读Lacan的Séminaire 22 : R.S.I.

• 

  2010-06-19 19:54:07 无盐

  10 Décembre 1974
  
  或许可以说Réel是不可思之物。R.S.I. Réel，Symbolique，Imaginaire，（如何翻译？）它们承载着一个意义，这个意义事关分析的实践。
  
  le nœud borroméen博罗梅安环：以3为基，属于想象（Imaginaire）。并非先验美学。三维想象。le nœud borroméen并不一定非得是三个圆。它们可以在无限远处汇合… 定义“点”的方式很多--超出欧基里德几何。
  
  想象倾向于缩为二维。
  
  回到弗洛伊德：Inhibition, Symptôme, Angoisse。在le nœud borroméen中的位置，和RSI的关系。
  
  症状是Symbolique在Réel中的效果。无意识可能有助于消减症状。
  

  回应 删除 举报广告
• 

  2010-06-22 23:31:34 无盐

  17 décembre 1974
  
  与学生们调侃一番后，这一次，Lacan开始认真了：
  
  我已证明le nœud borroméen可以以何种方式书写。这个书写支撑着一个réel。Réel没有其它可感知的观念idée。
  这个réel即是这个结，一种构造，这个réel表明了这一特征，这一书写的特征。这一特征是书写而成的，它通过réel支撑着这个观念。因为结是由第三个元素结成，因而去掉三者中之任何一个，结即被打开/开放。
  
  这里有两个圆，I和S，它们被变为直线的R从中间卡住。这是一个左右对称的图形。
  
  这里什么是意义（le sens）呢？它是一个模型吗？数学意义上的… 假设--réel这个词的意义之中应有之意。
  
  RSI不是一般意义上的模型。不同之处在于，三个元素纯粹是作为consistance。其间暗含着一个隐喻。一个语言学家如何定义这个隐喻的限度？
  
  为了对这个结进行操作，要有点“傻劲”才行。最好是傻呵呵地使用它。“信愿行”。Lacan, Lacan…
  
  为了某物“绽出”ex-siste，必须有个洞。“我思”挖出一个洞…
  
  再续。先看会儿足球。

  回应 删除 举报广告
• 

  2010-07-02 19:36:15 无盐

  17 décembre 1974
  
  上次没有说完，现在补上。
  
  要说的是弗老，而不是笛卡尔。属于存在的东东是由南根的快感来隐喻的。
  
  分析的经验的界限就是RSI （Réel 实在，Symbolique 符号，Imaginaire 想象）的界限。快感通过打洞在实在中存在/绽出。
  
  女人--并不存在--可能梦想有那么一个东西，而男人却在为它苦恼。只有这种女人，这种不存在的女人（或者更Lacan一些：只存在不存在的女人）。南根的冲动并不是生殖器的冲动。
  
  Parlêtre，不是parler simplement à être，而是être par l'être。无用之登峰造极。
  
  最后Lacan说，我对我讲的不满意。想听的，下次再来吧。
  
  Lacan当时应该有70多岁了。

  回应 删除 举报广告
• 

  2010-07-29 22:00:48 无盐

  原本打算每一次讲座写一篇，但看完后，已懒得再回头一篇一篇写了。本来要写成简介或者概述，但拉康似乎是拒绝概括的。他的漫游式的喃喃自语，他的话语中体现出的顽固的“症状”，很难去概括。比较起来，逐句的翻译似乎更容易些。
  
  拉康说话是隐喻式的，他似乎相信这是达致实在的唯一方式。所有的词语都是隐喻，除了“存在”。应该是德理达说的。
  
  读拉康的这个séminaire就像听一场梦，看似漫无边际，其中涌动着挥之不去的症状，或者说主题。我想到了Joyce的Finnegans Wake。拉康的下一个séminaire不就是与Joyce有关吗？Le sinthome, 在第一讲里，拉康说到，Joyce用英语写作的方式就是使得英语不复存在的方式。还能比这更拉康吗？

  回应 删除 举报广告
• 

  2011-10-18 23:41:41 springhero

  拉康：RSI
  真实界，象征界，与想象界
  
  Introduction
  序言
  Preliminary to the Seminar of R.S.I.
  
