Difference between revisions of "Metalanguage"
(The LinkTitles extension automatically added links to existing pages (<a rel="nofollow" class="external free" href="https://github.com/bovender/LinkTitles">https://github.com/bovender/LinkTitles</a>).) |
|||
| (11 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown) | |||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | {{Top}}métalangage{{Bottom}} | |
| − | |||
| − | + | =====Linguistic Definition===== | |
| + | "[[Metalanguage]]" is the technical [[linguistic]] term for any [[form]] of [[language]] which is used to describe or analyze the properties of [[another]] [[language]]. | ||
| − | + | =====Roman Jakobson===== | |
| + | [[Roman Jakobson]] includes the metalingual function in his [[list]] of the functions of [[language]].<ref>[[Roman Jakobson|Jakobson, Roman]]. "Linguistics and poetics," in ''Selected Writings'', vol. II, ''[[Poetry]] of Grammar and Grammar of Poetry'', The [[Hague]]: Mouton, 1981 [1960]., p. 25</ref> | ||
| − | + | =====Jacques Lacan===== | |
| + | =====Early Work===== | ||
| + | [[Lacan]]'s first reference to [[metalanguage]] comes in 1956, when he echoes [[Jakobson]]'s view on the metalingual function of all [[language]]: | ||
| − | + | <blockquote>"All [[language]] implies a [[metalanguage]], its already a [[metalanguage]] of its own [[register]]."<ref>{{S3}} p. 226</ref></blockquote> | |
| − | + | =====Later Work===== | |
| + | A few years later, in 1960, he says precisely the opposite, arguing that "no [[metalanguage]] can be spoken."<ref>{{E}} p.311</ref> | ||
| − | The same point is also expressed in the phrase | + | =====No "Outside" of Language===== |
| − | 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. | + | What [[Lacan]] appears to mean by this remark is that, since every attempt to fix the [[signification|meaning]] of [[language]] must be done in [[language]], there can be no escape from [[language]], no "outside". |
| − | 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 | + | |
| + | This is reminiscent of [[Heidegger]]'s views on the [[impossibility]] of exiting "the house of language." | ||
| + | |||
| + | =====Metalanguage Does Not Exist===== | ||
| + | [[Lacan]] rejects the very possibility of a [[metalanguage|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]]. | ||
| + | |||
| + | =====Meaning Beyond Language===== | ||
| + | This also appears similar to the [[structuralism|structuralist]] theme of ''il n'y a rien hors du texte'' ("there is [[nothing]] outside the [[text]]"), but it is not the same; [[Lacan]] does not deny that there is a beyond of [[language]] (this beyond is the [[real]]), but he does argue that this beyond is not of a kind that could finally anchor [[signification|meaning]]. | ||
| + | |||
| + | There is, in other [[words]], no [[transcendental]] [[signified]], no way that [[language]] could "tell the [[truth]] [[about]] truth."<ref>{{Ec}} p. 867-8</ref> | ||
| + | |||
| + | =====No Other of the Other===== | ||
| + | The same point is also expressed in the phrase: | ||
| + | |||
| + | <blockquote>"There is no [[Other of the Other]]."<ref>{{E}} p. 311</ref></blockquote> | ||
| + | |||
| + | 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. | ||
| + | |||
| + | =====Transference===== | ||
| + | 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 [[interpretation|interpreted]] and "liquidated." | ||
| + | |||
| + | ==See Also== | ||
| + | {{See}} | ||
| + | * [[Discourse]] | ||
| + | * [[Interpretation]] | ||
| + | || | ||
| + | * [[Language]] | ||
| + | * [[Linguistics]] | ||
| + | || | ||
| + | * [[Other]] | ||
| + | * [[Real]] | ||
| + | || | ||
| + | * [[Subject]] | ||
| + | * [[Transference]] | ||
| + | {{Also}} | ||
==References== | ==References== | ||
| + | <div style="font-size:11px" class="references-small"> | ||
<references/> | <references/> | ||
| + | </div> | ||
| + | {{OK}} | ||
| + | [[Category:Linguistics]] | ||
| + | [[Category:Language]] | ||
[[Category:Symbolic]] | [[Category:Symbolic]] | ||
| − | [[Category: | + | [[Category:OK]] |
| − | + | ||
| − | + | __NOTOC__ | |
| − | |||
Latest revision as of 19:25, 20 May 2019
| French: métalangage |
Linguistic Definition
"Metalanguage" is the technical linguistic term for any form of language which is used to describe or analyze the properties of another language.
Roman Jakobson
Roman Jakobson includes the metalingual function in his list of the functions of language.[1]
Jacques Lacan
Early Work
Lacan's first reference to metalanguage comes in 1956, when he echoes Jakobson's view on the metalingual function of all language:
"All language implies a metalanguage, its already a metalanguage of its own register."[2]
Later Work
A few years later, in 1960, he says precisely the opposite, arguing that "no metalanguage can be spoken."[3]
No "Outside" of Language
What Lacan appears to mean by this remark is that, since every attempt to fix the meaning of language must be done in language, there can be no escape from language, no "outside".
This is reminiscent of Heidegger's views on the impossibility of exiting "the house of language."
Metalanguage Does Not Exist
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.
Meaning Beyond Language
This also appears similar to the structuralist theme of il n'y a rien hors du texte ("there is nothing outside the text"), but it is not the same; Lacan does not deny that there is a beyond of language (this beyond is the real), but he does argue that this beyond is not of a kind that could finally anchor meaning.
There is, in other words, no transcendental signified, no way that language could "tell the truth about truth."[4]
No Other of the Other
The same point is also expressed in the phrase:
"There is no Other of the Other."[5]
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.
Transference
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, Roman. "Linguistics and poetics," in Selected Writings, vol. II, Poetry of Grammar and Grammar of Poetry, The Hague: Mouton, 1981 [1960]., p. 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
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits. Paris: Seuil, 1966. p. 867-8
- ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p. 311
