From No Subject - Encyclopedia of Psychoanalysis
In the early 1970s, Lacan turned his attention more and more to the place of jouissance in human sexuality, the field he had discussed with such subtety in the late 1950s with the theoretical tools of desire and the phallus. Whereas language and jouissance had remained distinct in mot of his formulations until now, Lacan argued that there is a side to language which is itself a form of jouissance. If language was traditionally seen as made up of signifiers, each of which was linked to another signifier, he now proposed that there was a signifier without such links... a One, which makes up "lalangue", an amalgam of libido and signifiers.
Language is now shown to have not only effects of meaning and signification, but direct effects of jouissance. These ideas complicated the received notion that the libido and jouissance were different in nature from linguistic elements.
註： 這分明就是詩
Index
- Lacan, Jacques. The Seminar of Jacques Lacan, Book XX: Encore, On Feminine Sexuality, The Limits of Love and Knowledge 1972-1973. Trans. Bruce Fink. New York: W. W. Norton & Company, 1998. pp. 44, 84, 101, 106, 132, 138-39, 141-42, 143
What does “Lacan argued that there is a side to language which is itself a form of jouissance. If language was traditionally seen as made up of signifiers, each of which was linked to another signifier, he now proposed that there was a signifier without such links... a One, which makes up "lalangue", an amalgam of libido and signifiers.” mean? This change of views came from Seminar XX, so can we say that this change of view came from Lacan’s reading of Joyce? (ChatGPT, 2025-4-6)
Jacques Lacan’s exploration of language and jouissance underwent significant evolution, particularly from Seminar XX (Encore) onward. In this period, he introduced the concept of “lalangue,” emphasizing that language is not solely a network of signifiers referring to other signifiers but also a source of jouissance—a form of intense, sometimes disruptive, enjoyment. This perspective suggests that certain signifiers exist without direct links to others, representing a singular “One” that embodies an amalgamation of libido and signifiers.
Regarding the influence of James Joyce on this shift, it’s important to note that Lacan’s focused engagement with Joyce’s work culminated in Seminar XXIII (Le Sinthome), where he examined Joyce’s unique use of language and its implications for psychoanalytic theory. While Seminar XX reflects Lacan’s evolving views on language and jouissance, the in-depth analysis of Joyce’s impact is more directly addressed in Seminar XXIII. Therefore, while there may be thematic continuities, the specific change in perspective introduced in Seminar XX cannot be solely attributed to Lacan’s reading of Joyce.