  真实界，象征界，与想象界研讨班序言
  19 November 1974
  
  There is no mike. So you’re going to have to tell me whether you can hear me.
  
  没有麦克风。所以你们必须告诉我，是否你们能够听得见我。
  
  There you are, there are people, I know because I was told so, who are living the strike like a celebration. I know it, of course, through analysis. One gets to know things by analysis! One gets to know even that there are people twisted enough for that. But anyway, why not? It’s subjective, as they say.
  
  我们开始吧，有些人，我知道因为有人告诉我，他们生活在这次的摆课风潮，就像是开庆祝会。当然，我是经由精神分析知道。 我们变得有精神分析知道事情。 我们甚至变得知道，人们因为那次摆课而受到扭曲。但是无论如何，有何不可？ 那是主观性的，如他们所说。
  
  That means that there are people who can tackle a lot of things from the right angle. Nevertheless, I am not one of them; as analyst, I can only take the strike to be a symptom, in the sense that this year perhaps, I will manage to convince you of it,
  that the symptom, to refer to one of my three categories, belongs to the Real. The annoying thing – and this is why I have some reservations – is that it is an organised symptom; that is what is bad, at least from the point of view of the analyst.
  
  那意味着，有些人们能够克服许多事情，从适当的角度。可是，我并不是其中一位。 作为精神分析师，我仅能将这次的罢课风潮当著是病征。那意味着， 或许这一年，我将成功地让你们信服这一点：这个病征，提到我的三个范畴之一，它是属于真实界。 令人懊恼的事是---这就是为什么我会有这些保留---它是一种有组织的病征。换句话说， 这是它不好的地方，至少从分析师的观点来看。
  
  So then, if all the same I am going to go on strike, it is not because for me it is a celebration, but it happens that this strike comes to me like a ring on my finger; I mean that it happens that today, namely, at the start of this year 74-75, I have not the slightest inclination to do a seminar for you, as is attested by the fact that you have not seen any notice of it, announcing the title like every other year.
  
  所以，假如我仍然要进行罢课，这不是因为对于我而言，这是一种庆祝，而是恰好地，这次罢课风潮就像我手上的这个戒指，来到我这里。我的意思是，它恰好是今天。也就是说， 在1974进到1975年的开始，我并没有丝毫意愿跟你们开这个研讨班。这个事实可作为证明： 你们并没有看到它的公告，宣布像每隔一年都会公告课程的名称。
  
  I must say that nevertheless your number today does not fail to shake me. You know
  that every year I question myself about what it could be that motivates this crowd.
  
  我必须说，可是你们今天出席的人数一定会让我动摇。 你们知道，每一年，我质问我自己，是什么激发那么多人研讨的动机。
  
  It is not any more resolved now, it is not any more resolved for me, but all the same I consider it as an appeal, an appeal (10) linked to the fact that what I wrote, did nothing more than write, I mean what is written on the board with little signs, the o, the S1, the S2, the $ of the subject, the fact is that the analytic discourse is something that stirs you, I mean which stirs you. It is not a you, a stirs you in the neutral sense. It is true that to have written it, is an attempt, a tentative approximation. One could perhaps do better. I hope that one will do better.
  
  现在这个问题并没有被回答，对于我而言，它不再被回答。但是我仍然认为它是一个诉求， 这个诉求跟这个事实有关： 我所写的东西， 我仅是写作， 我的意思是， 用一些小符号书写在黑板上的东西， 这个小客体o，第一主体S1，第二主体S2.被禁制的主体＄。事实上， 精神分析的论述是某件扰乱你们的东西。我的意思是， 扰乱「你」。这并不是一个「你」，以中立的意义「扰乱你」。的确，曾经书写下它，是一种企图，一种试验性地接近方法。 我们或许能够做得更好。我希望我们将会做得更好。
  
  But in short this year, I have to tell you that I have other concerns.
  
  但是总之，这一年，我必须告诉你们，我有其它关怀的事。
  
  That would, I hope, only give me greater merit in your eyes, if I pursue this seminar here. I have other concerns and I question myself as to whether I ought not to let them take precedence. I mean that among you – I see numerous faces of them here – there are people who belong to my School. And perhaps after all my lassitude comes from something that is eating me, namely, that this seminar prevents me from paying more attention to this School.
  
