Some connections of the subject to the function of the signifier and the laws of language
Mis à jour : 23 août 2020
Seized through the examples of the automation of repetition, identification, and the process of analytical cure in Seminars III (1955-1956), IX (1961-1962) (Lessons 1 TO 6), XI (1964) ) and The written (1966) Introduction The concept of subject has evolved throughout the teaching of lacan. At the time when, after putting forward one of the elements of his triad "Real, symbolic, imaginary", that is, the imagination, it puts the accent on the symbolic, taking into account and inspired by the Progress of the language language, the one of Ferdinand De Saussure (1857-1913) whose general language course was published in 1914 , and that of Roman Jakobson (1896-1982). Thus, in seminar ix, the identification (1961-1962) It States: " it is for us, at the point of the development where we have achieved, to try to articulate in a more accurate way this that we have already advanced more than once as a thesis: that nothing else supports the traditional philosophical idea of A subject, if not the existence of the signifier and its effects. " To Know: "... this is already given by our experience that it is the effect of the signifier that arises as such the subject. " But, in relation to the laws of language and signifier, he questioned himself: " Metonymical effect? Metaphorical effect? " And Advance: "... the position I take here is in advance, in relation to the one of jakobson, concerning the primacy that I give to the function of the signifier in any realization, let's say, the subject. " Indeed, what lacan will call his linguisterie, to distinguish himself from linguistics, will not be able to reintroduce the subject, and therefore, effect of signifier. " the distinction of the word... as it can exist at the preverbal level... and language is precisely in this emergence of the function of the signifier. " A - function of the signifier "the function of the signifier, as it is the point of mooring of something where the subject is" So I'm going to try to expose the function of the signifier in the emergence of the subject, through two examples from the clinic clinic. I - example of the repetition of repetition to illustrate the reports of the subject to the function of the signifier What is this rehearsal automation? Let's see what Roland Chemama and Bernard Vandermeersch say in their dictionary of psychoanalysis: " (...) the understanding of the phenomenon of repetition refers directly to that of trauma; its theorization (...) reveals a principle of psychic functioning radically different from the one, classically described, dominated by the principle of pleasure: also s. Is Freud the him as beyond the principle of pleasure. From an epistemological point of view, repetition is one of the major concepts of the last part of Freud's work. It introduces the impulse of death, opens the path of the second topical and, incidentally, signs a considerable readjustment of the clinic and analytical technique. At J. Lacan, the repetition is, with the unconscious, the transfer and the impulse, one of the four fundamental concepts of psychoanalysis, especially because it has become a omnipresent reference of the clinic and that it is a knot of the three other concepts. (...) Lacan (...) develops the concept of repetition according to two different axes. The first one is the one of the symbolic. " in fact, he insists in the seminar IX on: "... the clearance, of what is brought by the experience of language and what the report to the signifier allows us to introduce as an original dimension... that it is to distinguish radically from the real... in the form From the symbolic dimension. " " the repetition (...) is in sum to the principle of the symbolic order in general and the chain chain in particular. The seminar on "the stolen letter", pronounced in 1954-1955 (written, 1966), details this proposal. The functioning of the chain of the signifiers, in which the subject has to recognize itself as such and must spawn the path of his word, rests on the operation of repetition " Lacan tells us about the function of the signifier for the subject in the rehearsal: " - what makes the nerve of repetition, the automation of repetition for your experience: it's not that it is "always the same thing", - who's interesting is this why it repeats itself, - what precisely the subject, from the point of view of its organic comfort has, you know it, really strictly no need, for what is the rehearsals we are dealing with, that is, the most sticky rehearsals, The most boring, the most symptomagènes. - this is where your attention should be taken to detect the impact as such of the function of the signifier. How can it be done, this typical report on the subject formed by the existence of signifier as such, only possible support of what is for us originally the experience of repetition? " Then, borrow Freud from the terms related to the economy of libido, he tells us: " what I hear designate is this... (...)