “Her” is repressed.

 

弗洛依德所说的东西,由于它的严谨产生它的影响。无论如何,他所说的东西属于这个秩序。换句话说,Botticelli 在那里,因为它以他的后半部作为剩余物,那就是Signorelli 的”elli”, 它的不完整是因为这个事实:Signor 被遗忘,“bo”就是剩余物,从Bosinia Herzogovina 留下的不完整的东西。因为“Her”被潜抑。

 

Likewise for

Boltraffio, it is the same repression of “Her” which explains

that Boltraffio associates the “bo” of Bosnia Herzogovina with

Trafoi, which is a locality immediately preceding the adventures

of this journey, the place where he heard of the suicide of one

of his patients for reasons of sexual impotence, namely the same

term as the one evoked in the conversation that immediately

preceded with the person who is in the train between Ragusa and

Herzogivina, and who evokes those Turks, those Hohommadens who

are such lovely people who, when the doctor has not succeeded in

curing them, say to him: “Herr (sir), we know that you have done

everything you could, but nevertheless etc ………. “

 

同样地,Boltraffio,这是“Her“的相同的被潜抑。这解释了boltraffio

跟“bo“联想一块,Herzogovina 跟Trafoi 联想一块。它的位置就在这个旅途的各种冒险的前面。他听到他的一位病人因为性无能而自杀的地方。换句话说,这是相同的术语,跟这个谈话被引用的术语相同。在Ragusa与Herzogivina 之间的火车上跟他谈话的这个人之前。他引述那些土耳其人的话,那些Hohommadens 人们。他们是如此可爱的人们。虽然医生并没有成功地治疗他们,他们对医生说:「先生Herr(sir),我们知道你已经尽你所能,可是….」

 

The “Herr”, the

particular weighting, the significant accent, namely this

something that is at the limit of the sayable, this absolute

“Herr” which is death, this death which as La Rochefoucauld says,

“one cannot like the sun steadily regard it”, and which

effectively Freud, no more than anybody else, cannot steadily

regard. While, it makes itself present to him through his role

as a doctor on the one hand, by a certain liaison which is also

manifestly present, it, on the other hand with a quite personal

(27) accent.

 

这个“Herr”,这个特殊的衡量,这个重要的强调,这个处于可说出的东西的限制的东西,这个绝对的“Herr”是死亡,依照La Rochefoucauld 所说的,这个死亡,就像太阳一样,为民无法正视它。实际上,弗洛依德跟任何其他人一样,无法镇定地正视死亡。虽然死亡呈现自己给弗洛依德观看,一方面,通过他作为医生的角色,凭借也是明显出现的某种的沟通。另一方面,死亡也具有相当私人的强调。

 

雄伯译

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

https://springhero.wordpress.com

Unconscious 09

May 11, 2014

Unconscious 09

Jacques Lacan

 

雅克拉康

 

THE SEMINAR OF JACQUES LACAN

BOOK V

拉康讲座:第五册

 

The Formations of the Unconscious

无意识界的形成

1957 – 1958

 

Seminar 1; Wednesday 6 November 1957

 

Because I hope that since the last day, most of you at least haveopened Jokes and their relation to the unconscious, you can seefor yourselves that his reference to the technique of the jokequa language-technique, is very precisely the point around whichhis argument always pivots; and that if what emerges in terms ofmeaning, in terms of signification in the joke is something thatseems to him to deserve to be related to the unconscious, it isonly – I want to hammer home that everything that I have to sayabout the witticism is related to this – founded on its veryfunction of pleasure which pivots and turns always and uniquely(3) because of analogies of structure that are only conceivableon the plane of linguistics, analogies of structure between whathappens in the joke, I mean the technical aspect of the joke, let

us call it the verbal aspect of the joke, and what happens underdifferent names that Freud discovered, moments under differentnames, which is the mechanism proper to the unconscious, namelythe mechanisms such as condensation anddisplacement. I limitmyself to these two for today.

 

因为我希望,自从前一天,你们大部分的人至少已经打开弗洛伊德的「论笑话」,以及笑话跟无意识的关系。你们自己能够看出,弗洛伊德提到笑话的技术,作为语言-技术。他的主张的枢纽,确实就是环绕这个点。假如用意义的术语,所出现的东西,用笑话的意义的术语来说,就是某件他觉得应该是跟无意识的关系。我想要强调,关于机智语,我必须说出的东西,跟这个有关。它以快乐的这个功能作为基础。快乐作为枢纽,并且总是旋转着,因为仅有在语言学的层面能够被构想的结构的类同,在笑话所发生的事情的结构的类同。我指的是笑话的技术层面,我们姑且称它为笑话的文辞层面。弗洛伊德发现有不同的名字,在这些名字之下所发生的事情,在不同名字之下的时刻,这就是无意识本体的机制。也就是说,诸如浓缩与替换的机制。今天,我限制自己探讨这两个。

 

Here then is where we are: Hirsch-Hyacinth speaking to HeinrichHeine; or Hirsch-Hyacinth, a fiction of Heinrich Heine, gives anaccount of what happened to him. Something happens at thebeginning, to limit ourselves to the segment that I have justisolated, something particularly clear, raising in a way in orderto put it on a plateau, to exalt it, what is to follow, thisinvocation of the universal witness and of the personalrelationship of the subject to this witness, namely God. “Astrue as God shall grant me all good things”, which isincontestably something that is at once significant by itsmeaning, and ironic because of what reality can show us as

lacking in it, but starting from here the enunciation is made: “Iwas sitting beside Solomon Rothschild, quite as an equal.”

 

在此,这就是我们的处境。Hirsch-Hyacinth 跟 HeinrichHeine谈话; 或Hirsch-Hyacinth是Heinrich Heine的幻想人物。他描绘他发生的事情。在开头发生某件事情。为了探讨仅限于我刚刚孤立出来的片断,某件特别清楚的东西,为了将它放置在一个高地,推崇它,它以某种方式提出应该被追寻的东西。这是召唤普遍性的见证与主体跟这个见证的私人关系,也就是跟上帝的关系。「像上帝那么良善,赐给我一切美好的东西。」这无可争议地上某件具有意义上的重要性,又具有反讽性。因为现实能够跟我们显示,作为它里面的欠缺。但是从这里开始,表述就形成:「我当时正坐在索罗门、洛思查德的旁边,完全是于平起平坐。」

 

Herewe have the emergence of the object; this “quite” carries with itsomething which is significant enough. Every time we invoke the”quite”, the totality, it is because we are not altogether sure(4) that this totality is really closed, and in effect this canbe discovered at many levels, and indeed at every level at which

this notion of totality is used.

