Difference between revisions of "Metaphor"

From No Subject - Encyclopedia of Psychoanalysis
Jump to: navigation, search
 
(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>).)
(13 intermediate revisions by one other user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
−
To the overall conception of linguistics he borrows from Saussure Lacan adds Roman Jakobson’s distinction between metaphor and metonymy:
+
{{Top}}métaphore{{Bottom}}
  
−
On the basis of a distinction between two kinds of aphasia, Jakobson distinguished two fundamentally opposed axes of language: the metaphorical axis which deals with the selection of linguistic items and allows for their substitution, and the metonymic axis which deals with the combination of linguistic terms (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). (Evans 111)
+
=====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.
  
−
That is, metaphor can be seen as having a vertical relationship, in which the line between the signifier and the signified is crossed, as the signifier passes over into the signified and a new signifier is produced. For example, in the metaphor "Juliet is the sun" the various signifiers that might have stood in place of "the sun" (glorious, bright, fair, beautiful) thus pass through the barrier between the signifier and the signified, joining that object designated as "Juliet," and become signifieds of the new signifier, "the sun" (this example is drawn from Evans 111). A compression of linguistic space and relations, metaphor is the direct substitution of one signifier for another such that the second signifier ("the sun") supersedes the first (glorious, bright, fair, beautiful) in relation to the signified ("Juliet"). This process is the basic structure of identification as it occurs in the imaginary "since [it] consists in substituting oneself for another" (Evans 113). And insofar as this process escapes full symbolization (i.e. insofar as it is a compression of language that brings the imaginary into play as an equal partner in the linguistic production of meaning), Lacan reads it as the basic structure of the symptom, as an indicator of a breakdown of the process of symbolising the imaginary: "if the symptom is a metaphor, it is not a metaphor to say so […] the symptom is a metaphor" (Ecrits 175).
+
=====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]].
  
−
The second term which Lacan borrows from Jakobson to fill out his understanding of the symbolic order is metonymy: "following Jakobson, Lacan links metonymy to the combinatorial axis of language, as opposed to the substitutive axis" (Evans 113). If metaphor is a process of substitution, whereby one signifier comes to stand in for another in relation to a given signified, then metonymy is a purely diachronic movement above the barrier separating signifier from signified. In contrast to the vertical motion of metaphor, it is a horizontal movement along the chain of signification, as "one signifier constantly refers to another in a perpetual deferral of meaning" (Evans 114). As the only realm in which meaning is generated, the symbolic’s dependence on the metonymic function of signifier relations thus becomes the primary focus of Lacan’s concern with language. He emphasises the metonymic deferral of meaning that takes place in the incessant play of signifiers, referring to the ready movement of the chain of signifiers over the signifieds as glissement (slippage). This designation of the movement along the signifying chain as a slippage emphasises Lacan’s re-writing of Saussure’s concept such that the relationship between signifier and signified ceases to be stable (if arbitrary) and becomes profoundly unstable.
+
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=====
 +
[[Image:Lacan-firstmetaphor.jpg|center]]
 +
 
 +
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]].
 +
 
 +
Between these two [[symbol]]s there is the [[symbol]] (+) which represents the crossing of the [[bar]] ('''-''') of the [[Saussure]]an [[sign|algorithm]], and which represents "the emergence of signification."
 +
 
 +
The [[sign]] = is to be read: "is congruent with."
 +
 
 +
Thus the whole formula reads: the signifying function of the substitution of one [[signifier]] for another is congruent with the crossing of the [[bar]].
 +
 
 +
[[Image:Lacan-secondmetaphor.jpg|center]]
 +
 
 +
=====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]].
 +
 
 +
=====Second Formula=====
 +
[[Lacan]] presents another formula for [[metaphor]] in a paper written a few months later.<ref>{{E}} p. 200</ref>
 +
 
 +
[[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]].
 +
 
 +
=====The Anal Drive=====
 +
In his paper, "[[Sigmund Freud:Bibliography|On transformations of instinct as exemplified in anal eroticism]]"', [[Freud]] shows how [[anal eroticism]] is closely connected with the possibility of substitution.
 +
 
 +
[[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=====
 +
[[Metaphor]] is also the [[structure]] of [[identification]], since the latter consists in substituting oneself for another.<ref>{{S3}} p. 218</ref>
 +
 
 +
=====Love=====
 +
[[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==
 +
{{See}}
 +
{{Also}}
 +
 
 +
==References==
 +
<references/>
 +
 
 +
{{OK}}
 +
 
 +
__NOTOC__
 +
 
 +
{{Encore}} pp. 112, 120, 127, 128

Revision as of 19:25, 20 May 2019

French: métaphore
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 metaphorical axis which deals with the selection of linguistic terms and allows for their substitution, and the 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).[1]

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 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.[2]

A year later he dedicates a whole paper to a more detailed analysis of the opposition.[3]

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.[4]

Algebraic Formula
Lacan-firstmetaphor.jpg

This formula is to be read as follows.

On the lefthand side of the equation, outside the brackets, Lacan writes f 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 s, the signified.

Between these two symbols there is the symbol (+) which represents the crossing of the bar (-) of the Saussurean algorithm, and which represents "the emergence of signification."

The sign = is to be read: "is congruent with."

Thus the whole formula reads: the signifying function of the substitution of one signifier for another is congruent with the crossing of the bar.

Lacan-secondmetaphor.jpg
Signification

The idea behind this rather obscure formulation is that there is an inherent resistance to signification in language (a resistance which is symbolized by the bar in the Saussurean 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.

Second Formula

Lacan presents another formula for metaphor in a paper written a few months later.[5]

Lacan's own explanation of this second formula is as follows:

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.[6]

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."[7]

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.

The Anal Drive

In his paper, "On transformations of instinct as exemplified in anal eroticism"', Freud shows how anal eroticism is closely connected with the possibility of substitution.

Lacan takes this as grounds for linking anal eroticism to metaphor.

"The anal level is the locus of metaphor - one object for another, gives the faeces in place of the phallus."[8]

Identification

Metaphor is also the structure of identification, since the latter consists in substituting oneself for another.[9]

Love

Love is structured like a metaphor since it involves the operation of substitution.

"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."[10]

See Also

References

  1. ↑ 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.
  2. ↑ Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p. 218-20, 222-30
  3. ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Le Séminaire. Livre V. Les formations de l'inconscient, 1957-58, unpublished.
  4. ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p.164
  5. ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p. 200
  6. ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p.200
  7. ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Tavistock Publications, 1977. p.175
  8. ↑ Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book XI. The Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis, 1964. Trans. Alan Sheridan. London: Hogarth Press and Institute of Psycho-Analysis, 1977. p. 104
  9. ↑ Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar. Book III. The Psychoses, 1955-56. Trans. Russell Grigg. London: Routledge, 1993. p. 218
  10. ↑ Lacan, Jacques. Le Séminaire. Livre VIII. Le transfert, 1960-61. Ed. Jacques-Alain Miller. Paris: Seuil, 1991. p. 53


Index
Retrieved from "https://nosubject.com/index.php?title=Metaphor&oldid=46555"