Difference between revisions of "Unary trait"

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>).)
(Tags: Mobile edit, Mobile web edit)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
According to Jacques Lacan, the unary trait is the elementary form of the signifier as pure difference that supports symbolic identification.
+
According to Jacques [[Lacan]], the [[unary]] [[trait]] is the elementary [[form]] of the [[signifier]] as pure [[difference]] that supports [[symbolic]] identification.
  
In the second of the three forms of identification described by Freud, the subject identifies regressively with a love object or rival by adopting a "single trait" of the other person (einziger Zug) (1921c, p. 107). Dora's cough, for example, was an imitation of her father's.
+
In the second of the [[three]] forms of identification described by [[Freud]], the [[subject]] [[identifies]] regressively with a [[love]] [[object]] or rival by adopting a "single trait" of the [[other]] person ([[einziger]] Zug) (1921c, p. 107). [[Dora]]'s cough, for example, was an imitation of her [[father]]'s.
  
Lacan recognized this single trait as a signifier. Or more precisely, insofar as this signifier is isolated and is not part of a chain of signifiers, it is first a sign or an "insignia of the Other" (cf. Lacan, 1957-58, p. 304; 2002, p. 253). This insignia of the Other constitutes the nucleus of the ego-ideal.
+
Lacan recognized this single trait as a signifier. Or more precisely, insofar as this signifier is isolated and is not part of a [[chain]] of [[signifiers]], it is first a [[sign]] or an "insignia of the Other" (cf. Lacan, 1957-58, p. 304; 2002, p. 253). This insignia of the Other constitutes the nucleus of the ego-[[ideal]].
  
In his seminar on Identification (1961-62), Lacan used Saussure's linguistics, to compare the einziger Zug with the signifier as a distinct element. Thus he translated it as "unary trait" to emphasize its mathematical sense, comparing it with a binary number.
+
In his [[seminar]] on Identification (1961-62), Lacan used [[Saussure]]'s [[linguistics]], to compare the einziger Zug with the signifier as a distinct element. Thus he translated it as "unary trait" to emphasize its [[mathematical]] [[sense]], comparing it with a binary [[number]].
  
Ferdinand de Saussure defined the signifier negatively. It is not the same, but is different from the other signifiers in a given structure. This implies that a signifier is also different from itself. This pure difference characterizes the unary trait. As an example of the first primitive indication of the existence of the signifier, Lacan referred to a prehistoric hunter carving notches into a piece of bone. One notch signifies each kill, with no reference to the different types of prey or the particular events of each hunt. Each animal killed counts as one, and that is the only aspect of the hunt marked by the trait.
+
[[Ferdinand de Saussure]] defined the signifier negatively. It is not the same, but is different from the other signifiers in a given [[structure]]. This implies that a signifier is also different from itself. This pure difference characterizes the unary trait. As an example of the first [[primitive]] indication of the [[existence]] of the signifier, Lacan referred to a prehistoric hunter carving notches into a piece of bone. One notch signifies each kill, with no reference to the different types of prey or the [[particular]] events of each hunt. Each [[animal]] killed counts as one, and that is the only aspect of the hunt marked by the trait.
  
Of course, the traits in a series need not resemble each other. They do not need to be identical in order to be the same. In fact, the contrary is true. Because no simple trait is recognizable as a thing itself, once it becomes part of a series you cannot tell which was the first mark.
+
Of course, the traits in a series [[need]] not resemble each other. They do not need to be identical in [[order]] to be the same. In fact, the contrary is [[true]]. Because no simple trait is recognizable as a [[thing]] itself, once it becomes part of a series you cannot tell which was the first mark.
  
When the thing is erased, the unary trait remains as symbolic of its absence. Thus the trait transforms the absent thing into an object of desire. A second mark, indistinguishable from the first, creates a hole in which this object is lost. Thus the unary trait merges with the phallic mark and the castration threat, insofar as it forever prohibits access to the incestuous Thing. The existence of the subject of the enunciation is suspended by the trait that names it, but this subject immediately disappears in the trait that fixes it, such that the subject only exists between two traits.
+
When [[the thing]] is erased, the unary trait remains as symbolic of its [[absence]]. Thus the trait transforms the [[absent]] thing into an object of [[desire]]. A second mark, indistinguishable from the first, creates a [[hole]] in which this object is lost. Thus the unary trait merges with the [[phallic]] mark and the [[castration]] [[threat]], insofar as it forever prohibits access to the incestuous Thing. The existence of the subject of the [[enunciation]] is suspended by the trait that names it, but this subject immediately [[disappears]] in the trait that fixes it, such that the subject only [[exists]] between two traits.
  
To formalize the unary trait, Lacan relied on the topology of the torus, insofar as the unary trait is the mark of a double loss, the loss of an object, which corresponds to the central hole of the torus, and the absence of the subject of the unconscious, which is the uncounted turn of the repeated demand. A single cut that makes a Möbius strip, where the two surfaces are one, corresponds to the structure of the unary trait, identical neither to itself nor to the structure of the subject.
+
To [[formalize]] the unary trait, Lacan relied on the topology of the [[torus]], insofar as the unary trait is the mark of a [[double]] [[loss]], the loss of an object, which corresponds to the central hole of the torus, and the absence of the subject of the [[unconscious]], which is the uncounted turn of the repeated [[demand]]. A single cut that makes a Möbius [[strip]], where the two surfaces are one, corresponds to the structure of the unary trait, identical neither to itself nor to the structure of the subject.
  
