Difference between revisions of "Language"

From No Subject - Encyclopedia of Psychoanalysis
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 1: Line 1:
[[Language]] is a central concept in [[Lacanian psychoanalysis]].
 
  
It is usually regarded as its most distinctive feature.
 
  
==Language as a Structure==
 
  
[[Jacques Lacan]] is concerned with the general [[structure]] of [[language]] (the [[system]] of [[language]] in general) (''[[langage]]''), (rather than the differences between particular [[language]]s (''[[langue]]s'')).
 
  
==Development in Lacan's Thought==
 
  
Four broad phases can be discerned in the long process of [[development]] in [[Lacan]]'s thinking on the nature of [[language]].
+
==Lacanian Psychoanalysis==
 +
===The Primary Importanccce of Language in Psychoanalytic Treament==
 +
It is the emphasis placed by [[Lacan]]ian [[psychoanalysis]] that is usually regarded as its most distinctive feature.
  
===ONE===
+
[[Lacan]] criticizes the way that other forms of [[psychoanalysis]], such as [[Kleinian psychoanalysis]] and [[object-relations theory]], tend to play down the importance of [[language]] and emphasize the "non-verbal communication" of the [[analysand]] (his "body language," etc.) at the expense of the [[analysand]]'s [[speech]]).
  
[[Lacan]] argues that [[language]] is constitutive of the [[psychoanalytic experience]].<ref>{{Ec}} p.82</ref>
+
This is a fundamental error, according to [[Lacan]], for three main reasons.
  
[[Language]], understood in terms derived from [[Hegel]] rather than [[linguistic theory]], is a mediating element which permits the [[subject]] to attain recognition from the [[other]].
+
:1. Firstly, all [[human]] [[communication]] is inscribed in a [[linguistic]] [[structure]]; even "body language," is, as the term implies, fundamentally a form of ''[[language]]'', with the same structural features.
  
[[Language]] is first and foremost an appeal to an interlocutor.
+
:2. Secondly, the whole aim of [[psychoanalytic treatment]] is to articulate the [[truth]] of one's [[desire]] in [[speech]] rather than in any other medium; the fundamental rule of [[psychoanalysis]] is based on the principle that [[speech]] is the only way to this [[truth]].
  
==Language and Structure==
+
:3. And thirdly, [[speech]] is the only tool which the [[analyst]] has; therefore, any [[analyst]] who does not understand the way [[speech]] and [[language]] work does not understand [[psychoanalysis]] itself.<ref>{{E}} p.40</ref>
[[Lacan]]'s discussion of [[language]] contains references to [[Heideggerian]] [[phenomenology]] and to the [[anthropology]] of [[language]] ([[Mauss]], [[Malinowski]] and [[Levi-Strauss]]).
 
  
[[Language]] is seen as [[structuring]] the [[social]] [[law]]s of [[exchange]], as a [[symbolic]] [[pact]], etc.
+
One consequence of [[Lacan]]'s emphasis on [[language]] is his recommendation that the [[analyst]] must attend to the formal features of the [[analysand]]'s [[speech]] (the [[signifiers]]), and not be sidetracked into an empathic attitude baseed on an [[imaginary]] understanding of the content (the [[signified]]).
  
In his famous [[Rome Discourse]] [[Lacan]] posits a basic opposition between ''[[parole]]'' and ''[[langage]]''. (see [[speech]])
+
---
  
[[Lacan]] refers to [[Ferdinand de Saussure]] and [[Roman Jakobson]].
+
One common misconception of [[Lacan]] is that [[language]] is synonymous with the [[symbolic]] [[order]].
  
Following [[Sassure]], [[Lacan]] argues that [[language]] is a structure composed of differential elements.
+
This is, however, not correct; [[Lacan]] argues that [[language]] has both a [[symbolic]] and an [[imaginary]] dimension.
  
