Metaphor is a figure of speech that involves designating one thing with the name of another, a process that is carried out essentially by substituting one term for another.{{Top}}métaphore{{Bottom}}
=====Definition=====[[Metaphor ]] is usually defined as a fundamental notion that Jacques Lacan introduced [[trope]] in relation to his thesis that "the unconscious which one [[thing]] is structured like a language." He justified its legitimacy principally described by analogy with the Freudian mechanism of "condensationcomparing it to [[another]]," and more generally in relation to the structure of the formations of the unconscious and the metaphorical process of the Name-of-the-Fatherbut without directly asserting a comparison.
=====Jacques Lacan proposed =====However, [[Lacan]]'s use of the term owes little to this definition and much to the following symbolic formula for [[work]] of [[Roman Jakobson]], who, in a major article published in 1956, established an opposition between [[metaphor (2002, p]] and [[metonymy]]. 190):
The Lacanian use of metaphor is founded on On the principle basis of a signifying substitution that promotes the authority [[distinction]] between two kinds of the signifier over that [[aphasia]], [[Jakobson]] distinguished two fundamentally opposed axes of the signified. In [[language, metaphorical substitution most often occurs between two terms on ]]: the basis of semantic similarity. At [[metaphor]]ical axis which deals with the level selection of unconscious processes, this similarity is not always immediately apparent[[linguistic]] [[terms]] and allows for their substitution, and only a series the [[metonymy|metonymic]] axis which deals with the combination of associations can bring it to light[[linguistic]] items (both sequentially and simultaneously).
Thus Freudian condensation plays a role [[Metaphor]] thus corresponds to [[Saussure]]'s paradigmatic relations (which hold ''in absentia'') and [[metonymy]] to [[syntagmatic]] relationships (which hold ''in the different unconscious formationspraesentia'').<ref>Jakobson, such as dreams Roman. (1956) "Two aspects of language and symptomstwo types of aphasic disturbances. ''Selected Writings'', for examplevol. Just as the unconscious material in dreamsII, telescoped by condensations''[[Word]] and Language'', reappears in a meaningless form in the manifest dream contentThe [[Hague]]: Mouton, so the symptom expresses1971, in reality, something completely different from what it appears to meanpp. 239-59.</ref>
The metaphor =====Influence=====[[Lacan]], like many [[other]] [[French]] intellectuals of the Name[[time]] (such as [[Claude Lévi-of-the-FatherStrauss]] and [[Roland Barthes]]), as it was called by Lacan, is based on the same principle—that of the substitution of signifiers. In this case, the signifier of the Name-of-the-Father substitutes for the signifier of the motherquick to take up [[Jakobson]]'s desire, which thus becomes the object [[interpretation|reintepretation]] of repression [[metaphor]] and becomes unconscious[[metonymy]].
The "fort/da game" that Freud described (1920g) directly attests to In the process of metaphorization and the repression very same year that is linked to it. A relation of signifying substitution is established by the child as soon as they "name" the signifying reference to the father as the cause of the mother[[Jakobson]]'s absences. In addition seminal article was published, [[Lacan]] refers to the paternal metaphor, which makes it possible, the fort/da game is also inscribed in a double metaphorical process. In itself, the reel is already a metaphor for the mother, his [[seminar]] and begins to incorporate the game opposition into his [[linguistic]] rereading of its presence and absence is another metaphor since it symbolizes her departure and return[[Freud]].<ref>{{S3}} p.218-20, 222-30</ref>
JOËL DORA 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>
See also: Condensation; Displacement; Forgetting; Formations =====Substitution=====Following [[Jakobson]]'s [[identification]] of [[metaphor]] with the unconscious; Lettersubstitutive axis of [[language]], [[Lacan]] defines [[metaphor]] as the; Linguistics and psychoanalysis; Matheme; Metonymy; Mirror stage; Name-substitution of-the-Father; Phobias in children; Psychosesone [[signifier]] for another, chronic and delusional; Signifier; Signifierprovides the first [[formula]] of [[metaphor]].<ref>{{E}} p.164</signified; Signifying chain; Symptom/sinthome; Topology.Bibliographyref>
* Dor, Joël. (1998). Introduction to the reading of Lacan: The unconscious structured like a language (Judith Feher Gurewich and Susan Fairfield, Eds.). New York: Other Press, 1998.=====Algebraic Formula===== * Freud, Sigmund. (1920g). Beyond the pleasure principle. SE, 18[[Image: 1Lacan-64. * Lacan, Jacques. (2002).Écrits: A selection (Bruce Fink, Trans.). New York: W. W. Nortonfirstmetaphor.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]].
==new==[[Inside]] the brackets, he writes '''S'/S''', which means "the substitution of one signifier for another."
To On the overall conception righthand side of linguistics he borrows from Saussure Lacan adds Roman Jakobson’s distinction between metaphor the equation there is '''S''', the [[signifier]], and metonymy:'''<i>s</i>''', the [[signified]].
On the basis of a distinction between Between these two kinds of aphasia, Jakobson distinguished two fundamentally opposed axes of language: [[symbol]]s there is the metaphorical axis [[symbol]] (+) which deals with represents the selection crossing of linguistic items and allows for their substitutionthe [[bar]] ('''-''') of the [[Saussure]]an [[sign|algorithm]], and the metonymic axis which deals with represents "the combination emergence 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)signification. (Evans 111)"
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 The [[itsign] 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 imaginaryto be read: "if the symptom is a metaphor, it is not a metaphor to say so […] the symptom is a metaphorcongruent with." (Ecrits 175).
The second term which Lacan borrows from Jakobson to fill out his understanding of Thus the symbolic order is metonymywhole formula reads: "following Jakobson, Lacan links metonymy to the combinatorial axis signifying function of language, as opposed to the substitutive axis" (Evans 113). If metaphor is a process substitution 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 congruent 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 crossing 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[[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 defined as a trope in which one thing is described by comparing it to anotherthus the passage of the [[signifier]] into the [[signified]], but without directly asserting a comparison (with the use creation of the word 'like')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:
Lacan'<blockquote>The [[capital]] Ss are [[signifiers]], x the unknown signification and s use of the term owes much to signified induced by the metaphor, which consists in substitution in the work of signifying [[Roman Jakobsonchain]] whoof S for S'. The elision of S', in a major article published in 1956represented here by the bar through it, established an opposition between is the condition of the success of the metaphor and metonymy.<ref>{{E}} p.200</ref></blockquote>
Jakobson distinguished two fundamentally opposed axes =====Contexts=====[[Lacan]] puts his [[concept]] of alngauge: the metaphorical axis which deals with the selection [[metaphor]] to use in a variety of linguistic items and allows for their substitution, and the metonymic axis which deals with the combination of linguisitic itemscontexts.
=====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 "[[Category:Symbolicmetonymic]] [[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]], [[Category:TermsLacan]] [[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 [[Category:Conceptsmetaphor]]. =====The Anal Drive=====In his paper, "[[CategorySigmund Freud:PsychoanalysisBibliography|On transformations of instinct as exemplified in anal eroticism]]"', [[Freud]]shows how [[anal eroticism]] is closely connected with the possibility of substitution. [[Category:Jacques 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
