Changes

When [[reading]] [[Lacan]] in English it is therefore essential to be aware of which term is used in the original French; most of the [[time]] the French term will be ''[[langage]]''. =====Psychoanalytic Experience=====Between 1936 and 1949 references to [[language]] are sparse, but they are significant; already in 1936, for example, [[Lacan]] emphasizes that [[language]] is constitutive of the [[psychoanalytic]] [[experience]],<ref>{{Ec}} p.82</ref> and in 1946 he argues that it is [[impossible]] to [[understand]] [[madness]] without addressing the problem of [[language]].<ref>{{Ec}} p. 166</ref> [[Lacan]]'s comments on [[language]] at this time do not contain any references to a specific [[linguistics|linguistic theory]], and instead are dominated by [[philosophy|philosophical allusions]], mainly in [[terms]] derived from [[Hegel]]. Thus [[language]] is seen primarily as a mediating element which permits the [[subject]] to attain [[recognition]] from the other.<ref>{{E}} p. 9</ref> Above and beyond its use for conveying information, [[language]] is first and foremost an appeal to an interlocutor; in [[Jakobson]]'s terms, [[Lacan]] stresses the connative function above the referential. Thus he insists that [[langage]] is not a nomenclature.<ref>{{Ec}} p. 166</ref> =====Anthropology and Phenomenology=====From 1950 to 1954 [[language]] begins to occupy the central [[position]] that it will hold in [[Lacan]]'s work thereafter. In this period, [[Lacan]]'s [[discussion]] of [[language]] is dominated by references to [[Heideggerian]] [[phenomenology]] and, more importantly, to the [[anthropology]] of [[language]] ([[Anthropology|Maus, Malinowski, and Lévi-Strauss]]. [[Language]] is thus seen as [[structure|structuring]] the [[law|social laws of exchange]], as a symbolic pact, etc. There are also occasional references to [[rhetoric]], but these are not elaborated.<ref>{{E}} p. 169</ref> There are a few allusions to [[Saussure]],<ref>{{S1}} p. 248</ref> but in his famous "[[Rome Discourse]]" [[Lacan]] establishes an opposition between ''[[parole]]'' and ''[[language|langage]]'' (and not, as [[Saussure]] does, between ''[[parole]]'' and ''[[language|langue]]''.<ref>{{L}}. "''[[Fonction]] et [[champ]] de la parole et du langage en [[psychanalyse]].''" 1953a. In {{E}} p. 237-322. ("[[The function and field of speech and language in psychoanalysis]].") In {{E}}. p. 30-113</ref> ====="The Unconscious is Structured like a Language"=====Between 1955 and 1970 [[language]] takes center [[stage]] and [[Lacan]] develops his classic [[thesis]] that "the unconscious is [[structured]] like a language."<ref>{{S11}} p. 20</ref> It is in this period that the names [[Ferdinand de Saussure]] and [[Roman Jakobson]] come to the fore in [[Lacan]]'s [[Works of Jacques Lacan|work]]. =====Structural Linguistics=====[[Lacan]] takes up [[Saussure]]'s [[theory]] that [[language]] is a [[structure]] composed of differential elements, but whereas [[Saussure]] had stated this of ''[[language|langue]]'', [[Lacan]] states it of ''[[language|langage]]''. ''[[language|Langage]]'' becomes, for [[Lacan]], the single paradigm of all [[structures]]. [[Lacan]] then proceeds to criticize the [[Saussure]]an [[concept]] of [[language]], arguing that the basic unit of [[language]] is not the [[sign]] but the [[signifier]]. [[Lacan]] then argues that the [[unconscious]] is, like [[language]], a [[structure]] of [[signifiers]], which also allows [[Lacan]] to formulate the [[category]] of the [[symbolic]] with greater precision. In 1969 [[Lacan]] develops a concept of [[discourse]] as a kind of [[discourse|social bond]]. =====Psychotic Language=====From 1971 on, the shift from [[linguistics]] to [[mathematics]] as the paradigm of [[science|scientificity]] is accompanied by a tendency to emphasize the [[poetry]] and ambiguity of [[language]], as is evident in [[Lacan]]'s increasing interest in the "[[psychotic]] [[language]]" of [[James Joyce]].<ref>{{L}}. "[[Joyce]] le symptôme." 1975a. In Jacques Aubert (ed.), ''Joyce avec Lacan''. [[Paris]]: Navarin, 1987.</ref> [[Lacan]]'s own style reflects this [[change]] as it becomes ever more densely populated with puns and neologisms. =====''Lalangue''=====[[Lacan]] coins the term ''[[language|lalangue]]'' (from the definite article ''la'' and the noun ''[[language|langue]]'') to refer to these non-communicative aspects of [[language]] which, by playing on ambiguity and homophony, give rise to a kind of ''[[jouissance]]''.<ref>{{S20}} p. 126</ref> The term "[[language]]" now becomes opposed to ''[[language|lalangue]]''. ''[[language|Lalangue]]'' is like the primary chaotic substrate of polysemy out of which [[language]] is constructed, almost as if [[language]] is some ordered superstructure sitting on top of this substrate: <blockquote>"Language is without [[doubt]] made of ''[[lalangue]]''. It is an elucubration of [[knowledge]] (''[[knowledge|savoir]]'') [[about]] ''lalangue''.<ref>{{S20}} p. 127</ref></blockquote> =====Lacanian Psychoanalysis========The Primary Importanccce of ==Language in Psychoanalytic TreamentAnalytic Treatment=====