[[Language]] becomes for [[Lacan]] the single paradigm of all [[structure]].
+
<blockquote>"There is something in the symbolic function of human discourse that cannot be eliminated, and that is the role played in it by the imaginary."<ref>{{S2}} p.306</ref></blockquote>
  
===Lacan and Language===
+
The symbolic dimension of [[language]] is that of the [[signifier]] and [[speech|true speech]].
[[Lacan]] proceeds to critcize the [[Saussure]]an concept of [[language]].
 
  
[[Lacan]] argues that the basic unit of [[language]] is not the [[sign]] but the [[signifier]].
+
The [[imaginary]] dimension of [[language]] is that of the [[signified]], [[signification]], and [[speech|empty speech]].
  
[[Lacan]] argues that the [[unconscious]] is, like [[language]], a [[structure]] of [[signifier]]s.
+
[[Schema L]] represents these two dimensions of [[language]] by means of two axes which intersect.
  
[[Lacan]] asserts that "[[the unconscious is structured like a language]]."<ref>{{S11}} p.20</ref>
+
The axis A-S is [[language]] in its symbolic dimension, the [[discourse]] of the [[Other]], the [[unconscious]].
  
[[Lacan]] can formulate the category of the [[symbolic]] with greater precision.
+
The [[imaginary]] axis ''a'''-''a'' is [[language]] in its [[imaginary]] dimension, the wall of [[language]] which interrupts, distorts and inverts the [[discourse]] of the [[OTher]].
  
In 1969 [[Lacan]] develops a concept of [[discourse]] as a kind of [[social bond]].
+
In [[Lacan]]'s words, "language is as much there to be found in the Other as to drastically prevent us from understanding him.<ref>{{S2}} p.244</ref>
 
 
===''Lalangue''===
 
[[Lacan]] coins the term ''[[lalangue]]'' to refer to non-communicative aspects of [[language]] which, by playing on ambiguity and homophony, give rise to a kind of''[[jouissance]]''.<ref>{{S20}} p.126</ref>
 
 
 
All [[human]] [[communication]] is inscribed in a [[linguistic]] [[structure]].
 
 
 
The whole [[aim]] of [[psychoanalytic]] [[treatment]] is to articulate the [[truth]] of one's [[desire]] in [[speech]] rather than in any other medium.
 
 
 
The [[fundamental rule]] of [[psychoanalysis]] is based on the principle that [[speech]] is the only way to this [[truth]].
 
 
 
[[Speech]] is the only tool which the [[analyst]] has.
 
 
 
Any [[analyst]] who does not [[understand]] the way [[speech]] and [[language]] work does not [[understand]] [[psychoanalysis]].
 
 
 
==Quotes==
 
<blockquote>Properly speaking this is a redundancy because "[[structured]]" and "as a [[language]]" for me mean exactly the same thing.  [[Structure]]d means my [[speech]], my [[:category:terms|lexicon]], etc., which is exactly the same as a [[language]].  And that is not all.  Which [[language]]?  Rather than myself it was my pupils that took a great deal of trouble to give that question a different [[meaning]], and to search for the formula of a reduced [[language]].  What are the minimum conditions, they ask themselves, necessary to constitute a [[language]]? Perhaps only four <i>signantes</i>, four [[signify]]ing elements are enough.  It is a curious exercise which is based on a complete error, as I hope to show you on the board in a moment.  There were also some [[philosophers]], not many really but some, of those present at my [[seminar]] in Paris who have found since then that it was not a question of an &quot;under&quot; [[language]] or of &quot;another&quot; [[language]], not [[myth]] for instance or [[phoneme]]s, but [[language]].  It is extraordinary the pains that all took to change the place of the question.  [[Myth]]s, for instance, do not take place in our consideration precisely because those are also [[structure]]d as a [[language]], and when I say &quot;as a [[language]]&quot; it is not as some special sort of [[language]], for example, [[mathematical]] [[language]], [[semiotical]] [[language]], or [[cinematographical]] [[language]]. [[Language]] is [[language]] and there is only one sort of [[languag]]e: [[concrete]] [[language]]&nbsp;&#8212;&nbsp; [[English]] or [[French]] for instance&nbsp;&#8212;&nbsp;that people talk.  The first thing to start in this context is that there is no [[meta-language]]. For it is necessary that all so called [[meta-language]]s be presented to you with [[language]].  You cannot teach a course in [[mathematic]]s using only [[[letter]]s on the board. It is always necessary to speak an ordinary [[language]] that is understood. <ref>Of Structure as an Inmixing of an Otherness Prerequisite to Any Subject Whatever</ref></blockquote>
 