 

在此,我们拥有这个客体的出现,这个「完全」与之俱来带著某件足够重要的东西。每次我们召唤这个「完全」,这个完整性,这是因为我们并不完全确定,这个完整性确实是封闭的。实际上,这个完整性能够在许多层次被发现。的确,完整性的这个观念被使用在许多层次上。

 

Here in effect he begins again with this “quite”, and he says:”quite …… “, and it is here that the phenomenon is produced,the unexpected thing, the scandal in the enunciation, namely thisnew message, this something that we do not even yet know what itis, that we are not yet able to name, and which is”….f amillionairely”, something of which we do not know whetherit is a parapraxis or a successful act, an accident or a poeticcreation. We will see. It can be all of these at once, but it

would be well to lay stress on the formation on the strictsignifying plane, of the phenomenon of what will be taken upafterwards.

 

在此,实际上,他再次用这个「完全」开始。他说:「完全、、、」就在这里,这个现象被产生,出乎意料之外的事情,在表述时的丑闻,也就是这个新的讯息,我们甚至并不知道那是什么的某件东西,我们还不能够命名的东西。那就是「、、、famillionairely」,某件我们并不知道,它是否是一个虚拟本体,或是一个成功的行动,一件意外,或一篇诗的创作,。我们将会看出。它有时同时都是一切,但是我们最好强调在严格的能指意义的层面的形成,以后将会被探讨的现象。

 

I will tell you what it is, and I already announced it the lastday: in a signifying function which is proper to it qua signifierescaping from the code, that is from everything that had been accumulated up to this in terms of formations of the

signifier in its functions as a creator of the signified,something new appears there, that can be linked to the verysources of what can be called the progress of a tongue, itschanges.

 

我将告诉你们那是什么。我在前一天已经在能指意义的功能里宣告过它:能指意义的功能是它的本体,作为从符码逃离出来的能指。也就是,从每样曾经累积到这里的东西,用能指的形成的述语,在它的功能,作为是所指的创造者。某件新的东西出现在那里。它能够被联接到这个来源,所谓的语言的进展,语言的改变的东西的来源。

 

We must pause first of all at this something in its very formation, I mean at the point at which it is situated in (5) relation to the formative mechanism of the signifier. We

have to lay stress on it in order to be able even to continue in a valid way on what will turn out to be the consequences of the phenomenon, even of what accompanies it, even its sources, it reference points.

 

首先我们必须停顿一下,对于语言的形成的这个某件东西。我的意思是,在语言被定位为跟能指的形成的机制的相关的点。我们必须强调它,为了要能够用正确的方式继续,探讨结果会是这个现象的各种结果,甚至是伴随它的东西的结果,甚至它的来源,它的指称点。

 

 

But the essential phenomenon, is this nexus,

is this point, at which appears this new paradoxical signifier. this famillionaire from which Freud begins, and to which he

repeatedly returns, on which he asks us to dwell, to which, as

you will see up to the end of his speculation on the witticism,

he does not fail to return as designating the essential

phenomenon, the technical phenomenon that specifies the joke, and

that allows us to discern what the central phenomenon is, that by

which he teaches us on the plane that is our own proper plane,

namely the relationship with the unconscious, and that which

allows us also at the same time to illuminate from a new

perspective everything that surrounds it, everything that leads

it towards what can be called the Tendenzen, because it is the

term Tendenz that is employed in this work, of this phenomenon

that has different spheres of influences, the comic, laughter,

etc…; phenomena that may radiate out from it.

 

但是这个基本的现象,就是这个核心,这个点,这个新的悖论的能指出现的点。这个弗洛伊德用来开始的这个famillionaire,他重复地回归到这个familliionaire,他要求我们详述它的famillionaire,如同你们将会看出,一直到他沉思「机智语」的结束。他一定会回到这个famillionaire,作为指明基本的现象,指明「笑话」的技术的现象。并且让我们能够觉察出,这个基本的现象是什么。凭借这个现象,他在这个层次教导我们,在我们自己本体的层次。换句话说,跟无意识的关系,以及也让我们能够从新的观点启蒙每样环绕它的东西。每样引导它朝向所谓的the Tendenzen。因为就是Tendenz这个术语,被运用在这个著作里。拥有不同的影响的领域的这个现象,这个滑稽的笑声,等等、、、可能从它那里焕发光辉的现象。

 

Let us pause then at famillionaire. There are several ways to

approach it, this is the aim, not just of this schema, but of

this schema in so far as it is provided to allow you to inscribe

(6) the different planes of the signifying elaboration, the word

elaboration being chosen here specially, because it is expressly

chosen here, Freud introduces it specially.

 

让我们因此对这个familionaire 暂停一下。有好几种方式来探讨它。这不仅是这个基模的目的,而且属于这个基模。因为它被供应,为了让你们能够铭记能指的建构的不同的层面。「建构」这个字词在此明确地被选择,因为它在此明白地被选择,弗洛依德特别介绍它。

 

Let us stress this, and in order not to surprise you too much,

let us begin to perceive the direction in which it is going.

What happens when famillionaire appears? It can be said that

something is indicated there that we experience as a perspective

opening out towards meaning; something tends to emerge from it

that is ironical, even satirical, also something that is less

evident, but which develops we might say, in the after-effects of

the phenomenon, in what is going to be propagated from here into

the world as a consequence.

 

让我们强调这个。为了不要太过惊吓你们,让我们开始感知它正在进行的这个方向。当famillionaire 出现时,发生什么事情?我们能够说,在那里某件东西被指示,我们经验到它,作为一个朝向意义展开的观点,某件东西倾向于从它出现。那是反讽,甚至是讽刺,它也是某件比较不明显的东西。我们不妨说,它以这个现象的后续影响在发展,在将会从这里被宣导进入世界,作为结果。

 

It is a type of emergence of an

object, that itself tends rather in the direction of the comical,

of the absurd, of the nonsensical. It is the famillionaire

in so far as it derides the millionaire, by tending to take on

the form of a figure, and it would not be difficult to indicate

the direction in which in fact it tends to be embodied.

