THE CAUSE OF PSYCHOSIS 精神病的原因
In Seminar III, Lacan did not content himself with describing the principal features of psychotic communication—the exclusion of the Other, the semantic ‘shallowness’ of language, a code that has become message and a message that has been reduced to its code, and the compulsory nature of the exchange—he also tried to delineate the cause of these features.
在第三研讨班,拉康并没有满足于描述精神病者的沟通的主要特征—大他者的排除,语言的语意的“浮浅化”,已经变成讯息的符码,以及被化简成为它的符码的讯息,跟交换的强迫性的特性。拉康也尝试描述这特征的原因。
Assuming that the dimension of the Other and the possibility to define positions within a particular exchange are due to the wall imposed by language, Lacan had to conclude that in psychosis this wall has somehow not been erected. In psychotic patients, language has not been anchored.
当拉康假设,大他者的维度与定义特殊的交换里的立场的可能性,是由于被语言赋加的墙壁所形成。拉康必须获得结论:在精神病,这个墙壁因为某种原故,并没有被竖立。在精神病的病人身上,语言并没有被锚定。
Rather than a firmly embedded, solid structure, it is a free-floating, flat and permeable screen. Implicitly referring to Freud’s idea that in psychosis the link between the word-presentation and the thingpresentation has been severed, Lacan defined this non-embedment of language as a lack of ‘quilting points’ (points de capiton) between the signifier and the signified (Lacan 1993[1955–56]:268–270), for which he in turn held the foreclosure (forclusion) of the Name-of-the-Father responsible (Lacan 1977h[1957–58]:215).8
非但不是被坚固的镶嵌的牢固的结构,在神经病者的语言是一种自由漂浮,平坦与可被污染的帘幕。拉康暗示地提到弗洛伊德的观念:在精神病者,字词表象与物表象已经被撕裂开来。拉康定义语言的非-镶嵌,作为是处于能指与所指的“锚定点的欠缺”。因为这样,精神病者自己将“以父之名”的除权封闭负起责任。
In the final session of Seminar III Lacan proposed ‘foreclosure’ as the best translation of Freud’s term Verwerfung (Lacan 1993[1955– 56]:321). In Freud’s works, Verwerfung can hardly lay claim to conceptual status— there are very few passages in which the term appears—and it is not really elaborated as the specific cause of psychosis.9 In conceptualizing Verwerfung as a distinct mechanism for psychosis, Lacan took his main lead from Freud’s formula in his case-study of the Wolf Man that a ‘repression [Verdrangung] is something very different from a condemning judgement [Verwerfung]’ (Freud 1918b[1914]:79–80).
在第三研讨班的最后一堂,拉康建议“除权弃绝”作为是弗洛伊德的术语“否认”的最佳翻译。在弗洛伊德的著作里,“否认”几乎无法宣称具有观念的地位—这个术语出现的段落非常少—这个术语并没有确实地建构,作为是精神病的明确的原因。当拉康将“否认”形成观念,作为是精神病的明显的心理机制,他主要是从弗洛伊德的公式引申而来,在他研究“狼人”的个案:压抑跟谴责的判断是某件非常不同的东西。