 
 
==See Also==
 
* [[Structure]]
 
* [[Linguistics]]
 
* [[Sign]]
 
* [[Signifier]]
 
* [[Signified]]
 
* [[Letter]]
 
* [[Word]]
 
 
 
==References==
 
<references/>
 
# Language: 12, 24-5, 33, 44-5, 71, 83, 118, 119, as system, 38, 40 (35, 37)
 
 
 
[[Category:Terms]]
 
[[Category:Concepts]]
 
[[Category:Symbolic]]
 
[[Category:Psychoanalysis]]
 
[[Category:Jacques Lacan]]
 
[[Category:Language]]
 

Revision as of 17:52, 10 August 2006



Lacanian Psychoanalysis

=The Primary Importanccce of Language in Psychoanalytic Treament

It is the emphasis placed by Lacanian psychoanalysis that is usually regarded as its most distinctive feature.

Lacan criticizes the way that other forms of psychoanalysis, such as Kleinian psychoanalysis and object-relations theory, tend to play down the importance of language and emphasize the "non-verbal communication" of the analysand (his "body language," etc.) at the expense of the analysand's speech).

This is a fundamental error, according to Lacan, for three main reasons.

1. Firstly, all human communication is inscribed in a linguistic structure; even "body language," is, as the term implies, fundamentally a form of language, with the same structural features.
2. Secondly, the whole aim of psychoanalytic treatment is to articulate the truth of one's desire in speech rather than in any other medium; the fundamental rule of psychoanalysis is based on the principle that speech is the only way to this truth.
3. And thirdly, speech is the only tool which the analyst has; therefore, any analyst who does not understand the way speech and language work does not understand psychoanalysis itself.[1]

One consequence of Lacan's emphasis on language is his recommendation that the analyst must attend to the formal features of the analysand's speech (the signifiers), and not be sidetracked into an empathic attitude baseed on an imaginary understanding of the content (the signified).

---

One common misconception of Lacan is that language is synonymous with the symbolic order.

This is, however, not correct; Lacan argues that language has both a symbolic and an imaginary dimension.

"There is something in the symbolic function of human discourse that cannot be eliminated, and that is the role played in it by the imaginary."[2]

The symbolic dimension of language is that of the signifier and true speech.

The imaginary dimension of language is that of the signified, signification, and empty speech.

Schema L represents these two dimensions of language by means of two axes which intersect.

The axis A-S is language in its symbolic dimension, the discourse of the Other, the unconscious.

The imaginary axis a'-a is language in its imaginary dimension, the wall of language which interrupts, distorts and inverts the discourse of the OTher.

In Lacan's words, "language is as much there to be found in the Other as to drastically prevent us from understanding him.[3]

  1. Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p.40
  2. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book II. The Ego in Freud's Theory and in the Technique of Psychoanalysis, 1954-55. Trans. Sylvana Tomaselli. New York: Nortion; Cambridge: Cambridge Unviersity Press, 1988. p.306
  3. Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book II. The Ego in Freud's Theory and in the Technique of Psychoanalysis, 1954-55. Trans. Sylvana Tomaselli. New York: Nortion; Cambridge: Cambridge Unviersity Press, 1988. p.244