 

这是一种客体的出现。这个客体倾向于朝滑稽,荒谬,无意义的方向。这就是famillionaire,因为它从millionaire (百万富翁)一词演变而来。倾向于具有一个人物的形态。要指示这个方向并不困难,事实上,它倾向于被具体表现的方向。

 

Moreover, Freud mentions in passing that in another place also,

Heinrich Heine reduplicating his joke, calls the millionaire the

millionnar, which in German means the idiotic millionaire, and

can be translated in French following on the line of the

substantivation of millionaire that I have just spoken to you

(7) about, the fat-millionaire with a hyphen. This is to show you

that we have here an approach which ensures that we do not remain

 

而且,弗洛依德也在另外一个地方顺便提到,Heinrich Heine复制他的笑话,称the millionaire (百万富翁)为millionnar。在德文,意思是白痴般的百万富翁。在法文,根据百万富翁的实质化的脉络,在法文,我刚刚跟你们谈论到的,它能够被翻译为fat-millionaire(肥胖的百万富翁),中间有条横杆连号。这是要告诉你们,我们在此拥有一个方法,保证我们始终脱离人本位。

 

Let us not go much further, because to tell the truth this is not

the time, this is just the type of step not to taken too

quickly, namely not to be too quickly understood, because by

understanding too quickly, one understands absolutely nothing at

all. This still does not explain the phenomenon that has just

occurred in front of him, namely how it can be connected with

what we can call the general economy of the function of the

 

让我们暂告一个段落,因为坦白说,这并不是这个时间,这仅是不应该太快採取得这种步骤。也就是说,不要匆促地要求理解。因为若是匆促地理解,我们根本就无法理解。这依旧没有解释这个现象,刚刚发生在他面前的现象。也就是,它能够关联到我们所谓的能指的功能的一般经济活动。

 

雄伯译

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

https://springhero.wordpress.com

 

精神病 341

April 2, 2014

精神病341

雅克、拉康

 

We have come to the point at which there is no common measure between

ourselves and this you such as we have brought it out. There is ostension

necessarily followed by reabsorption, injunction followed by disjunction. In

order to have an authentic relationship with the other at this level and on this

plane, he must answer, Thou art the one wham I follow. Here we are on his

wavelength, and it’s he who guides our desire.

 

我们已经来到这个点,在我们自己与如同我们跟它显露出来的这个你」之间,没有共同的衡量。伪装后面必然跟随着重新吸收,指令后面必然跟随着中断。为了要在这个层次,这个层面,跟他者拥有真实的关系,他必须回答,你是我跟随的人」。在此,我们处于他的波长,他引导我们的欲望。

 

Tu e$ celui queje suis lends itself to a play on words.5 It’s the relationship

of identification with the other that is involved, but if we in fact guide one

another in our reciprocal identification towards our desire, we shall necessarily

encounter one another there, and we shall encounter one another in an

incomparable way, since it’s insofar as I am you that I am – here the ambiguity

is complete. Je suis isn’t only to follow, it’s also Je suis, et toi, tu es, I

am and thou art, and also, toi, celui qui, thou, the one who, to the point of

encountering, me tueras, wilt kill me. When the other is captured as an object

in the relation of ostension, we can only encounter this relation as a subjectivity

equivalent to our own on the imaginary plane, the plane of the mot ou

toi, I or thou, one or the other, all confusion is possible concerning the object

relation. The object of our love is only ourselves, it’s the tu es celui qui me

lues, thou art the one who kilst me.

 

Tu e$ celui queje suis有助于玩文字遊戏。“Thou art the one whom I follow,” “Thou art the one who I am,” “Kill theone whom I follow,” and “Kill the one who I am.”你是我跟随的这个人」,你是我存在的这个人」,请你杀死我跟随的这个人」,请你杀死我存在的这个人」。被牵涉到的是跟大他者的认同的关系。但是,假如我们事实上互相引导,在互惠的认同,朝向我们的欲望。我们将必然会在那里互相邂逅。我们将以无与伦比的方式互相邂逅。因为我是你,故我存在。在这种暧昧的完整的。Je suis并不是仅要跟随,它也是Je suis, et toi, tu es,我存在与你存在。也是toi, celui qui, thou,你」这个人,甚至邂逅时,会杀死我的人。当他者被捕获,作为处于伪装关系的客体。我们仅能邂逅这个关系,作为是在想象的层次相等我们自己的主体性。我或你的层次,此在与他在的层次。关于这个客体关系,可能会有各种混淆。

 

Observe the fortunate opportunity that the signifier offers us in French,

with the different ways of understanding tu es.6 One can make use of it indefinitely.

 

请你们观察这个幸运的机会,能指用法文提供给我们的机会,用不同的方式来理解tu es.。我们能够任意地使用它。

 

If I were to say to you that we do this all day long – instead of saying,

To be or not… to be or. .. ,7 one may say, Tu es celui quime. . .tues.. .,

Thau art the one who. . . me. . . thou art.. . , etc. This is the foundation of

the relationship with the other. In all imaginary identification, the tu es, thou

art, ends in the destruction of the other, and vice versa, because this destruction

is simply there in the form of transference and hides itself in what we

shall call thouness.

 

假如我对你们说,我们整天都做这个。而不是说:要活下去,或死亡、、、」。我们可能说:你是我、、、的这个人,你是、、、、等等。这是跟他者的关系的基础。在所有的想象的认同里,这个你是」,结果会毁灭大他者。反过来也是一样。因为这种毁灭在那里,仅是以移情的形式,并且隐藏它自己,在我们所谓的你在」。

 

In this respect I could have brought you a particularly disheartening and

stupid analysis of the type to be found in the famous Meaning of Meaning,

which elevates this kind of drivel to giddy heights.8 Similarly for this famous

passage in which it’s a matter of urging people who have the beginnings of

virtue to have at least the consistency to finish the job. One of them says

something like this – Toi quinepeux supporter le tu, tue-moi, Thou who canst

not bear the thou, kilst me. This is a reasonable idea – if you can’t bear the

truth of the thou, you can always be designated for what you are, namely a

scoundrel. If you want your neighbors’ respect, raise yourself to the notion

of normal distances, that is, to a general notion of the other, the order of the

world, and the law. This thou seems to have disconcerted commentators, and

as a matter of fact I think that today’s thouness will familiarize you with the register in question.