... it's that what we're dealing with in the automation of repetition is this: a cycle... (...)... as long as it is cycle and it comes back to a point of view, we can design it on the model of need, satisfaction. " The repetition of repetition would therefore be linked to a satisfaction of a needed need. He continues: " what means the automation of repetition as we have to him, is this: it is that if a determined cycle that was only this one... This is where the shadow of "trauma" is looming. That I only put here between quotes, because it is not its traumatic effect that I hold, but only its uniqueness ... this one so, who is called by this certain signifier... That alone can endure what we will learn in the suite to define as a letter: Instance of the letter in the unconscious ... this great a, has it initial as it is numérotable, that this cycle, and not another, is tantamount to a certain signifier " Putting forward the side meaning of trauma, the uniqueness of the meaning of trauma, supported by a letter. More: " it is in this title that the behavior repeats itself: to bring back that signifier that it is like such, this number that it founds. If for us the symptomatic repetition has a meaning, (...) when you talk about the repetitive incidence in symptomatic training, it is for as much as what is repeating is there, not even to fill the natural function of the sign... Who is to represent one thing, the thing that would be here updated ... but to présentifier as such as the absent signifier that this action has become. I say that it is as what is repressed is a signifier, that this cycle of real behavior is present in its place. " The rehearsal repetition, this search for satisfaction is therefore used to "Présentifier the signifier absent that this action has become". there is back in the real of a behavior, instead of an absent signifier, repressed. " the paradox of repetition of repetition is that you see emerge a cycle of behavior, recordable as such in the terms of a tension resolution of the couple so " Need-Satisfaction ", and that nevertheless, whatever the function Interested in this cycle... So carnal that you supposed her ... there is no less than what she means as a rehearsal automation, it is that she is here to bring out, to remember, to insist, something that is nothing else in its essence but a signifier , designatable by its function, and specially under this face, that it introduces in the cycle of its rehearsals... Always the same in their essence, and so about something that is always the same thing ... that it introduces the difference, the distinction, the uniqueness. " This is the paradox of repetition of repetition: it translates to a behavior to answer a couple "Need-satisfaction", but the interested function is there to bring out a signifier that designates it. The IX seminar is the title of the identification. While for Freud, the identification to the other is done through a trait, what lacan expresses this way: " it is very remarkable that in this kind of identification where I copy in the situation, sometimes the non-loved object, sometimes the loved object, but that - in both cases this identification is partial, höchst beschränkte, highly limited, but who Is accentuated in the sense of narrow, shrunk - that it is nur a einzigen zug, only a unique trait of the person person, which is like the " Ersatz " borrowed from the German word ", For Him, identification is "identification of meaning", and not only imaginary: "... what I will try for you to articulate, these are the laws of identification as an identification of signifier. " This is the case of the primary identification. II - example of the primordial identification In this seminar IX, in lessons 1 to 6, already the concept of S1, meaning the primordial identification, forgotten of the subject and that it finds at the end of the analysis: "... it is from this point, not mythical, but perfectly concrete of inaugural identification of the subject to the radical signifier, not of a plotinien, but of the unique trait as such, that the whole perspective of the subject like " Not knowing " can deploy in a rigorous way. " And: " this is where something else is forcing us to ask ourselves about this: That the scansion where this presence in the world is manifested, is not simply imaginary, to know that already it is not to the other that here we refer, but to this most intimate of ourselves that we try to do the anchor , the root, the foundation of what we are as subject [" the identification as an identification of signifier to the S1 "]." And, further, it designates this primordial identification as " trait " "from this permanence of the subject, I show you the reference (...) I have shown it to you, designated the last time in this trait trait, in this function of the "Stick" as a figure of one as it is only distinctive trait, which is just as much more distinctive than in Is erased almost everything that distinguishes it, except to be a