Changes

The term '[[shifter]]' was introduced into [[linguistics]] by (Danish [[linguist) ]] [[Otto Jespersen]] (1860-1943) to refer to those elements in [[language]] whose general [[meaning]] cannot be defined without reference to the [[message ]] (to describe a class of words whose [[meaning ]] varies according to their situation or whose references varies).

For [[Jakobson]], a [[shifter ]] is a term whose [[meaning ]] cannot be determined without referring to the [[message ]] that is being communicated [[communicate]]d between a sender and a receiver.<ref>1957</ref>

Personal pronouns are [[shifter]]s: the word 'I' designates both the speaker or sender who says 'I' and the 'I' contained in the [[message ]] that is sent.

[[Roman Jakobson ]] developed the concept in an article published in 1957. Before this article, 'the peculiarity of the personal pronoun and other shifters was often believed to consist in the lack of a single, constant, general meaning."<ref>Jakobson, 1957: 132</ref>

Jakobson argues that [[shifter]]s do have a single general meaning; for example Before this article, "the peculiarity of the personal pronoun I always means 'the person uttering I'. This makes and other shifters was often believed to consist in the [[shifter]] lack of a 'symbol'single, constant, general meaning. "<ref>Jakobson, 1957: 132</ref>

[[Jakobson concludes ]] argues that shifters combine both [[Symbolicshifter]]s do have a single general [[meaning]] and indexical functions and 'belong therefore to ; for example the personal pronoun I always means "the class of indexical symbols.person uttering I"<ref>Jakobson, 1957: 132.</ref>

In this way, Jakobson questions This makes the possibility of [[shifter]] a context-free grammar, since the '[[enunciationsymbol]] is encoded in the statement itself'.

[[Jakobso]] concludes that [[shifter]]s combine both [[symbolic]] and [[index]]ical functions and "belong therefore to the class of indexical symbols."<ref>Jakobson, 1957: 132.</ref> In this way, [[Jakobson]] questions the possibility of a context-free grammar, since the [[enunciation]] is encoded in the [[statement]] itself. Also, since grammar is implicated in ''[[parole]]'', the ''[[langue]]''/''[[parole]]'' distinction is put into question.

However, while [[Jakobson]] defines the [[shifter]] as an indexical [[index]]ical [[symbol]], [[Lacan ]] defines it as an indexical [[index]]ical [[signifier]].

This problematises the distinction between [[enunciation]] and [[statement]].

On the one hand, as a [[signifier]] it is clearly part of the [[statement]].

On the other hand, as an [[index ]] it is clearly part of the [[enunciation]].

This division [[divisio]] of the 'I' is not merely illustrative of the [[splitting]] of the [[subject]]; it is that [[split]].

"Indeed, the I of the enunciation is not the same as the I of the statement, that is to say, the shifter which, in the statement, designates him."<ref>{{SllS11}} p.139</ref>