  我希望，在你们的眼睛里，那仅是给予我更大的优点，假如我在此探讨这个研讨班。 我还其它的关怀，而我质疑我自己，关于我是否应该让它们具有优先权。我的意思是，在你们当中---我看到他们的无数的脸孔在这里—有些人属于我的学派。 或许，畢竟，我的厌倦来自某将侵蚀我的东西，换句话说， 这个研讨班使我无法更加注意这个学派。
  
  This year to stimulate this School, I took a tack of which some among you have perhaps heard an echo. I am not going to put the concerns that this gives me into the public forum. Not, of course, that this is something private, quite the contrary, since what is at stake is that there is elsewhere, somewhere other than here, something that gives a place to other teachings than mine.
  
  今年，要刺激这个学派，我改变方针，你们当中有些人或许听到一些风声。 我并不要将这些关怀，让我成为公共的议论。当然，不要。这是某件私人的事情，完全相反地，因为濒临危险的事，在别的地方，在除此之外的某个地方，有某件事情给予其它的教学，除了我的教学之外。
  
  It is strange, strange in the properly Freudian sense, unheimlich, it is strange that it is by some people who do not find themselves properly speaking yet authorized by analysis, but who are on the path, that there comes this resistance to the reason why I am stimulating them. I am stimulating them in short to make effective, to make effective what?
  
  这是奇怪的，意纯粹佛洛伊德的意义来说，是奇怪的。奇怪的是， 有些人并没有发现他们自己，适当来说，得到精神分析的授权。 但是他们在这条途径上，对于我为什么要刺激他们的理由，会有所抗拒。总之，我正在刺激他们，为了要实行，实行什么？
  
  In a testimony that they would contribute about the point where they are at, to make effective this passe which perhaps some of you know is what I am trying to introduce into my School, this passe by which in short what is at stake is that each one contributes his stone to the analytic discourse by bearing witness to how one enters into it.
  
  在一个他们提供的证词，有关他们的位置在哪里的这点， 为了使这个「通过制度」实行。你们有些人或许知道， 「通过制度」是我正在尝试介绍到我的学派。 憑藉这个「通过制度」，总之，岌岌可危的是，每一个人都贡献他的一块石头，给精神分析的论述。他们见证到我们如何进入这个论述。
  
  It is strange that among them there are some who are fully formed analysts and who when literally – this is what I did in this place where I wanted certain teachings to take place – when literally I beg their help – this is what I did – refuse it in the most categorical way, and go as far as to answer me with the insult, the insult which can be found in the newspapers for example – these are not things that have an effect on me but which, all the same about this insult, which is already not (11) bad to find in the newspaper, in the newspaper Le Monde in particular, as it happens, inflate this insult, and add to it. Yeah.
  
  奇怪的是，他们有些人是充分有资格的精神分析师，当实质上—这是我处在这个立场所做的。在这个立场，我要某些的教学能够发生---当我实质上请求他们的帮忙---这是我所做的---他们断然地拒绝帮忙，并且过分到以羞辱回答我。譬如，这种羞辱能够在报纸上找到---这些事对我并没有什么影响，但是仍然是关于这个羞辱，能在报纸上找到，还算不错，在「Le Monde」这家报纸上。它恰巧地将羞辱扩大，然后加油添醋。没错。
  
  If I speak this year, I will take things from the angle of the identity of self to self. The question is whether this applies to the analyst. Can the analyst be considered as an element? Does he make, in other words, a set? Making a set/doing it together (faire ensemble), this is something that I will try to explain to you, is not to form a trade union.
  
  假如我今年谈论，我将从自我跟自我的认同的角度看待事情。 这个问题是，这是否可以应用的分析师身上。分析师能够被认为是一个元素吗？换句话说，他能够形成一个「集合」吗？ 形成一个「集合」，或聚集在一块，这就是我将尝试跟你们解释的事情。这并不是要组成一个商业公会。
  
  They are two different terms. Faire ensemble might mean, that means being able to make a series. And what I am questioning myself about is where this series stops? Among other terms, can an analyst, like the example of what I have just alluded to about the insult, behave like an imbecile (imbécile)?
  
