24,656
edits
Changes
no edit summary
: ([[Fr]]. ''[[signifiant]]'')
The term was not used by [[Freud]], who was unaware of [[Saussure]]'s work.
[[Lacan]] takes the term '[[signifier]]' from the work of the Swiss [[linguist]], [[Ferdinand de Saussure]].
According to [[Saussure]], the [[signifier]] is the phonological element of the [[sign]]; not the actual sound itself, but the [[mental]] [[image]] of such a sound.
In [[Saussure]]'s terms, the [[signifier]] is the "acoustic image" which signifies a [[signified]].<ref>[[Saussure]]. 1916: 66--7</ref>
[[Lacan]] argues that the [[signifier]] is primary and produces the [[signified]].
The [[signifier]] is a [[meaning]]less [[material]] element in a closed differential [[system]].
The 'signifier without the signified' is called by [[Lacan]] the 'pure signifier', though this is a question of logical rather than chronological precedence.
<blockquote>"Every real signifier is, as such, a signifier that signifies nothing. The more the signifier signifies nothing, the more indestructible it is."<ref>{{S3}} p.185</ref></blockquote>
It is these [[meaning]]less indestructible [[signifier]]s which determine the [[subject]]; the effects of the [[signifier]] on the [[subject]] constitute the [[unconscious]], and hence also constitute the whole of the field of [[psychoanalysis]].
Thus for [[Lacan]] language is not a [[system]] of [[sign]]s (as it was for [[Saussure]]) but a [[system]] of [[signifier]]s.
[[Signifier]]s are the basic units of [[language]], and they are "subjected to the double condition of being reducible to ultimate differential elements and of combining according to the laws of a closed order."<ref>{{E}} p.152</ref>
By the phrase "reducible to ultimate differential elements," [[Lacan]] follows [[Saussure]] in asserting the fundamentally differential character of the ]]signifier]].
[[Saussure]] states that in [[language]] there are no positive terms, only [[difference]]s.<ref>Saussure, 1916: 120</ref>
By the phrase 'combining according to the laws of a closed order', [[Lacan]] asserts that [[signifier]]s are combined in [[signifying chain]]s according to the [[law]]s of [[metonymy]].
The [[signifier]] is the constitutive unit of the [[symbolic]] [[order]] because it is integrally related with the concept of [[structure]].
"The notion of structure and that of signifier appear inseparable."<ref>{{S3}} p.184</ref>
The field of the [[signifier]] is the field of the [[Other]], which [[Lacan]] calls "the battery of signifiers."
[[Lacan]] defines a [[signifier]] as "that which represents a subject for another signifier," in opposition to the [[sign]], which "represents something for someone."<ref>{{S11}} p.207</ref>
To be more precise, one [[signifier]] (called the [[master]] [[signifier]], and written S1) represents the [[subject]] for all other [[signifier]]s (written S2).
However, no [[signifier]] can [[signify]] the [[subject]].
Although the term '[[signifier]]' is [[absent]] from [[Freud]]'s work, [[Lacan]]'s use of the term focuses attention on a recurrent theme in [[Freud]]'s writings.
[[Freud]]'s examples of [[psychoanalytic]] [[interpretation]]s constantly focus on purely formal [[linguistic]] features.
Thus [[Lacan]]'s insistence that the [[analyst]] attend to the [[signifier]]s in the [[analysand]]'s [[speech]] is not really an innovation in [[technique]] but an attempt to theorise [[Freud]]'s own method in more rigorous terms.
Not only can units of [[language]] smaller than words ([[morpheme]]s and [[phoneme]]s) or larger than [[word]]s (phrases and sentences) also function as [[signifier]]s, but so also can non-[[linguistic]] things such as [[object]]]s, relationships and [[symptom]]atic [[act]]s.<ref>{{S4}} p.288</ref>
The single condition which characterises something as a [[signifier]], for [[Lacan]], is that it is inscribed in a [[system]] in which it takes on value purely by virtue of its [[difference]] from the other elements in the [[system]].
It is this differential nature of the [[signifier]] which means that it can never have a univocal or fixed [[meaning]];<ref>{{S4}} p.289</ref> on the contrary, its [[meaning]] varies according to the [[position]] which it occupies in the [[structure]].
== References ==
<references/>
signifier 13, 20, 223, 26, 40, 46-8, 61-2, 67, 114, 125-6, 130, 133, 138-9, 141-2, 149-* 60, 176-77, 181, 184, 198-9, 203, 205-14, 217, 219-20, 227-9, 236-7, 241, 247-52, 256-7, * 266, 268-70, 273, 276-7, 278-9, 282, network of signifiers, 42-52, 177, signifier and * signification, 253, signifier and signified, 248, 250 [[Seminar XI]]
The term was not used by [[Freud]], who was unaware of [[Saussure]]'s work.
