Difference between revisions of "Enunciation"
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
=def= | =def= | ||
| − | ENUNCIATION ( | + | ENUNCIATION (''Enonciation'') |
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| − | |||
| + | In linguistics, one important distinction is that between the [[enunciation]] (''enonciation'') and the [[statement]] (''enonce''). | ||
| + | |||
| + | The [[statement]] (''enonce'') refers to the actual [[words]] uttered. | ||
| + | The [[enunciation]] (''enonciation'') refers to the act of uttering them. | ||
| + | |||
| + | When linguistic production is analysed in terms of abstract grammatical units (such as sentences), independent of the specific circumstances of occurrence, it is referred to as a statement. | ||
| + | On the other hand, when linguistic production is analysed as an individual act performed by a particular speaker at a specific time/place, and in a specific situation, it is referred to as an enunciation. | ||
| + | |||
| + | In 1936, Lacan states that the act of speaking contains a meaning in itself, even if the actual words spoken are 'meaningless.'<ref>Ec. p.83</ref> | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[Speech]], prior to any function it may have in 'conveying a message', is an appeal to the [[other]]. | ||
| + | |||
| + | Lacan focuses his attention on the dimension of the enunciation, the act of speaking in itself, irrespective of the content of the utterance. | ||
| + | |||
| + | In 1946, Lacan uses the term 'enunciation' to describe strange characteristics of psychotic language, with its 'duplicity of the enunciation.'<ref>Ec, 167</ref> | ||
| + | |||
| + | In the 1950s, the term is used to locate the [[subject of the unconscious]]. | ||
| + | |||
| + | In the [[graph of desire]], the lower [[chain]] is the [[statement]], which is [[speech]] in its [[conscious]] dimension, while the upper [[chain]] is "the [[unconscious]] [[enunciation]]."<ref>E, 316</ref> | ||
| + | |||
| + | [[Lacan]] designates the [[enunciation]] as u[[nconscious]], and affirms that the source of [[speech]] is not the [[ego]], nor [[consciousness]], but the [[unconscious]]; [[language]] comes from the [[Other]], and the idea that '[[I]]' am [[master]] of my [[discourse]] is only an [[illusion]]. | ||
| + | |||
| + | The very word '[[I]]' (''Je'') is ambiguous; as a [[shifter]], it is both a [[signifier]] acting as [[subject]] of the [[statement]], and an index which designates, but does not [[signify]], the [[subject]] of the [[enunciation]].<ref>E, 298</ref> | ||
| + | |||
| + | The [[subject]] is thus [[split]] between these two levels, divided in the very act of articulating the "I" that presents the [[illusion]] of [[unity]].<ref>Sll, 139</ref> | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
Revision as of 06:11, 5 June 2006
def
ENUNCIATION (Enonciation)
In linguistics, one important distinction is that between the enunciation (enonciation) and the statement (enonce).
The statement (enonce) refers to the actual words uttered. The enunciation (enonciation) refers to the act of uttering them.
When linguistic production is analysed in terms of abstract grammatical units (such as sentences), independent of the specific circumstances of occurrence, it is referred to as a statement. On the other hand, when linguistic production is analysed as an individual act performed by a particular speaker at a specific time/place, and in a specific situation, it is referred to as an enunciation.
In 1936, Lacan states that the act of speaking contains a meaning in itself, even if the actual words spoken are 'meaningless.'[1]
Speech, prior to any function it may have in 'conveying a message', is an appeal to the other.
Lacan focuses his attention on the dimension of the enunciation, the act of speaking in itself, irrespective of the content of the utterance.
In 1946, Lacan uses the term 'enunciation' to describe strange characteristics of psychotic language, with its 'duplicity of the enunciation.'[2]
In the 1950s, the term is used to locate the subject of the unconscious.
In the graph of desire, the lower chain is the statement, which is speech in its conscious dimension, while the upper chain is "the unconscious enunciation."[3]
Lacan designates the enunciation as unconscious, and affirms that the source of speech is not the ego, nor consciousness, but the unconscious; language comes from the Other, and the idea that 'I' am master of my discourse is only an illusion.
The very word 'I' (Je) is ambiguous; as a shifter, it is both a signifier acting as subject of the statement, and an index which designates, but does not signify, the subject of the enunciation.[4]
The subject is thus split between these two levels, divided in the very act of articulating the "I" that presents the illusion of unity.[5]