  他们是两个不同的术语。 「聚集在一块」可能意味着，那意味着，能够形成一连串的行动。我正在质疑我自己的是，这一连串行动会停在哪里？ 除了其它术语， 精神分析师能够行为像个白痴吗？譬如，我刚刚提到的这个羞辱。
  
  This is a very important question. How judge what I am describing as imbecility? It surely has a meaning, even in the analytic discourse; elsewhere, of course, in every discourse no one has any doubt, one is an imbecile or not, I am saying with respect to
  this discourse specifically to the discourse of the master, the discourse of the university, the scientific discourse, there is no doubt about it.
  
  这是非常重要的问题。 如何判断我正在描述什么当作白痴？它确实具有一种意义， 甚至在精神分析的论述；当然，在别的地方， 在每个论述，没有人会怀疑，他是否是白痴。我正在说的，关于这个论述，明确地说，是提到主人的论述， 大学的论述， 科学的论述，关于它是无可置疑的。
  
  How define imbecility in the analytic discourse? Here is a question, a question that I introduced, faith, I would say, from the first year of my seminar in stating that analysis is certainly a remedy against ignorance, that it is without effect against being an asshole (connerie).
  
  在精神分析的论述里，如何定义白痴行为？ 这是一个问题，我不妨说，这是我介绍的一个问题， 请相信，从我研讨班的第一年，我陈述：精神分析确实是一种对抗无知的一种补救。对抗一种狗屎的东西，它并非没有效果。
  
  19.11.74 Draft 2 Int 4
  Hang on, pay attention! I already said that connerie is not imbecility. How can you situate imbecility, specify it as being an asshole?
  
  请注意，请仔细注意！我已经说过「connerie」并不是白痴行为。你们如何定位白痴行为，明确指定它为狗屎？
  
  The annoying thing and what is difficult in the question that I evoke, is something is perhaps something that you got wind of from me, I did not heavily insist on it, but all the same it must be said there are subjects for whom analysis, I mean the analytic experience, when they present themselves to it, does not succeed. And I specify that this makes them imbeciles. It must indeed be that there is something flawed at the start.
  
  令人懊恼的事情是，我召唤的这个问题，困难的地方，或许是某件你们从我这里听到的东西。 我并没有强烈地坚持它，但是我仍然必须说，有些主体，对于他们，精神分析，我指的是精神分析经验，当他们呈现他们自己面对它时，它并没有成功。我明确指明，这使他们成为白痴。从一开头，一定是有某件瑕疵的地方。
  
  That means perhaps that they would be more useful, I mean useable elsewhere. I mean that for something else they have obvious gifts.
  
  那或许意味着，他们会更加有用。我的意思是在别的地方有用途。我的意思是，对于某件其它的事情，他们有明显的天才。
  
  This brings us back to the ethics of each discourse and it is not for nothing that I put forward the term ethics of psychoanalysis.
  
  这将为们带回每个论述的伦理学。我提出精神分析的伦理学这个术语，并非毫无意义。
  
  Ethics is not the same in it and it is perhaps with those whose ethics would have made them shine elsewhere that analysis does not succeed.
  
  伦理学在里面并不相同。或许对于伦理学本来会在别的地方焕发光辉的那些人，精神分析并没有成功。
  
  Simple hypothesis, but that perhaps – this cannot be without twists and turns – perhaps if I decide, we will put here, finally we will put, it is a manner of speaking, I will put to the test here, (12) starting from the fact that I am indicating that there is no other ethics than to play the game according to the structure of a discourse and that we rediscover there my title of last year; it is the non-dupes, those who do not play the game of a discourse, who find themselves liable to err. It is not inevitably any worse for that. Only it is at their own risk.
  