 
==See Also==
 
==See Also==
Line 24: Line 24:
 
==References==
 
==References==
 
<references/>
 
<references/>
# Freud, Sigmund. (1921c). Group psychology and the analysis of the ego. SE, 18: 65-143.
+
# [[Freud, Sigmund]]. (1921c). Group [[psychology]] and the [[analysis]] of the ego. SE, 18: 65-143.
# Lacan, Jacques. (1958). The direction of the treatment and the principles of its power. In Bruce Fink (Trans.),Écrits: A selection. New York: W. W. Norton, 2002.
+
# [[Lacan, Jacques]]. (1958). The direction of the [[treatment]] and the principles of its [[power]]. In [[Bruce Fink]] (Trans.),[[Écrits]]: A selection. New York: W. W. Norton, 2002.
# Lacan, Jacques. (1964). The four fundamental concepts of psychoanalysis (Alan Sheridan, Trans.). New York: W. W. Norton, 1978.
+
# Lacan, Jacques. (1964). The four fundamental [[concepts]] of [[psychoanalysis]] (Alan [[Sheridan]], Trans.). New York: W. W. Norton, 1978.
# Lacan, Jacques. (1957-58). Le Séminaire-Livre V, Les Formations de l'Inconscient. Paris: Seuil, 1998.
+
# Lacan, Jacques. (1957-58). Le Séminaire-Livre V, Les [[Formations]] de l'[[Inconscient]]. [[Paris]]: Seuil, 1998.
# Lacan, Jacques. (1961-62). Le Séminaire-Livre IX, L'identification (unpublished seminar).
+
# Lacan, Jacques. (1961-62). Le Séminaire-Livre IX, [[L'identification]] (unpublished seminar).

Latest revision as of 02:57, 21 May 2019

According to Jacques Lacan, the unary trait is the elementary form of the signifier as pure difference that supports symbolic identification.

In the second of the three forms of identification described by Freud, the subject identifies regressively with a love object or rival by adopting a "single trait" of the other person (einziger Zug) (1921c, p. 107). Dora's cough, for example, was an imitation of her father's.

Lacan recognized this single trait as a signifier. Or more precisely, insofar as this signifier is isolated and is not part of a chain of signifiers, it is first a sign or an "insignia of the Other" (cf. Lacan, 1957-58, p. 304; 2002, p. 253). This insignia of the Other constitutes the nucleus of the ego-ideal.

In his seminar on Identification (1961-62), Lacan used Saussure's linguistics, to compare the einziger Zug with the signifier as a distinct element. Thus he translated it as "unary trait" to emphasize its mathematical sense, comparing it with a binary number.

Ferdinand de Saussure defined the signifier negatively. It is not the same, but is different from the other signifiers in a given structure. This implies that a signifier is also different from itself. This pure difference characterizes the unary trait. As an example of the first primitive indication of the existence of the signifier, Lacan referred to a prehistoric hunter carving notches into a piece of bone. One notch signifies each kill, with no reference to the different types of prey or the particular events of each hunt. Each animal killed counts as one, and that is the only aspect of the hunt marked by the trait.

Of course, the traits in a series need not resemble each other. They do not need to be identical in order to be the same. In fact, the contrary is true. Because no simple trait is recognizable as a thing itself, once it becomes part of a series you cannot tell which was the first mark.

When the thing is erased, the unary trait remains as symbolic of its absence. Thus the trait transforms the absent thing into an object of desire. A second mark, indistinguishable from the first, creates a hole in which this object is lost. Thus the unary trait merges with the phallic mark and the castration threat, insofar as it forever prohibits access to the incestuous Thing. The existence of the subject of the enunciation is suspended by the trait that names it, but this subject immediately disappears in the trait that fixes it, such that the subject only exists between two traits.

To formalize the unary trait, Lacan relied on the topology of the torus, insofar as the unary trait is the mark of a double loss, the loss of an object, which corresponds to the central hole of the torus, and the absence of the subject of the unconscious, which is the uncounted turn of the repeated demand. A single cut that makes a Möbius strip, where the two surfaces are one, corresponds to the structure of the unary trait, identical neither to itself nor to the structure of the subject.

See Also

References

  1. Freud, Sigmund. (1921c). Group psychology and the analysis of the ego. SE, 18: 65-143.
  2. Lacan, Jacques. (1958). The direction of the treatment and the principles of its power. In Bruce Fink (Trans.),Écrits: A selection. New York: W. W. Norton, 2002.
  3. Lacan, Jacques. (1964). The four fundamental concepts of psychoanalysis (Alan Sheridan, Trans.). New York: W. W. Norton, 1978.
  4. Lacan, Jacques. (1957-58). Le Séminaire-Livre V, Les Formations de l'Inconscient. Paris: Seuil, 1998.
  5. Lacan, Jacques. (1961-62). Le Séminaire-Livre IX, L'identification (unpublished seminar).