[[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]] This is inscribed in a fundamental error, according to [[linguisticLacan]] [[structure]]; even "body language," is, as the term implies, fundamentally a form of ''for [[languagethree]]'', with the same structural featuresmain reasons.

:21. SecondlyFirstly, the whole aim of all [[psychoanalytic treatmenthuman]] is to articulate the [[truthcommunication]] of one's is inscribed in a [[desirelinguistic]] in [[speechstructure]] rather than in any other medium; even "body language," is, as the fundamental rule of term implies, fundamentally a [[psychoanalysisform]] is based on the principle that of ''[[speechlanguage]] is '', with the only way to this same [[truthstructure|structural features]].

:32. And thirdlySecondly, the [[speechwhole]] aim of [[psychoanalytic treatment]] is to articulate the only tool which [[truth]] of one's [[desire]] in [[speech]] rather than in any other medium; the [[analystfundamental rule]] has; therefore, any of [[analystpsychoanalysis]] who does not understand is based on the way [[speechprinciple]] and that [[languagespeech]] work does not understand is the only way to this [[psychoanalysistruth]] itself.<ref>{{E}} p.40</ref>

One consequence of :3. And thirdly, [[Lacan]]'s emphasis on [[languagespeech]] is his recommendation that the only tool which the [[analyst]] must attend to the formal features of the has; therefore, any [[analysandanalyst]]'s who does not understand the way [[speech]] (the and [[signifierslanguage]]), and work does not be sidetracked into an empathic attitude baseed on an understand [[imaginarypsychoanalysis]] understanding of the content (the [[signified]])itself.<ref>{{E}} p.40</ref>

==Symbolic 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 Imaginary Dimensions==not be sidetracked into an empathic attitude baseed on an [[imaginary]] [[understanding]] of the [[content]] (the [[signified]]).

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

<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>

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

The axis '''A-S ''' is [[language]] in its [[symbolic|symbolic dimension]]], the [[discourse]] of the [[Other]], the [[unconscious]]. The [[imaginary]] axis ''a'''-''a'' is [[language]] in its [[imaginary|imaginary dimension]], the wall of [[language]] which interrupts, distorts and [[inversion|invert]]s 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.<ref>{{S2}} p. 244</ref>

The =====Languages and Codes=====[[imaginaryLacan]] axis ''a'''-''a'' is distinguishes between [[language]] in its s and [[code]]s; unlike [[imaginarycode]] dimensions, the wall of in [[language]] which interruptsthere is no [[stable]] one-to-one correspondence between [[sign]] and [[sign|referent]], distorts and inverts the nor between [[discoursesignified]] of the and [[Othersignifier]].

In It is this property of [[language]] which gives rise to the inherent ambiguity of all [[Lacandiscourse]]'s words, "language is as much there to which can only be found in [[interpreted]] by playing on the Other as to drastically prevent us from understanding him.<ref>{{S2}} phomophony and other forms of equivocation (''l'équivoque'').244</ref>

==Languages and CodesReferences==<div style="font-size:11px" class="references-small"><references/></div>

{{OK}}[[LacanCategory:Linguistics]] distinguishes between [[languageCategory:Language]]s and [[codeCategory:Symbolic]]s; unlike [[code]]s, in [[language]] there is no stable one-to-one correspondence between [[sign]] and [[sign|referent]], nor between [[signified]] and [[signifier]].