  这是简单的假设，但是或许---这不可能没有受到扭曲与转变---或许，假如我决定，我们将会放置在这里，最后，我们将会放置，这是一种言谈的方式， 我将会在从考验它。我从这个事实开始：我正在指示，除了依照论述的结构，玩这个遊戏外，没有其它的伦理学。我们在那里重新发现去年的我地演讲标题：「这并不是欺骗」。那些没有玩论述遊戏的人， 那些发现他们自己容易犯错误的人。这无可避免，不会更加糟糕。只是他们冒着自己的风险。
  
  Those who err, in each discourse, are not inevitably useless in it. Far from it! Only it would be preferable in order to found a new one of these discourses, that people should be a little bit more dupe.
  
  在每个论述里犯错误的那些人，他们未必然是没有用途。根本不是！ 只是我们最好创建一种新的这些论述。人们应该稍微被欺骗一下。
  
  There you are. So then since all the same it would be quite useless to tell you that I am suspending myself, that I am questioning myself about what I will do this year, it would be quite vain to do so, but to do it for two hours which is what you were expecting, well then, I am not going to do it. I am going to stop there while asking you simply to trust, in order to know if you are to come back here on the 10th
  December, the second Tuesday, to trust the little notices on which I will inscribe the title that I will have chosen, if do this seminar this year.
  
  问题就在这里。既然这将是完全没有用途，假如我告诉你们，我正在悬置我自己，我正在质疑我自己，关于今年我将怎么做。 这样做将是完全白费力气，但是做它两个小时，这是你们当时正在期望的。 呵呵，我将不要做它。 我将要停在那里，当我要求你们仅是信任，为了要知道，你们在十二月十日，第二个星期二，你们是否会回到这里。我要求你们信任这些小小的公告。在公告上，我将记下我到时选定的这个标题，如同今年的这个研讨班。
  
  It is quite superfluous, and I would even say contra-indicated for you to bombard Gloria with telephone calls. The poor woman can’t take any more! It will be one thing or another, either this notice will be put up there, let us say to leave the time to do it and then I must also think things out, the notice will be in the corridor two days
  before, or else it will not be. If it is not there, well then!
  
  这是完全是多此一举。我甚至会说相反的指示，让你们用电话，使葛洛瑞亚秘书应接不暇。这位可怜的女人再也忍受不了！这将是某件事情， 要就这个公告公佈，我们姑且保留时间来做它。
  
  You can tell yourselves that I am taking a year’s sabbatical. If it is there, I am
  counting on seeing you as numerous as you are today.
  
  你们能够告诉你们自己，我正在度一年的安息日。假如是在那里，我相信我会见到你们许多人，如同今天一样。
  
  雄伯译
  32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
  http://springhero.wordpress.com
  
  
  
  
  
  
  

  回应 删除 举报广告
• 

  2011-10-20 01:59:06 springhero

  拉康：RSI 02
  真实界，象征界，与想象界
  
  Introduction
  序言
  Preliminary to the Seminar of R.S.I.
  
  真实界，象征界，与想象界研讨班序言
  19 November 1974
  
  Seminar 1: Tuesday 10 December 1974
  Voilà. So then you saw my notice, which is written like that, Rsi. It can be read like that. It can also be read, since it is in capital letters, it can be read R.S.I. Which perhaps suggested to those who are in the know the Real, the Symbolic and the Imaginary.
  
  哇塞！你们都看到我的佈告。上面书写着：Rsi。它能够那样读。它也能够这样读，因为它是大写字母，R.S.I. 这或许跟那些人已经知道的人建议：真实界，象征界，与想象界。
  
  I would like this year to talk to you about the Real, and to begin by pointing out to you that these three words, Real, Symbolic and Imaginary have a meaning. They are three different meanings, but you can also note that I said three meanings, like that, because it seems to be self-evident. But if they are different, is that enough for them to make three, if they are as different as I say?
  
  我今年想要跟你们谈论关于真实界。我开始先跟你们指出：这三个字，真实界，象征界，与想象界，都具有意义。它们是三个不同的意义，但是你们也能够注意到，我说的是三个意义，像那样。因为它似乎是不证而明的。 但是假如它们是不同的，而且如我说的差别很大，难道就足够让它们成为三个吗？
  
  Hence the notion of a common measure, which is difficult to grasp, except by defining the unit in it as a function of measure. There are so many, one, two, three.
  