trait, by accentuating this fact that the more similar it is, the more it works, I do not say as a sign, but as a support of the difference. " From the identification to the S1, one signifier of the other that is addressed to him and that he becomes while disappearing (and therefore, he is mortified by this s1 and is written for lacan $), lacan teaches us that the subject can enter In the word, when this S1 is the signifier of the call to a secondsignifier , that lacan calls S2, and is address to the other. It is for lacan " the advent " of the subject, while the identification at the S1 marked its " birth ". "... before the only fact that it is addressed to him, he disappears as subject under the signifier that he becomes, he was absolutely nothing. But this nothing is supported by its advent, now produced by the call to the second signifier. " However, at the time when he gave his seminar on identification (1961-1962), he thinks that the subject has to be done through the signifier: " (...) the position I take here is in advance, arrow compared to the one of jakobson, Concerning the primacy I give to the function of the signifier in any realization, let's say, of the subject. " III - example of the identifications of the subject In the seminar ix finally, lacan formalizes its concept of "the identification of signifier": In the report of the identification to the language and the truth: "... it is about seizing for us the report of this possibility called identification, in the sense where there arises what only exists in language and thanks to language: a truth. " In Its report to the function, the value and the status of the signifier : " it is well here that the function appears, the value of the signifier even as such, and it is in the same way that it is the subject that it is that we have to ask us about the report of this identification of the subject with this Who is a different dimension of everything that is of the order of appearance and disappearance, to know the status of the signifier. " In the articulation of its modes by the meaning: "... the different modes, the different angles under which we are brought to identify us as subjects, at least for a share of them assume the signifier to articulate it... " In is report to what connotes means: " the difference in the pure state "... the signifier as such is used to connote the difference in the pure state ", " one signifier distinguishes itself from a sign first in this... who is what I tried from you To make sense... it is that the signifiers first demonstrate that the presence of the difference as such and nothing else. " IV - back to the automation of repetition, on its side of real The second axis according to which lacan develops its concept of repetition " is the one of the real. From 1964, in the seminar XI, (...), Lacan proposes to distinguish the two slopes of repetition by using two concepts Aristotelian, the tuchê and the photomaton. The Photomaton Designates for him the insistence of the signifiers, this principle of the symbolic chain; as to the tuchê, (...), that is what triggers this insistence - the trauma in sum -, it's the meeting (... ) of something unbearable about it. And this unbearable that Freud tried to take into account under the auspices of the death impulse, lacan will then conceptualize him under the term of real - the impossible, the impossible to symbolize." From Seminar ix, it distinguished the " functions exerted by language in a certain field of real, the one we other, speaking people, are the drivers. " but more and more, and especially towards the end of its teaching, it limits the effect of these functions of the signifier, which do not allow the symbolism to cover the real for the committeeagain. In 1961-1962, lacan questions: where is the subject, in the return of repetition, compared to trauma? In the body, articulated to the signifier (" in the organism therefore aspirated by the effects of the " it speaks " (...) having been taken in the mechanisms of signifier ")? Or in a real unassimilable, because he questions, by the way, the primacy of symbolic (" is it, to the other extreme, identifiable to the game even of the signifier? ) ". Symbolic: " (...) is the subject only the subject of the speech (...)? ", and real: or in " His vital immanence "? The two are related: " our effort this year (...) is to show how the subject of the subject is articulated, elsewhere than in one or the other of these poles, playing between the two. " The subject is in the entre-two of the symbolic and the real: " is it enough, to know that the function of the subject is in the entre-two, between the effects of the function function and this vital immanence that you confusing, I think, again, despite my warnings, gladly with the Function of the impulse? " Freud's discovery and invention are located and operate at this junction, to which we must of course add the imagination: " (...) so it is in this structural linking of something inserted radically in this vital individuality