Difference between revisions of "Code"
(The LinkTitles extension automatically added links to existing pages (https://github.com/bovender/LinkTitles).) |
|||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
=====Roman Jakobson===== | =====Roman Jakobson===== | ||
| − | [[Lacan]] borrows the term "[[code]]" from [[Roman Jakobson]]'s theory of [[communication]]. | + | [[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]]''. | [[Jakobson]] presents his opposition "[[code]] vs [[message]]" as an equivalent of [[Saussure]]'s ''[[langue]]'' vs ''[[parole]]''. | ||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
=====Jacques Lacan===== | =====Jacques Lacan===== | ||
=====Code and Language===== | =====Code and Language===== | ||
| − | However, [[Lacan]] draws an important distinction between the concepts of [[language]] and [[code]].<ref>{{E}} p. 84</ref> | + | However, [[Lacan]] draws an important [[distinction]] between the [[concepts]] of [[language]] and [[code]].<ref>{{E}} p. 84</ref> |
[[Code]]s are the province of [[animal]] [[communication]], not of [[intersubjectivity|intersubjective]] [[communication]]. | [[Code]]s are the province of [[animal]] [[communication]], not of [[intersubjectivity|intersubjective]] [[communication]]. | ||
| Line 18: | Line 18: | ||
=====Ambiguity and Equivocation===== | =====Ambiguity and Equivocation===== | ||
| − | 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>{{L}} (1973b) "[[Works of Jacques Lacan|L'Étourdit]]", ''Scilicet'', no. 4, 1973. pp. 5-52</ref> | + | 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>{{L}} (1973b) "[[Works of Jacques Lacan|L'Étourdit]]", ''[[Scilicet]]'', no. 4, 1973. pp. 5-52</ref> |
[[Lacan]] is not always consistent in maintaining this opposition between [[code]] and [[language]]. | [[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 [[signifier]]s. | + | 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 [[signifier]]s. |
| − | 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 [[signifier]]s available to the [[subject]]. | + | 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 [[signifier]]s available to the [[subject]]. |
==See Also== | ==See Also== | ||
Latest revision as of 04:11, 24 May 2019
| French: code |
Roman Jakobson
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.
Jacques Lacan
Code and Language
However, Lacan draws an important distinction between the concepts of language and code.[1]
Codes are the province of animal communication, not of intersubjective communication.
Index and Signifier
Whereas the elements of a language are signifiers, 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.
Ambiguity and Equivocation
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.[2]
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.
See Also
References
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p. 84
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. (1973b) "L'Étourdit", Scilicet, no. 4, 1973. pp. 5-52