  因此，这是一个共同基准的观念。它很难理解，除了定义里面的这个单位，作为一种基准的功用。 有那么多，一，二，三。
  
  Again it must be, for it to be able to be said that there are so many, again this unit must be grounded on the sign, whether it is a sign or whether it is written equals, or indeed that you make two little strokes to signify equals, the equivalence of these units.
  
  而且，它必须是那么多，为了让它能够被说：有那么多。而且，这个单位必须建立在符号的基础上，无论它是一种符号，或是否是书写的相等物，或确实是，你画两划，为了表达相等物，这些单位的相等物。
  
  But if by chance they were different, as I might say from one another, we would
  be very embarrassed and, after all, what would bear witness to it, would be the meaning itself of the word other.
  
  但是，假如它们恰巧是不同的，如我所说，彼此不相同。我们将会很尴尬。畢竟，什么东西见证到它？什么将是「它者」这个字词的意义本身？
  
  Again there must be distinguished, in this meaning of other, the other made up of a
  distinction defined by an external/internal relationship, for example, as Freud did, whether he wants to or not, in his second topography which is supported by a geometry of the sack where you see a thing, somewhere in the New introductory lectures, a thing which is supposed to contain, contain what?
  
  而且，在「它者」的意义上，「它者」由外在与内在的关系所定义的区别组成，它必须被区别出来，如同佛洛伊德所做的，无论他想不想要，在他第二个拓扑图形，由这个袋子的几何形状。在那里，你们看到一件东西， 在这个「新导引演讲」里，一件应该是包括，包括什么的东西。
  
  It’s a funny thing to say, the (14) drives. This is what he calls the Id. Naturally this forces him to add to it a certain number of tools, a sort of lunula which all of a
  sudden is transformed into a sort of vitellus on which there is supposed to be differentiated an embryo.
  
  这样说真好笑，这个冲动驱力。这就是他所说的「本我」。当然，这强迫他替它增添某些的工具，一种的「新月形之物」，它突然被转变成为一种「蛋白」。在它上面，应该有胚胎会被区别出来。
  
  This is obviously not what he means, but it is regrettable that it suggests it. Such are the disadvantages of imaged illustrations. I am not telling you everything else that he is forced to add, without counting the number of hatchings (hachures) that he entitles Superego.
  
  显而易见，这并不是他的意思，但是很遗憾的，它建议它。 意象的说明不利的地方就是这样。 我并不是在告诉你们他不得不添增多其它一切，而不计算他称为「超我」的衍生物。
  
  This geometry of the sack is indeed this thing that we have to deal with at the level of topology, except for the fact that, as perhaps the idea has come to you, this is drawn on a surface and that we are forced to put the sack onto it. On a surface this gives a ring (rond) and, with this ring, there is an inside and an outside.
  
  这个袋子的几何图形，确实是我们必须处理的东西，在拓扑图形的层次上，除了这个事实：或许你们曾经想到它， 这是被画在表面上，我们不得不将袋子放进里面。 在表面上， 这给予一种环圈。由于有这个环圈，就有里面与外面。
  
  It is with that that one is led to write inclusion, namely, that something, I for example is included in an E, a set. Inclusion you know perhaps how that is written, like that, , whence people have deduced a little quickly that one could slip from inclusion which is there above to the lesser sign , namely, that I is smaller that E,which is a manifest imbecility.
  
  随着这个，我们被引导去书写「包含」，也就是那个某件东西， 譬如，「I」被包含在「E」里，一种「集合」。「包含」，你们或许知道它如何被书写，就像那样，从那里，人们很快就推论出，我们能够从「包含」里溜掉。在上方那里，有这个比较次要的符号，换句话， 那个「I」比较小，那个「E」，是一个明显的白痴行为。
  
  Here then is the first other, the other defined from the outside to the inside. Only there is another Other, the one that I marked with a capital O, which for its part is defined as not having the slightest relationship, however small you may imagine it…when you begin to convey yourself in words, you are immediately caught in a wolf trap.
  