with this significative function that we are, in the analytic experience. " B - pinning, repressed...... appearance of the meant and effects of signifier What are the effects of the laws of the language on the subject analyzing: effects or métonymiques effects? I - metaphor and metonymy For Lacan, who speaks of opposition between metaphor and metonymy, they are however not separated, independent: " the metonymy is at the start, and it is the one who makes the metaphor possible. But the metaphor is of another degree that the metonymy ". Further, about the mechanisms of the dream that Freud has highlighted in the interpretation of dreams , in particular, "[these] mechanisms of condensation and displacement, of figuration, are all of the order of the joint joint, and it is on this basis that the metaphor may intervene. " " " his wreath was not stingy or hateful lacan takes this example at Victor Hugo, in the poem booz asleep, to illustrate the relationship between metaphor and articulation métonymique. Here, on the pattern of " one word for another " (on the axis paradigmatic), which is a definition of the metaphor, given by lacan in the instance of the letter , the " Wreath " is put to The place of " Booz ", " Wreath " is put for " booz ". " it is by the fact that the wreath is the subject of stingy and hateful, that it can be identified in booz in its lack of greed and its Generosity." and this place is already defined by grammar and syntax, which orders the combinations of the signifiers between them (on the axis syntagmatique): " one word then another ", definition of the. Let's give some examples, of metonymy first. In Memoirs of a neuropath , President Shreber writes phrases interrupted like: " now, now is the time... ". " The voice stops to force the subject to make the meaning of which it is act in the sentence. " the syntactic combination comes before and the meaning comes to complete the sentence: " now, now is the time... let it be mate!". An example of a metaphor: the wreath of booz. Lacan says that the wreath is identified in booz, by an operation that establishes a similarity that was not there before: " nothing that is in the use of the dictionary cannot be a moment to suggest that a wreath can be stingy and even less hateful ." the metaphor does not proceed close in close but operates a jump, a gap. Another example of a metaphor: in the episode of oblivion of the name of signorelli, botticelli and boltraffio substitute for signorelli. neighborhood in the neighborhood, from metonymy to metonymy, Freud passes from signorelli to botticelli and boltraffio, But there is no contiguity between signorelli and botticelli and boltraffio, there is cut, gap. Why Does Freud forget the name of signorelli? He writes himself that, from the same herr comes to the place of trafoi, and trafoi has meant the involvement of Freud in the sexual meaning allied to death, meant who is transferred to signorelli. out , in an inter language metaphor, "Herr" Replaces Signorelli, in the routine of the latent thoughts that freud develops to achieve this oblivion. II - metonymy The Metonymy is " a certain way of appearance of the meant ", whose lacan qualifies the effect as that of a " little sense ", "... to tell you, remind you of the formulas under which for you I have rated for example the function of the metonymy: Function Grand S, as far as it is in a channel that continues by (if, if it is " ,...) this is what has to give us the effect I called from "little sense", as far as the sign less designates, connotes, a certain mode of appearance of the meant as it result of the Function of S, the signifier, in a chain of signifiers . " But, while reminding us of the primacy of signifier on the meant: "it is on the basis of the articulation, the adjacency, the neighborhood and their dénouage that the effects of signifier can arise: the meant is an effect, not a cause, it is the signifier that dominates", It expresses the effects of the resulting sense of the dénouage of the m etonymicaloints joints of the signifiers that follow each others on the signifiers chain. III - metaphor Then he accentuates: " how can it be that language has its maximum efficiency when it comes to say something by saying something else? ", highlighting the operation of the metaphor. " it must be seen that without the structuring of the signifier, no transfer of meaning would be possible. " " the transfer of the meant [...] is possible only due to the structure of the signifier." What are the effects of the laws of the language on the subject analyzing: metonymical metaphorical effects or metonymical effects? Ask me with lacan. Gilles Chatenay Answers: " the meant is rather the effect of these operations [substitutions metaphorical and put put], it does not exist before the signifier, what lacan opposes to of. " You still have to not forget the signifier under its phonetic aspect: "the formal articulation of the signifier is dominant in relation to the transfer of the meant", What poets and their