 

在这方面,我本来会带给你们特别令人灰心而愚蠢的这种分析,在著名的意义的意义」一书里能够被找到的这种分析。它提升这种无聊的讯息,到令人晕眩的高度。同样地,对于这个著名的段落,里面都是建议具有品德开端的那些人们,至少要有贯彻到底的一致性。其中一位说了某件事情,类似这个不能够忍受这个你的人们,请杀死我。」这是一个合理的观念。假如你们不能忍受这个你的真理,你们总是能够被设计成为你们本来的样子。换句话说,一位恶棍。假如你们想要你们邻居的尊敬,请提升你们到正常距离的观念。也就是说,到大者的一般的观念。世界与法律的秩序。这个你」似乎让评论者狼狈不堪。事实上,我认为,今天的你在」,将会让你们对受到质疑的这个铭记耳熟能详。

 

雄伯译

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

https://springhero.wordpress.com

 

精神病 339

March 29, 2014

精神病339

雅克、拉康

 

2

We can’t exhaust everything proposed to us concerning the analysis of this

 verb to be by the philosophers who have centered their meditation on the

question of Dasein, and especially Mr. Heidegger, who has begun to consider

it from the grammatical and etymological angle in texts that are quite faithfully

expounded in several articles that Monsieur Jean Wahl has recently

devoted to them.

 

我们无法穷尽一切哲学家跟我们建议的东西,关于这个成为」的动词的分析。那些哲学家曾经专注他们的沉思,在生命实存」的问题,特别是海德格。他曾经开始考虑这个问题,从文本里的文法及字源学的角度。这些文本在好几篇文章里,相当忠实地被诠释。曾、瓦尔最近探讨这些文本的文章。

 

Mr. Heidegger attaches a great deal of importance to the signifier at the

level of the analysis of the word and of conjugation, as it’s usually called –

let us more accurately say declension. In German as in French this famous

verb to be is far from being a simple verb and even from being one single

verb.

 

海德格非常重视这个能指,从字词与动词变化的分析的层次,如它通常被称呼的。让我们更加正确地说,词类变化。在德文,如同在法文,成为」的这个著名的动词,丝毫不是一个简单的动词,甚至,根本就不是单一的动词

 

It’s evident that the form suis, am, doesn’t come from the same root as

e$, art, est, is, Stes, [you] are, and as fut, [it] was, nor is there any strict equivalence

to the form iti, been. Whereas fut has an equivalent in Latin, as does

suis and the series of est, iti comes from another source, from stare. The

distribution is equally different in German where sind, [they] are, is grouped

with bist, art, whereas in French the second person is grouped with the third.

 

显而易见,am 的这个形式,并不是来自跟 is arewas  相同的字根。也没有任何严格的相等语,跟been 的这个形式。虽然 fut 在拉丁文有一个相等语,如同suis est 的系列,来自于另外一个来源,来自stare。在德文,这个分佈同样地不同。在德文,sind are),跟bistart 聚拢一块。虽然在法文,第二人称跟第三人称聚拢一块。

 

Three roots have been more or less uncovered for all the European languages,

those that correspond to sommes, [we] are, est and fut, which has been compared

with the root phusis in Greek, which is related to the idea of life and

growth. As to the others, Mr. Heidegger insists upon the two aspects, Sten

which would be closer to stare, to stand alone, and Verbahen, to last, to endure,

this sense being nevertheless attached to the source phusis. According to Mr.

Heidegger, the idea of standing erect, the idea of life and the idea of lasting,

enduring, is therefore what an etymological analysis combined with a grammatical analysis yields, and it’s out of a kind of reduction or of indeterminationcast over these senses as a whole that the notion of being emerges.

 

对于所有的欧洲的语言,三个字根曾经被揭露得差不多。对应于sommes, [we] are, est and fut,的那些字根,曾经被拿来跟希腊文的phusis的字根作比较。它跟生命与成长的观念息息相关。至于其他的字根,海德格坚持两个层面,比较靠近stare,单独存在的sten。而Verbahen是延续,持久。这些意义仍然跟phusis的来源息息相关。依照海德格,挺直站立的观念,生命的观念,延续,持久的观念,因此就是字源的分析跟文法的分析产生的东西。生命实存的观念的出现,就是这些时态作为整体投射的不确定的还原。

 

I summarize, so as to give you some idea of the thing. I must say that an

analysis of this order is rather inclined to elide, to mask, what Mr. Heidegger

is trying to initiate us into, namely that which is absolutely irreducible in the

function of the verb to be, the copulatory function pure and simple. One

would be mistaken to think that this function is disclosed through a gradual

shift in direction of these various terms.

 

我总结一下,为了让你们稍微理解这个物象。我必须说,这个秩序的分析相当倾向于闪躲,遮蔽。海德格尝试启发我们进入,也就是,绝对无法还原的东西,在to be这个动词的功能,纯净而简单的交媾的功能。假如我们认为,这个功能的显露,是通过缓慢的转变,朝著这些各式各样的术语的方向,那你们就错误了。

 

We raise this question – at what moment and by what mechanism does the

you, such as we have defined it as a form of punctuation, as an indeterminate

signifying mode of hooking on, achieve subjectivity? Well then, I believe that

it’s essentially when it’s taken in the copulatory function in pure form and in

the ostensive function. And it’s for this reason that I chose the exemplary

sentences that we started with – thou art the one who. . . .