  因此在此是第一个「它者」，「它者」从外面到里面被定义。仅有在那里，还有另外一个「大它者」。这个大它者，我用大写字母O标示。就它本身而言，这个大它者被定义，作为根本就没有关系，无论你们想像它是如何小…当你们开始用文字传达你们自己， 你们立刻套限在「文字的陷阱」里。
  
  Because this however small you imagine it, brings the Imaginary into play, and when you bring the Imaginary into play, you have every chance of becoming entangled.
  
  因为这是运作到想象界，无论你想像它如何小。当你们运作想象界时，你拥有充分的机会被纠缠。
  
  This is even how people started out for the infinitesimal: people had all sorts of trouble getting out of the Imaginary.
  
  这甚至是人们如何开始追求这个微积分，人们遭遇各种的麻烦，逃离想象界。
  
  That they should be three, this Real, this Symbolic and this Imaginary, what does that mean? There are two slopes. One slope, a very steep one, leads us to homogenise them; because what relationship have they among themselves? Well then! This is precisely where I want to open up the path for you this year. One could say that the Real is what is strictly unthinkable.
  
  它们应该有三个，这个真实界，象征界，及这个想象界。 那是什么意思？ 有两个斜坡。其中一个斜坡。非常陡峭，引导我们将它们类同。因为它们之间能形成怎样的关系呢？呵呵！这确实是我今年想要跟你们开展的途径。 我们能够说，真实界就是严格不可思议的地方。
  
  That at least would be a start. That would make a hole in the affair and that would allow us to question what is involved in, do not forget, what I started from, namely, from three terms in so far as they convey a meaning. What is this business of meaning, especially if you introduce into it what I am striving to make you sense?
  
  至少，那是一个开始。 那将会形成这件事物的一个空洞。这个空洞容许我们质疑所被牵涉的东西。 请不要忘记，我开始的东西， 也就是，从三个术语，因为它们传递意义。 意义的这个事情是什么？特别是，假如你们将我设法让你们感觉到东西，介绍到里面。
  
  The fact is that as regards what is involved in (15) analytic practice, this is where you operate from, but on the other hand, you only work to reduce this meaning; it is in the measure that the unconscious is supported by this something, it must be said, the
  most difficult thing that I had to introduce, this something defined by me, structured like the Symbolic. It is from the fundamental equivocation of this something that is at stake in the term Symbolic that you always operate - I am talking to those here who are worthy of the name analyst. Equivocation is not meaning.
  
  事实上，关于精神分析实践被牵涉的东西， 这是你们从那里运作的地方。但是另一方面， 你们仅是设法来还原这个意义。就是随着无意识受到这个东西支持，我们必须说， 我必须介绍的最困难的东西， 这个被我定义的东西，结构像个象征界。 就是这个某件东西的基本的模棱两可，岌岌可危，在你们总是运作的象征界—我在此正在谈论对对象是拥有精神分析师身份的人。 模棱两可就不是意义。
  
  Meaning is that through which there responds something which is different to the
  Symbolic, and there is no means of supporting this something otherwise than by the Imaginary.
  
  意义是，通过意义，会有某件东西回应。这个东西不同于象征界，没有工具支持这个某件东西，除了憑藉想象界。
  
  But what is the Imaginary? Does it even ek-sist? Since you hint, simply by pronouncing the term Imaginary, that there is something which ensures that the speaking being shows that he is destined for mental defectiveness. And this results from the simple notion of the Imaginary, in so far as the starting point for it is the reference to the body and to the fact that its representation, I mean everything that for it is represented, is only the reflection of its organism. It is the least of the suppositions that the body implies.
  
  但是这个想象界是什么？ 它甚至是「先前存在」吗？ 既然你们暗示，仅是根据宣布想象界这个术语。有某件东西保证，言说的生命主体显示： 他注定会有精神上的缺失。这是因为想象界的简单观念而造成。 作为它的开始点， 就是提到身体，提到这个事实：它的符号再现，我的意思是，它符号再现的一切东西， 仅是它的器官的反映。 这是身体至少会有的假设。
  
  Only here there is something that immediately makes us stumble, which is that in this notion of body, there must be immediately implied the following, which is its very definition: it is something about which one presumes that there are specified functions in the organs, so that an automobile, even a computer according to the latest news, is also a body. It is not self-evident, we should say, that a body is living. So that what best attests to the fact that it is living, is precisely this mens in connection with which, more exactly that I introduced along the path, the journeying of mental defectiveness.
  