readers do not ignore, and also not the psychoanalysts and their analysants. Unlike the metonymy, have I written, the metaphor operates, by the substitution of one signifier to another, a jump. The result is a creation of meaning, to the extent that the signifier replacement takes with him different meant from those of the substituted signifier, which of course all are the enunciation subject's own ones and related to its history. It is also this creation of meaning ("the spark") that you can spot at work in the symptom on its side of metaphor, as the lacan written in the instance of the letter in the unconscious: " the double-trigger mechanism of the metaphor is this when the symptom is determined in the analytic sense. Between the enigmatic signifie of sexual trauma and the word what it comes to replace in a current significant chain, pass the spark, which fixed in a symptom, - metaphor where the flesh or the function are taken as an element meaning, - the meaning inaccessible to the conscious subject where it can be solved. " Finally note, as to the structure of the subject, this important point: Jacques Lacan, in the seminar III, the psychosis, tells us, about the memories of a neuropath, of President Shreber: " even when sentences make sense, we ever meet anything that looks like a metaphor." And in chapter xv of the same seminar, (" primordial signifiers or lack of one "): " psychosis consists of a hole, a lack at the level of signifier". In Chapter XIV, about the book of Hélène Deutsch on the " as if ", the " as if ", that is, on the " imaginary compensation of the absent oedipus ", in the schizophrénies, Jacques Lacan indicates that this oedipus " would have given manhood in the form, not from the paternal image, but of the signifier, of the name-of-the-father. " Gilles Chatenay: " no metaphor in the memories of shreber, the psychosis consists of a hole at the level of the meaning, and the schizophrenic subject of Hélène Deutsch compensates by the image a signifier that is missing, the name-of-the-father: it is not anticipating (...) to move forward that the signifier of the name-of-the-father is of metaphorical order. " Conclusion : In a reminder of is RSI triad, and more particularly of the symbolic in his relationship to the experience of psychoanalysis, the one that does the analysis, that is, a relationship of signifier and language, from the word to the subject, lacan stresses upon this : " if we distinguish it from imagination and real, this register of symbolic... (...)... it's not an ontological definition: these are not here from the fields of being that I separate . If (...)... I thought I had to play this triad of symbolic, imaginary and real 42 : the symbolic, theimaginary and the real ( S.I.R.), it is for as much as this third element... (...)... is exactly in my eyes what is constituted exactly by this fact of the revelation of a field of experience. (...) this is the freudian experience... I will say, from a field of experiment: I mean that it is not about erlebnis [experience lived]. (...) this is a field formed in a certain way, up to a certain degree by some "device", the one that inaugurates the psychoanalytical technique as such, the complementary face of the discovery freudian, complementary as the place is to upside down, really attached. " The cure is possible, among others, only by the language structure of the unconscious, and metaphors and metonimy are the springs as to the laws of the signifier. And above all: " the effect of language is the cause introduced in the subject. By this effect he is not cause of himself, he carries in him the worm of the cause that will shear him. Because his cause is the meaning without which there would be no subject in the real. But this subject is what the signifier represents, and it can't represent anything but for another signifier : what the subject is reduced to be as the listening subject. " The signifier is cause of the subject. The subject is not cause of itself. This is how the symptom is tied, but can also be carried away.
Christophe Gervot, psychoanalyst, writer, musician, concept artist, translator and trainer.
Christophe Gervot, psychanalyste à Missillac (44780), est diplômé en Lettres, Langues, Littérature et Civilisation Etrangères de l'Université Catholique de l'Ouest (UCO) et de l'Université Rennes 2. Il a été étudiant de l'Antenne Clinique d'Angers (ACA), de la Section Clinique de Nantes (SCN) et est diplômé en psychanalyse du Département de psychanalyse de l'université Paris 8. Il est également diplômé en Études européennes, option 'Politiques et Pratiques culturelles en Europe' (PPCE) de l'Institut d’Études européennes (IEE) de l'université Paris 8.