 

我们提出这个问题在什么时刻,凭借怎样的心理机制,这个你」如何完成主体性?如同我们曾经定义它,作为一种标点的形式,作为挂钩的不确定度能指的模式。呵呵,我相信,这基本上它被看待,用单纯形式的交媾的功能,及伪装的功能。因为这个理由,我选择我们开始使用的这些例句的句,你是、、、、这个人」。

 

Which element is it that, elevating the you, makes it go beyond its indeterminate

function of boredom and begins to turn it, if not into subjectivity,

then at least into something that constitutes a first step towards the Thou art

the one who wilt follow me? It is the It i$ thou who will follow me. This is

ostension, which in fact implies the presence of the assembly of all those who,

whether or not united into a community, are supposed to form its body, to

be the support of the discourse in which ostension is inscribed. This it is thou

corresponds to the second formula, namely, thou art the one who will follow

 

是什么元素提升这个你」,让它超越它的不确定的无聊的功能,然后开始转变它,即使不是成为主体性,那么至少也是成为某件形成最初的起步,朝向你是我要你跟随我的人」。那就是愿意追随我的人是你」。这是伪装。事实上,它暗示着所有那些人们的聚会的存在。无论有没有团结成为一个社区,他们被认为形成它的团体,成为这个辞说的支持。伪装被铭记的辞说里。这个就是你」对应于第二个公司,也就是,你是愿意跟随我的人」。

 

雄伯译

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

https://springhero.wordpress.com

 

 

精神病 324

March 19, 2014

精神病 324

雅克、拉康

 

2

Indeed it’s one of the most profound characteristics of the mental foundation

of the Judaeo-Christian tradition that against it speech clearly profiles the

being of the / as its ultimate ground. On all the essential questions the subject

always finds himself in a position, summoned, to justify himself as /• The /

who says, I am the one who am, this / , absolutely alone, is the one who radically

sustains the thou in his interpellation. That’s all the difference there is

between the god of the tradition we come from and the god of the Greek

tradition. I wondered whether the Greek god is capable of proffering himself in the mode of any /. Would he say, I am the one who i$? This is out of the

question, however. The super-attenuated form of the Greek god isn’t something

that there is any reason to laugh at, or to believe that it’s situated on

the path to the atheistic disappearance of God. It’s rather the god Voltaire

was interested in to the point of regarding Diderot as a cretin, the god of

deism, who is of the half-flesh, half-fish order of the I am the one who is.

 

的确,这是犹太教与基督教的精神传统基础最深刻的一个特色。以它作为背景,言说清楚地作为这个我」的生命实存的轮廓,当作它最后的基础。对于所有的基本的问题,主体总是发现他自己处于一个立场,被召唤要替他自己自圆说,作为这个我」。说我是具有生命实存的这个人」的这个我」,绝对孤独的这个我」,就是在他的质询当中,强烈维持这个你」的这个人。这就是我们继承的传统的神,与希腊的传统的神的差异所在。我想要知道,希腊的神是否能够用任何我」的模式呈现他自己。他会说:我是具有生命实存的这个人吗?可是,这个不可能的。希腊的神具有超级被弱化为人的形态,并不是某件让人有理由嘲笑的东西。或是让人有理由相信,它正朝向无神论的上帝的消失的途中。相反地,它是伏尔泰感到興趣的神,甚至他将笛特罗当著是具有超越智慧的神,理性的神。我是具有生命实存的这个人」,属于一半是肉身,一半是鱼的层次。

 

Your minds won’t readily dwell on the god of Aristotle, because this has

become unthinkable for us. But still, try to get yourselves to meditate – a

mode of this medeor I was speaking to you about last time, and which is the

original verb of your medical function – for a second on what the relationship

to the world might have been for a disciple of Aristotle’s for whom God was

the most immutable sphere in the sky. He isn’t a god who announces himself

through the word, like the one we were evoking a second ago. He is that part

of the starry sphere that includes the fixed stars, he is that sphere in the world

that doesn’t move. This obviously involves a relationship to the other that to

us is foreign and unthinkable and much more distant than the one put into

play, for example, in the punitive fantasm [lafantaisie punitive].

 

对于亚里斯多德的神,你们的心灵并没有迅速接受,因为对于我们,这已经是匪夷所思。但是依旧的,请你们尝试让你们自己沉思一下。上一次,我正在跟你们谈论的这个医学medeor」的模式。它是你们的医学功能的原初的动词。请你们稍微沉思一下,对于亚里斯多德的学生,跟世界的关系当时会是什么样子。对于亚里斯多德,上帝是天空最无法改变的球形。他并不是通过字词宣佈他自己的神,如同我们刚刚召唤的这个神。亚里斯多德的神是包括那些固定的星辰的星光闪闪的球形的那个部分。他说静止不动的世界的那个球形。这显而易见地牵涉到跟他者的关系。对于我们而言,这个他者是外来的,不可思议的,更加遥远的,比起我们运作的这个神,譬如,作为惩罚的恶魔的神。

 

Nobody dwells on this – it’s because at the heart of the religious thought

that has formed us there is the idea of making us live in fear and trembling,

that the coloration of guilt is so fundamental in our psychological experience

of the neuroses, without its being possible for all that to prejudge what they

are in another cultural sphere. This coloration is even so fundamental that it

was by its means that we explored the neuroses and noticed that they were

structured in a subjective and intersubjective mode. This is why there is

every reason to wonder whether the tradition that announces itself in the

expression which is, we’re told, flanked by a little tree on fire -I am the one

who am, doesn’t fundamentally bear upon our relationship to the other. We’re

not so far from our subject matter. It’s a question of this in President Schreber

– of a mode of constructing the Other-God.

 

没有人详述这个那是因为在形成我们的宗教思想的核心,存在着让我们生活于恐惧与战栗的这观念。罪恶感的被扭曲是如此基本,在我们对于神经症的心理的经验,以致于要从另外一个文化的领域预先判断它们是什么,成为不可能。这种扭曲是如此的基本,以致于我们凭借一切方法,探索神经症并且注意到,他们的结构的主体与互为主体性的模式。这就是为什么我们有充分理由想要知道,宣佈它自己是我是具有生命实存的这个人」的这个传统,基本上与我们跟他者的关系是否有关联。因为我们被告诉,这个表达的侧边有棵正在燃烧的小树。我们距离我们主体的问题并没有那么遥远。在许瑞伯庭长,这是主体的问题。建构他者上帝的模式。

 

雄伯译

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

https://springhero.wordpress.com

 

精神病 313

March 11, 2014

精神病 313

雅克、拉康

 

This is the function of the you in man according to Mr. Isakower, and I

would be happy to make an apologue of this in order to get the experience of

the you understood, but at its lowest level. One totally misrecognizes its function

if one neglects that it leads to the you as signifies

 

