Shifter
A term used by Jakobson 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 between a sender and a receiver.[1] Personal pronouns are shifters: the word 'I' designates both the speaker or sender who says 'I' and the 'I' contained in the message that is sent.
shifter The term 'shifter' was introduced into linguistics by Otto Jespersen
in 1923 to refer to those elements in language whose general meaning cannot
be defined without reference to the message. For example the pronouns 'I' and
'you', as well as words like 'here' and 'now', and the tenses, can only be
understood by reference to the context in which they are uttered. 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'
(Jakobson, 1957: 132). In terms of Peirce's typology of SIGNs, shifters were
treated as pure indices (see INDEx). However, following Peirce's own argument
(Peirce, 1932: 156-73), Jakobson argues that shifters do have a single general
meaning; for example the personal pronoun I always means 'the person
uttering I'. This makes the shifter a 'symbol'. Jakobson concludes that shifters
combine both Symbolic and indexical functions and 'belong therefore to the
class of INDEXICAL SYMBOLS' (Jakobson, 1957: 132). 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 impli-
cated in parole, the langue/parole distinction is also put into question (see
Caton, 1987: 234-7).
Following Jakobson, Lacan uses the term 'shifter' (in English), or 'index-
term' as he also calls it (E, 186), to show the problematic and undecidable
nature of the I (Je). However, while Jakobson (following Peirce) defmes the
shifter as an indexical symbol, Lacan defines it as an indexical 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 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' (Sll, 139). Lacan also identifies the
French particle ne as a shifter (E, 298).
References
- ↑ 1957