Bibliography Books of psychoanalysis: Chatenay G, metaphor and metonymy, on a Saturday morning in Nantes, in access, bulletin of the association of the cause freudian, Val de loire - Brittany, no. 4, angers, December 2012 Chemama R, and vandermeersch b, dictionary of psychoanalysis, Paris, larousse, coll. In Full, 2007 Deutsch H., the "as if" and other texts, (1933-1970), texts gathered and prefaces by Marie-Christine hamon, translated from the German by Sacha Zilberfarb and the English by Catherine Orsot and Marie-Christine hamon, Paris , Seuil, coll. Freudian field, 2007 Freud s., the interpretation of dreams, translated in French by I. Meyerson, Paris, puf, 1926 and 1967 Freud's, oblivion of clean names, in psychopathology of daily life, Paris, editions payot and shores, coll. Small Library Library, 2001 Lacan J. The Seminar, Book III, the psychosis, chapters XVII AND XVIII: metaphor and metonymy I and II, Paris, Seuil, 1981 Lacan J., the seminar, book ix, the identification, lessons 1 TO 6 (from 15 November to 20 December 1961) text established by Patrick Vallas, published on the website: http://www.valas.fr/Jacques-Lacan-L-identification-1961-1962,252 And available at the address: http://www.valas.fr/IMG/pdf/S9_identification.pdf Lacan J., the instance of the letter, in written, Paris, Seuil, coll. The Freudian field, 1966 Lacan J., position of the unconscious, in written, Paris, Seuil, coll. The Freudian field, 1966 Reference Books: Linguistics: From Saussure, f., general language courses, Paris, editions payot, 1995 Jakobson, r., article: Two aspects of language and two types of aphasia, in tests of general linguistics, volume I, the functions of language, editions de minuit, 1963 Autobiographical story: Shreber D. P., Memoirs of a neuropath, translated from the German by Paul Duquenne and Nicole Salts, Paris, Seuil, coll. Points, 1975  from saussure, f., general language courses, Paris, editions payot, 1995  Jakobson, r., general language tests (1 AND 2), Paris, Editions de minuit, 1963 (T. 1), 1973 (T. 2)  Lacan, J., seminar ix, the identification, text established by Patrick Vallas, published on the website http://www.valas.fr/Jacques-Lacan-L-identification-1961-1962,252, available at http://www.valas.fr/IMG/pdf/S9_identification.pdf  Ditto, p. 9  Ditto, p. 61  Ditto  Ditto, p. 23  Ditto, p. 79  Lacan, J., Opus Cité, p. 100  Chemama R. And vandermeersch b., dictionary of psychoanalysis, larousse, coll. In Full, Paris, 2007, PP. 366-369  Lacan, ibid, p. 26  Chemama R. And vandermeersch b., Opus Cité, p. 369  Lacan, J., Opus Cité, p. 78  Ditto, p. 92  Ditto, p. 93. I'm the one who highlights.  Ditto, p. 94. I'm the one who highlights.  Ditto, p. 95. I'm the one who highlights.  Ditto, p. 82  Ditto, p. 24  Ditto, p. 37  Ditto, p. 60  Ditto, p. 92  Lacan J., position of the unconscious, in written, Paris, Seuil, coll. The Freudian field, 1966, p. 835  Lacan, J., seminar ix, the identification, Opus Cité, p. 23  Ditto, p. 53  Ditto, p. 60  Ditto, PP. 60-61  Ditto, p. 73  Ditto, p. 76  Chemama R, and vandermeersch b, dictionary of psychoanalysis, Opus Cité, PP. 366-369  Lacan, J., seminar ix, the identification, Opus Cité, p. 84  Ditto, p. 96  Ditto  Ditto  Ditto  " and the subject is only the subject of the speech, sort of ripped from its vital immanence, condemned to fly over it, to live in this kind of mirage that derives from this repetition that makes all this Let him live, not only he speaks it, but that, the living, he lives it by speaking it, and that already what he lives is part of a épos [Epos: speech], a saga woven throughout his Act even? Our effort this year, if it has a sense, it is to show how the function of the subject is articulated, elsewhere than in one or the other of these poles, playing between the two. ", Ditto, p. 96  Ditto, p. 97. I'm the one who highlights.  Ditto, p. 96  Freud's., the interpretation of dreams, translated in French by I. Meyerson, Paris, puf, 1926 and 1967  Lacan J., the instance of the letter, in written, Paris, Seuil, coll. The Freudian field, 1966  Lacan J. The Seminar, Book III, the psychosis, Opus Cité, p. 248  Shreber D. P., Memoirs of a neuropath, translated from the German by Paul Duquenne and Nicole Salts, Paris, Seuil, coll. Points, 1975  Lacan J. Ibid, p. 245  Ditto  Ditto, p. 248  Freud's, oblivion of clean names, in psychopathology of daily life, Paris, editions payot and shores, coll. Small library payot, 2001, PP. 7-14  Chatenay G, metaphor and metonymy, on a Saturday morning in Nantes, in access, bulletin of the association of the cause freudian, Val de loire - Brittany, no. 4, December 2012, PP. 176-180  Lacan, J., seminar ix, the identification, Opus Cité, p. 77  Lacan J. The Seminar, Book III, the psychosis, Opus Cité, PP. 255 and 258  Chatenay G, metaphor and metonymy, on a Saturday morning in Nantes, Opus Cité, p. 181  Lacan J. Ibid, p. 261  Lacan J., the instance of the letter in the unconscious, in written, Paris, Seuil, coll. The Freudian field, 1966, p. 518  Lacan J. The Seminar, Book III, the psychosis, opus. City, p. 247  Ditto, p. 227  Ditto, p. 218  Chatenay G, metaphor and metonymy, on a Saturday morning in Nantes, Opus Cité, p. 172  Lacan, J., seminar IX, the identification, Opus Cité, p. 85  Lacan J., position of the unconscious, in written, Opus Cité, p. 835. I'm the one who highlights.