依照艾萨寇威的说法,这是这个你」在人身上的功能。我很乐意将这个当作是一个寓言,为了让这个你」的经验被人理解,但是在它最低的层次。假如我们忽略,它导致这个你」作为能指,我们就完全误识它。

 

Analysts – the path I’m following here isn’t a solitary one – have emphasized

yet another point. I can’t dwell upon the relation that exists between

the superego, which is nothing other than the function of the you, and the

sentiment of reality. I don’t need to insist on this for the simple reason that

it’s stressed on every page of President Schreber’s observation. If the subject

doesn’t doubt the reality of what he hears, it’s because of this characteristic

of foreign body that the intimation of the delusional you presents. Need I

invoke the philosophy of Kant, who recognizes a fixed reality only in the

starry skies above our heads and the voice of conscience within?16 This foreignness,

like the character Tartuffe, is the true possessor of the house who

readily says to the ego – You will have to leave. When the feeling of foreignness,

strangeness, strikes somewhere, it’s never on the side of the superego

– it’s always the ego that loses its bearings, it’s the ego that enters the state

of you, it’s the ego that thinks it is in the state of the double, that is, expelled

from the house, while the you remains the possessor of things.

 

精神分析家我在此正在追寻的途径曾经强调,还有另外一点。我无法详述存在于超我与现实的情感之间的关系。超我实实在在就是这个你」的功能。我并不需要坚持这点,理由很简单,在许瑞伯庭长的观察的每一页,它都被强调。假如主体并不怀疑他所听到的内容是现实界,那是因为外来的身体的这个特性。这个妄想的你」的暗示呈现的外来的身体。我有需要引述康德的哲学吗?他体认出一个固定的现实界,仅是从我们头上的星光点点的天空,以及从内在良心的声音。这个外来,就像是塔图费的小说人物,他是房屋的真正拥有者,他对自我说:你将必须离开。」当外来,陌生的感觉在某个地方触动起来,它从来就不是在超我的这一边。总是自我这边惊慌失措。是自我进入你」的这个状态。自我认为,它处于双重人的状态。换句话说,它从房屋被赶出。尽管这个你」是房屋的拥有者。

 

That’s our experience. We don’t have to stop there all the same. But ultimately

we have to be reminded of these truths if we are to understand where

the structural problem lies.

 

那就是我们的经验。我们仍然并不需要停在那里。但是最后,我们必须提醒这些真理,假如我们想要理解结构性的问题在哪里。

 

It may seem strange to you that I mechanize things in this way, and perhaps

you will imagine that I’m working with an elementary notion of the

discourse I teach, that everything is contained within the relation between

the I and the you, between the ego and the other.

 

你们可能觉得奇怪,我以这种方式将事情作为机制。或许,你们会想像,我正在从事我教导的辞说的基本观你。每样东西都被包括在这个我」跟这个你」之间的关系,在自我与他者的关系。

 

This is what linguists – not to mention psychoanalysts – start mumbling

about whenever they investigate the question of discourse. One may even

regret seeing that Pichon, in the quite remarkable work I have mentioned,

finds it necessary to remind us that for the basis of his definition of verbal

distributories17 – as he puts it – one has to set out from the idea that discourse

is always addressed to an other, to the allocutor.18 And so he begins

with the simple locutory plane19 found in the imperative, Come here! There’s

no need to say much about this – Come here! presupposes an I, it presupposes

a you. There is moreover a narrative plane that is delocutory,20 on which

there’s always I and you, but on which one is alluding to something else.

 

这就是语言学家更不用说精神分析家开始喃喃而语的东西,每当他们研究辞说的这个问题。我们甚至很遗憾看见,在我提到的这部杰出的著作里,他发觉有必要提醒我们,作为他定义文辞分佈的基础如他所表达的我们必须从这个观念出发:辞说总是针对一位他者,针对这位言说者。所以,他从作为指令基础的这个简单的对谈的层次开始:来这里!」对于这一点,没有必要多说。来这里!」预先假设有一个我」。它预先假设有一个你」。而且,有一个叙述的层次,是非对谈的层次。在这个层次上,总是有你与我」,但是在这个层次上,我们提到的某件其他东西。

 

We can only think that one is not fully satisfied with such a distribution,

since a new problem arises concerning the interrogative, which we shall introduce

with a dissymmetry that forms a symmetry provided we regard the

number three as the best.

 

我们仅能够认为,对于这样的分佈,我们并不完全满意。因为关于这个询问,会产生一个新的问题。我们用形成均称的不均称,来介绍的这个询问。只要我们将三这个数字,作为是最好的数字。

 

雄伯译

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

https://springhero.wordpress.com

精神病 293

March 3, 2014

精神病 293

雅克、拉康

 

The quilting point

缝合点

SENSE AND SCANSION

意义与韵律分析

THE FULL CIRCLE AND SEGMENTATION

完整迴圈与片段化

“YES, I COME INTO HIS TEMPLE . . .”

是的,我进入庙里、、、」

THE FEAR OF GOD

上帝的恐惧

THE FATHER, A QUILTING POINT

父亲,缝合点

 

Does the subject hear with his ears something that exists or something that

doesn’t exist? It’s quite obvious that it doesn’t exist and that consequently

it’s of the order of a hallucination, that is, of a false perception. Is this adequate

for us?

 

主体用耳朵听见某件存在的东西,或不存在的东西。显而易见,这个东西并不存在,结果,它属于幻觉的秩序。也就是,虚假感知的秩序,这对于我能就足够了吗?

 

This massive conception of reality leads to the quite mysterious explanation,

advanced by analysts, according to which a so-called refusal to perceive

produces a hole and there then appears in reality a drive that has been rejected

by the subject. But why should something as complex and architectured as

speech appear in this hole? This is what we are not told.

 

现实界的这个巨大的观念,导致精神分析家提出的这个相当神秘的解释。依照这个解释,所谓的拒绝感知,产生一个空洞。然后,在现实界,曾经被主体拒绝的冲动就出现了。但是为什么像言说这样复杂而精巧的东西,竟然是出现在这个空洞里?这就是我们没有被告知的东西。

 

To be sure, such an explanation already constitutes progress over the classical

conception, but we can go further. In short, we can expect that the

phenomenon of psychosis will enable us to restore the proper relationship,

increasingly misunderstood in analytic work, between the signifier and the

signified.

