Changes
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>).
=====Definition=====
[[Metaphor]] is usually defined as a [[trope ]] in which one [[thing ]] is described by comparing it to [[another]], but without directly asserting a comparison.
=====Jacques Lacan=====
However, [[Lacan]]'s use of the term owes little to this definition and much to the [[work ]] of [[Roman Jakobson]], who, in a major article published in 1956, established an opposition between [[metaphor]] and [[metonymy]].
On the basis of a [[distinction ]] between two kinds of [[aphasia]], [[Jakobson]] distinguished two fundamentally opposed axes of [[language]]: the [[metaphor]]ical axis which deals with the selection of [[linguistic]] [[terms ]] and allows for their substitution, and the [[metonymy|metonymic]] axis which deals with the combination of [[linguistic]] items (both sequentially and simultaneously).
[[Metaphor]] thus corresponds to [[Saussure]]'s paradigmatic relations (which hold ''in absentia'') and [[metonymy]] to [[syntagmatic ]] relationships (which hold ''in praesentia'').<ref>Jakobson, Roman. (1956) "Two aspects of language and two types of aphasic disturbances. ''Selected Writings'', vol. II, ''[[Word ]] and Language'', The [[Hague]]: Mouton, 1971, pp. 239-59.</ref>
=====Influence=====
[[Lacan]], like many [[other ]] [[French ]] intellectuals of the [[time ]] (such as [[Claude Lévi-Strauss]] and [[Roland Barthes]]), was quick to take up [[Jakobson]]'s [[interpretation|reintepretation]] of [[metaphor]] and [[metonymy]].
In the very same year that [[Jakobson]]'s seminal article was published, [[Lacan]] refers to it in his [[seminar]] and begins to incorporate the opposition into his [[linguistic]] rereading of [[Freud]].<ref>{{S3}} p. 218-20, 222-30</ref>
A year later he dedicates a [[whole ]] paper to a more detailed [[analysis ]] of the opposition.<ref>{{L}} ''[[Seminar V|Le Séminaire. Livre V. Les formations de l'inconscient, 1957-58]]'', unpublished.</ref>
=====Substitution=====
Following [[Jakobson]]'s [[identification]] of [[metaphor]] with the substitutive axis of [[language]], [[Lacan]] defines [[metaphor]] as the substitution of one [[signifier]] for another, and provides the first [[formula ]] of [[metaphor]].<ref>{{E}} p.164</ref>
=====Algebraic Formula=====
This formula is to be read as follows.
On the lefthand side of the equation, [[outside ]] the brackets, [[Lacan]] writes '''<i>f</i>''' '''S''', the signifying function, which is to say the effect of [[signification]].
[[Inside ]] the brackets, he writes '''S'/S''', which means "the substitution of one signifier for another."
On the righthand side of the equation there is '''S''', the [[signifier]], and '''<i>s</i>''', the [[signified]].
=====Signification=====
The [[idea ]] behind this rather obscure formulation is that there is an inherent [[resistance]] to [[signification]] in [[language]] (a [[resistance]] which is [[symbolize]]d by the [[bar]] in the [[Saussure]]an [[sign|algorithm]]).
[[Meaning]] does not simply appear spontaneously, but is the product of a specific operation which crosses over the [[bar]].
The formula is meant to illustrate [[Lacan]]'s [[thesis ]] that this operation, the production of [[meaning]], which [[Lacan]] calls "[[signification]]", is only made possible by [[metaphor]].
[[Metaphor]] is thus the passage of the [[signifier]] into the [[signified]], the creation of a new [[signified]].
[[Lacan]]'s own explanation of this second formula is as follows:
<blockquote>The [[capital ]] Ss are [[signifiers]], x the unknown signification and s the signified induced by the metaphor, which consists in substitution in the signifying [[chain ]] of S for S'. The elision of S', represented here by the bar through it, is the condition of the success of the metaphor.<ref>{{E}} p.200</ref></blockquote>
=====Contexts=====
[[Lacan]] puts his [[concept ]] of [[metaphor]] to use in a variety of contexts.
=====Oedipus Complex=====
[[Lacan]] analyzes the [[Oedipus complex]] in terms of a [[metaphor]] because it invovles the crucial concept of substitution; in this [[case]], the substitution of the [[Name-of-the-Father]] for the [[desire]] of the [[mother]].
This fundamental [[metaphor]], which founds the possibility of all ther [[metaphor]], is designated by [[Lacan]] as the [[paternal metaphor]].
=====Repression and Neurotic Symptoms=====
[[Lacan]] argues that [[repression]] ([[secondary repression]]) has the [[structure]] of a [[metaphor]].
The "[[metonymic ]] [[object]]" (the [[signifier]] which is elided, S' in the previous formula) is repressed, but returns in the [[surplus ]] meaning (+) produced in the [[metaphor]].
The [[return ]] of the [[repressed]] (the [[symptom]]) therefore also has the [[structure]] of a [[metaphor]]; indeed; [[Lacan]] asserts that "the symptom ''is'' a metaphor."<ref>{{E}} p.175</ref>
=====Condensation=====
[[Lacan]] also follows [[Jakobson]] in linking the [[metaphor]]-[[metonymy]] distinction to the fundamental mechanisms of the [[dream ]] work described by [[Freud]].
However, he differs from [[Jakobson]] over the precise [[nature ]] of this parallel.
Whereas for [[Jakobson]], [[metonymy]] is linked to both [[displacement]] and [[condensation]], [[metaphor]] to [[identification]] and [[symbolism]], [[Lacan]] [[links ]] [[metaphor]] to [[condensation]] and [[metonymy]] to [[displacement]].
[[Lacan]] then argues that just as [[displacement]] is logically prior to [[condensation]], so [[metonymy]] is the condition for [[metaphor]].
[[Lacan]] takes this as grounds for linking [[anal eroticism]] to [[metaphor]].
<blockquote>"The [[anal ]] level is the locus of metaphor - one object for another, gives the faeces in [[place ]] of the [[phallus]]."<ref>{{S11}} p. 104</ref></blockquote>
=====Identification=====
[[Love]] is [[structure]]d like a [[metaphor]] since it involves the operation of substitution.
<blockquote>"It is insofar as the function of the ''érastès'', of the lover, who is the [[subject ]] of [[lack]], comes in the place of, substitutes himself for, the function of ''érômènos'', the loved object, that the signification of love is produced."<ref>{{S8}} p. 53</ref></blockquote>
==See Also==
