Difference between revisions of "Metalanguage"
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
+ | A '[[metalanguage]]' is a [[linguistic]] term for a type of [[language]] that can be used to describe (or analyze) (the properties of) another [[language]] (or [[symbolic]] [[system]]). | ||
+ | |||
+ | ==Roman Jakobson== | ||
+ | [[Roman Jakobson]] includes the metalingual function in his list of the functions of [[language]].<ref>Jakobson, 1960:25</ref> | ||
− | |||
More generally, any descriptive [[discourse]] such as [[literary criticism]] can be said to function as a [[metalanguage]]. | More generally, any descriptive [[discourse]] such as [[literary criticism]] can be said to function as a [[metalanguage]]. | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
+ | ==Jacques Lacan== | ||
+ | In 1956 [[Jacques Lacan]] reaffirms [[Jakobson]]'s view on the metalingual function of all [[language]]: "all [[language]] implies a [[metalanguage]], its already a [[metalanguage]] of its own register."<ref>{{S3}} p. 226</ref> | ||
+ | However, in 1960, [[Lacan]] states the opposite, arguing that "no [[metalanguage]] can be spoken."<ref>{{E}} p.311</ref> | ||
+ | [[Lacan]] rejects the very possibility of a metalinguistic dimension, denies the [[existence]] of any [[metalanguage]]. | ||
+ | [[Lacan]] follows [[Heidegger]]'s view of [[language]] as a "house of being" of which it is impossible to step [[outside]].<ref>1960</ref> | ||
+ | [[Lacan]] does not deny that there is a beyond of [[language]], but he does argue that this beyond is not of a kind that could finally anchor [[meaning]]. | ||
+ | There is no transcendental [[signified]], no way that [[language]] could "tell the [[truth]] about [[truth]]."<ref>{{Ec}} p. 867-8</ref> | ||
+ | ==Other of the Other== | ||
+ | The same point is also expressed in the phrase, "there is no Other of the Other."<ref>{{E}} p.311</ref> | ||
+ | If the [[Other]] is the [[guarantee]] of the coherence of the [[subject]]'s [[discourse]], then the [[falsity]] of this [[guarantee]] is revealed by the fact that the [[guarantor]] himself [[lack]]s such a [[guarantee]]. | ||
− | + | ==Psychoanalytic Treatment== | |
− | + | In a [[clinical]] context, this means that there is no [[metalanguage]] of the [[transference]], no point [[outside]] the [[transference]] from which it could be finally [[interpreted]] and 'liquidated'. | |
− | + | ==See Also== | |
− | + | * [[Language]] | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
==References== | ==References== | ||
<references/> | <references/> | ||
− | |||
[[Category:Linguistics]] | [[Category:Linguistics]] | ||
− | |||
[[Category:Postmodern theory]] | [[Category:Postmodern theory]] | ||
[[Category:Deconstruction]] | [[Category:Deconstruction]] |
Revision as of 10:06, 29 June 2006
A 'metalanguage' is a linguistic term for a type of language that can be used to describe (or analyze) (the properties of) another language (or symbolic system).
Contents
Roman Jakobson
Roman Jakobson includes the metalingual function in his list of the functions of language.[1]
More generally, any descriptive discourse such as literary criticism can be said to function as a metalanguage.
Jacques Lacan
In 1956 Jacques Lacan reaffirms Jakobson's view on the metalingual function of all language: "all language implies a metalanguage, its already a metalanguage of its own register."[2]
However, in 1960, Lacan states the opposite, arguing that "no metalanguage can be spoken."[3]
Lacan rejects the very possibility of a metalinguistic dimension, denies the existence of any metalanguage.
Lacan follows Heidegger's view of language as a "house of being" of which it is impossible to step outside.[4]
Lacan does not deny that there is a beyond of language, but he does argue that this beyond is not of a kind that could finally anchor meaning.
There is no transcendental signified, no way that language could "tell the truth about truth."[5]
Other of the Other
The same point is also expressed in the phrase, "there is no Other of the Other."[6]
If the Other is the guarantee of the coherence of the subject's discourse, then the falsity of this guarantee is revealed by the fact that the guarantor himself lacks such a guarantee.
Psychoanalytic Treatment
In a clinical context, this means that there is no metalanguage of the transference, no point outside the transference from which it could be finally interpreted and 'liquidated'.
See Also
References
- ↑ Jakobson, 1960:25
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p. 226
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p.311
- ↑ 1960
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits. Paris: Seuil, 1966. p. 867-8
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p.311