 

的确,这样一种解释已经组成一种对古典观念的进展。但是我们能够再深入些。总是,我们能够期望,精神病的现象,会让我们能够恢复这个适当的关系,在精神分析的工作越来越被误解的关系,处于能指与所指之间。

 

1

I remind you that at the end of the period during which the external world

disintegrated for Schreber, with its roots in that period, there appeared in

him a structuration of the relations between the signifier and the signified

that is presented thus – there are always two planes.

 

我提醒你们,对于许瑞伯,有段期间,外在世界连它的根都瓦解。这段期间的结束,在他身上出现能指与所指之间的关系的结构。这个结构如此呈现总是有两个层面。

 

They are without doubt indefinitely subdivided within themselves. But

Schreber’s efforts always to locate an anterior plane and a plane beyond is

obviously imposed on him by his experience, and this guides us towards

something that is really deep-seated in psychotic structure. I have sometimes

got you to feel this in an immediate way in my presentations.

 

无可置疑,这两个层面在它们里面再可以无限地再区分。但是许瑞伯总是要找出前景层面与超越层面的位置的努力,显而易见,是由他的经验赋加在他身上。这引导他朝向在精神病的结构是根深蒂固的某件东西。我有时在呈现时,用立即的方式,让你们感觉到这点。

 

On one of these planes phenomena are produced that are above all ones

the subject regards as neutralized, as signifying less and less a true other –

phrases, he says, learned by rote, drummed into the birds from the sky who

repeat them to him, who don’t know what they are saying. This term birds

leads to the parrot – it’s a question of the transmission of something empty.

that wearies and exhausts the subject. At their first appearance these phenomena

are situated at the limit of meaning, but they soon turn into quite

the contrary – residue, refuse, empty bodies.

 

这其中的一个层面,各种现象被产生,尤其重要的是主体认为是中立的现象,作为越来越不是意涵著一个真实的大者。他说,这些词语是记诵习得,从灌输到来自天空的众鸟,众鸟跟他重复这些词语。众鸟不知道它们说些什么。众鸟」的这个术语联想到鹦鹉。问题是,它传递某件让主体厌烦而疲倦的空洞的东西。这些现象最初出现时,它们被定位在意义的极致。但是它们不久就被转变成为恰恰相反。它们变成残渣,废料,空洞的身体。

 

I have already mentioned these interrupted sentences that suggest a continuation.

They teach us a great deal about the unity that prevails at the level of

the signifier – in particular, that the latter isn’t isolatable.

 

我已经提到这些被中断的句子,它们暗示着连续。它们教导我们很多关于盛行于能指的层次的一致性。特别是,后者是不可孤立的。

 

These unfinished sentences are in general interrupted at the point at which

the full word that would give them their meaning is still lacking but is implied.

I’ve already picked out more than one example of this. For instance, the

subject hears – Do you still speak. . . , and the sentence stops. This means –

Do you still speak. . . foreign languages?1

 

这些未完成的句子通常被中断,在实词将会给予它们意义的时刻,实词依旧是欠缺,但是被暗示出来。我已经挑选有关这个的不只一个例子。譬如,主体听到你依旧说话吗?这个句子停止。这意味着:你依旧说外国的语言吗?

 

The said conception of souls is this dialogue, which is much fuller than the

drummed-in words the souls exchange with him, in teaching him an entire

psychology of thoughts, on the subject of himself. What first of all manifested

itself at the beginning of the delusion, like an ineffable and vigorous form of

expression, withdraws to a distance, becomes enigmatic, passes into the posterior

realms of God, at the level of which the intrusive and absurd voices

multiply. Even further beyond these voices there are other voices which express

themselves in striking formulas.

 

所谓的「各种灵魂的观念」就是这个对话。这个对话更加充实,比起各种灵魂跟他交换的词语所灌输的话语。当教导他完整的思想的心理学,探究他自己的这个主体。在妄想的开始时,首先展示自己的东西,就像是无法表达而严谨的表达形式,撤退到一段距离,变成谜团,进入上帝的后面的领域。在这个领域的层次,在些侵入而荒谬的各种声音加倍起来。甚至在超越这些声音的更远处,会有其他声音用生动的公式表达自己。

 

I remind you of one that is not the least striking of them – Lacking now is

. . . the leading thought.2 They also speak to him of Gesinnung, which can

mean either conviction or faith. Gesinnung, they explain, is something we owe

any good man, even the blackest of sinners, subject to the demands of purification

inherent in the order of the universe, something we owe him in

exchange [dans V6change\> in the name of that which must regulate our relations

with human beings. It is indeed faith that is in question, that minimum

of good faith implied by recognition of the other.

 

我提醒你们一个很引人注意的公式,欠缺现在是、、、主要的思想」。他们也对他谈论到Gesinnung。这个Gesinnung 意思是信念或是信仰。他们解释,信念或信仰是我们亏欠好人的东西,即使最阴暗的原罪者。他们承受在宇宙的秩序里原来具有的净化的要求。信念或信仰是我们交换时亏欠他的东西,以必须规范我们跟人类的关系的名义。受到质疑的确是是信念,由于他者的体认所暗示的最少量的美好的信仰。

 

A certain period of his hallucinations goes much further still. We have the

most unusual expression [. • .]. It’s a rare word, extremely difficult to translate.

After consulting with people who know about these things, I had arrived

at the idea that it was a question of nothing other than what I call the base

word, the key, the ultimate linchpin, rather than the solution. It has a tech-

nical connotation, in fact, in the art of hunting – it would be what hunters

call xhefunties, that is, the traces of big game.

 

幻觉的某个时期进行得更加深入。我们拥有最不寻常的词语。那是一个罕见的字词,极端困难翻译。我请教懂得这些事情的人们之后,我获得这个观念。这个问题实实在在就是我所谓的基础的字,钥匙,最后的稳定中心,而不是解决。它拥有技术的外延意涵。事实上,在打猎的技艺,那就是猎人所谓的xhefunties,也就是,大狩猎的痕迹。

 

雄伯译

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

https://springhero.wordpress.com

 

 

 

 

精神病 240

February 14, 2014

精神病 240

雅克、拉康

 

 Be that as it may, on this occasion we’re unable to avoid wondering whether

a certain incompleteness in the realization of the paternal function isn’t involved

in Schreber’s case. Every author has in fact attempted to explain the onset of

Schreber’s delusion with reference to the father. Not that Schreber was in

conflict with his father at the time – he had disappeared a long time previously.