[[Lacan]] takes the term '[[signifier]]' from the work of the Swiss [[linguist]], [[Ferdinand de Saussure]].
According to [[Saussure]], the [[signifier]] is the phonological element of the [[sign]]; not the actual sound itself, but the [[mental]] [[image]] of such a sound.
In [[Saussure]]'s terms, the [[signifier]] is the "acoustic image" which signifies a [[signified]].<ref>[[Saussure]]. 1916: 66--7</ref>
[[Lacan]] argues that the [[signifier]] is primary and produces the [[signified]].
The [[signifier]] is a [[meaning]]less [[material]] element in a closed differential [[system]].
The 'signifier without the signified' is called by [[Lacan]] the 'pure signifier', though this is a question of logical rather than chronological precedence.
<blockquote>"Every real signifier is, as such, a signifier that signifies nothing. The more the signifier signifies nothing, the more indestructible it is."<ref>{{S3}} p.185</ref></blockquote>
It is these [[meaning]]less indestructible [[signifier]]s which determine the [[subject]]; the effects of the [[signifier]] on the [[subject]] constitute the [[unconscious]], and hence also constitute the whole of the field of [[psychoanalysis]].
Thus for [[Lacan]] language is not a [[system]] of [[sign]]s (as it was for [[Saussure]]) but a [[system]] of [[signifier]]s.
[[Signifier]]s are the basic units of [[language]], and they are "subjected to the double condition of being reducible to ultimate differential elements and of combining according to the laws of a closed order."<ref>{{E}} p.152</ref>
By the phrase "reducible to ultimate differential elements," [[Lacan]] follows [[Saussure]] in asserting the fundamentally differential character of the ]]signifier]].
[[Saussure]] states that in [[language]] there are no positive terms, only [[difference]]s.<ref>Saussure, 1916: 120</ref>
By the phrase 'combining according to the laws of a closed order', [[Lacan]] asserts that [[signifier]]s are combined in [[signifying chain]]s according to the [[law]]s of [[metonymy]].
The [[signifier]] is the constitutive unit of the [[symbolic]] [[order]] because it is integrally related with the concept of [[structure]].
"The notion of structure and that of signifier appear inseparable."<ref>{{S3}} p.184</ref>
The field of the [[signifier]] is the field of the [[Other]], which [[Lacan]] calls "the battery of signifiers."
[[Lacan]] defines a [[signifier]] as "that which represents a subject for another signifier," in opposition to the [[sign]], which "represents something for someone."<ref>{{S11}} p.207</ref>
To be more precise, one [[signifier]] (called the [[master]] [[signifier]], and written S1) represents the [[subject]] for all other [[signifier]]s (written S2).
However, no [[signifier]] can [[signify]] the [[subject]].
Although the term '[[signifier]]' is [[absent]] from [[Freud]]'s work, [[Lacan]]'s use of the term focuses attention on a recurrent theme in [[Freud]]'s writings.
[[Freud]]'s examples of [[psychoanalytic]] [[interpretation]]s constantly focus on purely formal [[linguistic]] features.
Thus [[Lacan]]'s insistence that the [[analyst]] attend to the [[signifier]]s in the [[analysand]]'s [[speech]] is not really an innovation in [[technique]] but an attempt to theorise [[Freud]]'s own method in more rigorous terms.
Not only can units of [[language]] smaller than words ([[morpheme]]s and [[phoneme]]s) or larger than [[word]]s (phrases and sentences) also function as [[signifier]]s, but so also can non-[[linguistic]] things such as [[object]]]s, relationships and [[symptom]]atic [[act]]s.<ref>{{S4}} p.288</ref>
The single condition which characterises something as a [[signifier]], for [[Lacan]], is that it is inscribed in a [[system]] in which it takes on value purely by virtue of its [[difference]] from the other elements in the [[system]].
It is this differential nature of the [[signifier]] which means that it can never have a univocal or fixed [[meaning]];<ref>{{S4}} p.289</ref> on the contrary, its [[meaning]] varies according to the [[position]] which it occupies in the [[structure]].
== References ==
<references/>
signifier 13, 20, 223, 26, 40, 46-8, 61-2, 67, 114, 125-6, 130, 133, 138-9, 141-2, 149-* 60, 176-77, 181, 184, 198-9, 203, 205-14, 217, 219-20, 227-9, 236-7, 241, 247-52, 256-7, * 266, 268-70, 273, 276-7, 278-9, 282, network of signifiers, 42-52, 177, signifier and * signification, 253, signifier and signified, 248, 250 [[Seminar XI]]
