[[Jacques Lacan]] borrows the term 'code' (''code'') from [[Roman Jakobson]]'s theory of [[communication]].
Jakobson presents his opposition 'code vs message' as an equivalent of [[Saussure]]'s ''[[langue]]'' vs ''[[parole]]''.
However, Lacan draws an important distinction between the concepts of [[language]] and code.<ref>see E, 84</ref>
Codes are the province of animal communication, not of [[intersubjective communication]].
Whereas the elements of a language are [[signifier]]s, the elements of a code are ''indices'' (see [[index]]).
The fundamental difference is that there is a fixed bi-univocal (one-to-one) relationship between an index and its [[referent]], whereas there is no such relationship between a [[signifier]] and a referent or between a signifier and a [[signified]].
Because of the bi-univocal relation of indices and referents, codes lack what Lacan regards as the fundamental feature of human languages: the potential for ambiguity and equivocation.<ref>see Lacan, 1973b</ref>
<ref>Lacan is not always consistent in maintaining this opposition between code and language. In the seminar of 1958-9, for example, when presenting the elementary cell of the [[graph of desire]], he designates one point as the code, which he also designates as the place of the Other and the battery of signifiers. In this case, it is clear that the term 'code' is being used in the same sense as the term 'language', namely, to designate the set of signifiers available to the subject.</ref>
==References==[[Jacques Lacan]] borrows the term '[[code]]' from [[Roman Jakobson]]'s theory of [[communication]]. [[Jakobson]] presents his opposition 'code vs message' as an equivalent of [[Saussure]]'s ''[[langue]]'' vs ''[[parole]]''.However, [[Lacan]] draws an important distinction between the concepts of [[language]] and [[code]].<ref>see E, 84</ref> [[Code]]s are the province of [[animal]] [[communication]], not of [[intersubjective communication]]. Whereas the elements of a [[language]] are [[signifier]]s, the elements of a [[code]] are ''[[indices]]''. The fundamental difference is that there is a fixed bi-univocal (one-to-one) relationship between an [[index]] and its [[referent]], whereas there is no such relationship between a [[signifier]] and a [[referent]] or between a [[signifier]] and a [[signified]]. Because of the bi-univocal relation of [[indices]] and [[referent]]s, [[code]]s lack what [[Lacan]] regards as the fundamental feature of [[human]] [[language]]s: the potential for ambiguity and equivocation.<ref>see Lacan, 1973b<references/ref>
<ref>Lacan is not always consistent in maintaining this opposition between code and language. In the seminar of 1958-9, for example, when presenting the elementary cell of the [[graph of desire]], he designates one point as the code, which he also designates as the place of the Other and the battery of signifiers. In this case, it is clear that the term 'code' is being used in the same sense as the term 'language', namely, to designate the set of signifiers available to the subject.</ref>
==See Also==
==References==
<references/>
[[Category:Dictionary]]
[[Category:Terms]]
[[Category:Concepts]]