 

无论如何,在这个场合,我们不能个避免想要知道,是否实践父权功能的某个不完整,并没有牵涉到许瑞伯的个案。事实上,每位作者曾经企图解释许瑞伯幻觉的触发,以跟父亲的关系。倒不是因为许瑞伯在当时跟他的父亲发生冲突。先前,他曾经消失很长久的时间。

 

Not that he was at a time of setback in acceding to paternal functions,

since on the contrary he was entering a brilliant stage of his career and had

been placed in a position of authority that seems to have solicited him to truly

adopt a paternal position, to have offered him a support for idealizing and

referring himself to this position. President Schreber’s delusion would therefore

depend more on the giddiness of success than on a sense of failure. This

is what the understanding generated by authors of the mechanism determining

the psychosis revolves around, at least on the psychical level.

 

倒不是因为他当时在接纳父权的功能时,处于挫折的时刻。因为相反地,他正在进入他的事业的辉煌的阶段,并且被任命担任权威的职位。这个权威的职位似乎要求他真实地採用父亲的立场,为了提供给他作为支撑,让他对于这个职位理想化,并且依持这个职位。许瑞伯庭长的幻觉因此更加依靠成功的眩丽,而不是依靠失败的感知。这是心理机制的作者们在决定精神病时,产生的这种理解,围绕打转的东西,至少在心理的层次。

For my part, I would make three responses on the subject of the function

of the father.

 

就我而言,我想要做三个回答,探究父亲的这个功能。

 

Normally, the conquest of the Oedipal realization, the integration and

introjection of the Oedipal image, is carried out – Freud says this unambiguously

– by way of an aggressive relationship. In other words, it’s by way of

an imaginary conflict that symbolic integration takes place.

 

正常来说,对于伊狄浦斯实践的征服,伊狄浦斯意向的融合与内射被实现。弗洛依德清楚地说到这个作为侵凌性的关系。换句话说,作为想象界的冲突,象征界的融合才会发生。

 

There is another way, different in nature. Ethnological experience shows

us the importance, however residual it may be, of the phenomenon of couvade

– imaginary realization here takes place by the symbolic putting into play of

conduct. Isn’t it something of this order that we have been able to locate in

neurosis? The hysterical pregnancy that Eisler describes, which occurred fol-

lowing a traumatic breakdown of his equilibrium, isn’t imaginary but symbolic.

 

还有另外一个方式,不同的特性。种族学的经验跟我们显示,怀孕同理心convade的现象这个重要性,无论它是多么的仅留残迹。想象的实践的发生,在此凭借将冲突从事象征的运作。这难道不是在神经症,某件我们能够找到位置的属于这个秩序的东西?艾斯勒描述的歇斯底里的怀孕,发生在他的平衡的创伤的崩塌之后,它并非是想象,而是象征。

 

Isn’t there a third way, which is in some sense embodied in delusions?

These little men are forms of reabsorption, but they’re also the representation

of what will take place in the future. The world will be repeopled by Schreber

men, men of a Schreberian spirit, small, fantasmatic beings – procreation

after the deluge. Such is the prospect.

 

在幻觉,难道没有第三种方式在某个意义上被涵盖?这些小人物都是重新被吸收的形态,但是他们也是未来将会发生的东西的再现。世界将重新居住著像许瑞伯般的人们,许瑞伯精神的人们,藐小,幻象般的人类他们在圣经所记的大洪水之后繁殖。远景就是这样。

 

In sum, in the normal form the emphasis is placed upon the symbolic

realization of the father by way of imaginary conflict – in the neurotic or

paraneurotic form, upon the imaginary realization of the father by way of a

symbolic exercise of conduct. And here, what do we see if not the real function

of generation?

 

总之,以正常的形态,强调点被放置在父亲的象征的实践,作为是想象界的冲突。在神经症或类似神经症的形态。放置在父亲的想象界的实践,作为象征地运用行为。在此,我们看见什么?难道不就是生产的真实的功能?

 

There’s something here that nobody’s interested in, neither neurotics nor

primitives. I’m not saying that the latter don’t know the real function played

by the father in generation, simply that they’re not interested in it. What

they’re interested in is the begetting of the soul, the begetting of the mind by

the father, the father as either symbolic or imaginary. But, curiously, in delusion

it’s in fact the father’s real function in generation that we see emerge in

an imaginary form, at least if we accept the identification analysts make between

the little men and spermatozoa. There’s a movement of retreat here between

the three functions that define the problematic of the paternal function.

 

在此有某件没有人会感到興趣的东西,神经症及原始人们都不感到興趣的东西。我并不是说,神经症及原始人们不知道父亲在生产时扮演的功能。我仅是说,他们对它不感到興趣。他们所感到興趣的是灵魂的产生,父亲的产生心灵,父亲作为要就是象征,要不就是想象。但是,耐人寻味地,在幻觉,事实上,我们看见父亲在生产时的真实的功能出现,以想象的形态。至少,假如我们接受精神分析所做的认同,这些小人物与精子之间的认同。在此有一种撤退的行动,发生在三个功能之间。这三个功能定义父亲的功能的棘手难题。

 

We are now engaged in reading this text and in the task of actualizing it to

the utmost in the dialectical register of signifier and signified.

 

我们现在从事阅读这个文本,并且从事将它实践彻底的工作,在能指与所指之间的辩证的铭记。

 

To each and everyone of you here I shall say this – if you investigate, as is

certainly legitimate, the question of being, don’t be too arrogant about it. In

the articulated phenomenal dialectic I’ve put to you, speech is indeed the

central reference point.

25 April 1956

 

对于你们在场的每一位,我将这样说:假如你们研究生命实存的问题,这确实是合情合理的,你们不要太过于自负。我已经跟你们表达现象呈现辩证法。言说确实是中心的指称点。

1956425

雄伯译

32hsiung@pchome.com.tw

http://springehro.wordpress.com