  只有在此，有某件东西，立刻让我们结结巴巴。那就是，在身体的这个观念， 以下的东西必须立刻被暗示。它的定义是：这是某件我们假定，在器官会有明确的功用。所以一台汽车，甚至是一部电脑，依照最新的新闻。它也是一个身体。这并不是不证自明的，我们应该说，一个身体是活著。所以它的最好测试就是这个事实： 它是活著。 确实就是这个「善良心灵」，关于它，我更加确实地介绍，沿着这个途径，精神缺失的旅途。
  
  It is not given to all bodies, in so far as they function, to suggest the dimension of imbecility. This dimension is introduced by this something that the tongue, and not just any one, Latin… – this to put in their place those who impute precisely this imbecility to Latin – is precisely the only one that instead of sticking on the soul an opaque term like nous, or another metaphor of something or other, of a knowledge, which we for sure do not know whether it exists, since it is the knowledge supposed by the Real.
  
  这个善良心灵并没有给予所有的身体， 当它们发挥功能，来建议白痴行为的维度。 这个维度由这个某件东西介绍，舌头，而不是任何其它东西。 在拉丁文，…这个舌头要将那些人放置在他们的位置，那些人灌输确实就是这个白痴行为到拉丁文---这确实是唯一的东西，非但没有给予灵魂一个模糊的术语「理性思想」，或是某件其它东西的比喻，某种知识的比喻。我们确实并不知道，它是否存在，因为这个知识由真实界来认定。
  
  This knowledge of God, it is certain that it ek-sists. We have given ourselves enough trouble in spelling it out, it ek-sists, but only in the sense that I am writing this
  term ek-sistence, by (16) writing it differently than is usually done. It ek-sists perhaps, but we do not know where.
  
  上帝的这个知识，确定它是「事先存在」。我们曾经带给自己足够的麻烦，将它拼字出来。 它「事先存在」。但是它仅是这个意义，我正在书写这个术语「事先存在」，我将它以跟平常不同的方式书写。它或许是「事先存在」，但是我们不知道在哪里。
  
  All one can say, is that what consists gives no testimony of it, so then, there is something a little bit striking in seeing that the tongue that is suspected of being the most stupid one is precisely the one that has forged this term intelligere, to read between the lines, namely, elsewhere than the way in which the Symbolic is written. It is from this effect of writing of the Symbolic that there stems this meaning-effect, in other words imbecility, to which there bear witness up to today all the systems
  described as natural.
  
  我们所能说的是，所组成的东西，并没有给予它的证词。有某件东西稍微引人注意，当我们看到，舌头被怀疑是最愚笨的东西。舌头确实曾经铸造这个术语「智慧」，在字里行间阅读。换句话说， 在象征界被书写的方式以外的地方。 就是根据象征界的书写的影响， 意义的效果开始于那里。换句话说，白痴行为。 迄今，所有被描述为属于自然的系统，都见证到这种白痴行为。
  
  Without language, not the slightest suspicion could come to us of this imbecility, which is also that by which the support which is the body bears witness to us, I remind you that I said it earlier but this did not do anything for you, bears witness to us of being alive. In truth this mens, attested to by mental defectiveness, is
  something from which I do not hope to get out in any way.
  
  假如没有语言， 我们丝毫不会怀疑这种白痴行为。这也是，身体跟我们见证到的支持。我提醒你们， 我早先说过它， 但是这并没有对你们做任何事情，它跟我们见证，它是活着。 事实上， 这个「善良心灵」，由精神的缺失所验证， 它是某件东西， 我无论如何并不希望逃离它。
  
  雄伯译
  32hsiung@pchome.com.tw
  http://springhero.wordpress.com
  
  

  回应 删除 举报广告

> 我来回应

这个小组的成员也喜欢去  · · · · · ·

Enjoy Your Lacan! (792)

齐泽克 (2236)

克里斯蒂娃 [ Julia Kr... (374)

德里达 (2501)

Gilles Deleuze (1546)

鲍德里亚/布希亞（Jean... (1741)