The Problem Of Signifier In Lacan’s Psychoanalysis

Jacques Lacan was a highly influential psychoanalyst and philosopher in the twentieth Century.On the basis of Freud’s theory,he reformed it by means of structural linguistics,mathematics,topology and other tools,Finally,he completed the subversive return to Freud,and formed a unique theory of psychoanalysis.The proposal of Lacan’s theory,not only opposed Ego Psychoanalysis who occupied a leading role,but also combined psychoanalysis with other subjects creatively,break the disciplinary boundaries,and realize the interdisciplinary cross.The characteristic of Lacan’s psychoanalytic theory lies in the borrowing of linguistic terms,based on the ideas of linguists such as Saussure and Jacobsen,the term "signifier" is given priority and is associated with the subject,symptoms,discourse and so on,which makes signifier act as an element of subject construction.His interdisciplinary approach not only innovated the theory of psychoanalysis,but also expanded the field of linguistic research.This article takes Lacan’s point of signifier as the research content,and tries to outline the whole picture of Lacan’s thought through the origin,development and change of the signifier.Although Lacan’s concept of the signifier comes from linguistics,but it has gradually broken the linguistic horizon in the later period,and moved towards a more grand subject background.In this article,on the basis of the induction and arrangement of signifier,we take it as a methodological tool to explain psychoanalysis,and on the premise of combining the related theories,we make a critique of it.For all that,the far-reaching academic impact of Lacan’s theory of signifier is also not to be ignored.On the critical inheritance of the Lacan’s theory of signifier,many scholars have done the extension of different directions.The ideological criticism of Zizek,the politics of Laclau and Mouffe are all drawn from Lacan’s theory of discourse,the interpreting semotics of Kristeva is based on Lacan’s theory of signifier,Cixous’s Ecriture feminine is based on the critique of lacan’s Phallus,Alain Badiou,Althusser,Deleuze are all influenced by Lacan.This article is composed of three parts:introduction,text and conclusion.The introduction is mainly about the research value of the paper,the current research situation at home and abroad,the research ideas and innovation of this paper,highlights the differences when compared this paper with other papers,namely,seize the clue of "signifier",contact the development and change of Lacan’s ideas in earlier and later period,so to avoid the scattered structure and miscellaneous content.The first to five chapters are the main part of the paper.In reference to Saussure’s semiotic thoughts,combined with Jacobsen’s interpretation,referring to the "floating signifier "in structural anthropology of Levi Strauss,Lacan stripped the signified in Saussure’s symbol,highlight the signifier,construct the signifier chain.Because of the exclusion of signified,the means of meaning production which rely on the combination of signifier and signified in Saussure’s theoy is also be excluded.In order to resolve the problem of meaning production,Lacan draw lessons from Jacobsen’s research again,regard metaphor and metonymy as the way of meaning production of the signifying chain.The second chapter,starting with the relationship between the signifier and the subject,defines the subject of Lacan’s psychoanalysis.As a preterm infant,human beings are unable to control their body after birth,by recognizing the mirror image with integrity,human beings gained initiative and established a false and imaginative ego.But ego is far from the research object of Lacan’s psychoanalysis,on the contrary,the unconscious subject,which is obscured by ego,is the key to the study of psychoanalysis,from the relationship between ego and subject,we can deduce the relationship between the Imaginary and the Symbolic.For the subject,they can get their being only when they enter the Symbolic,in the process of transition from the Imaginary to the Symbolic,Oedipus structure is the only way,only by identifying with the name of the father,accept the castration of Symbolic law,give up the desire for the mother,the subject can be registered in the Symbolic,get the meaning of the Phallus,and producing sex identification.But such a subject of signifier is incomplete,the subject still has a part that can not be signified.Based on this,Lacan defines two sides of the subject:the subject of signifier and the subject of jousissance,the two are complementary to each other.The third chapter interprets the symptom from the perspective of signifier,based on the elaboration of Lacan’s concept of body and symptom formation,we deeply analyze the relationship between three different clinical structures of symptoms(neurosis,psychosis,perversion)and signifier.Neurosis include hysteria and obsessional neurosis,these two structures are related to the sex and being of the subject separately,psychosis related to the loss of the name of the father,perversion can be due to the disavowal of the father’s function.In the early times,Lacan regard the loss of the name of the father in Oedipus structure as the reason of psychosis,but after reading the works of Joyce in later times,he realized that although Joyce did not identify the name of the father,but the writings of him replaced the name of the father to have an effect,and avoid Joyce to fall into the structure of psychosis.According to Joyce’s case,Lacan further proposed the concept of the sinthome,which was also an attempt by Lacan to describe the jousissance.But sinthome have different ways to construct,differenting from Joyce’s way of sinthome construction by means of the abundance of meaning,Irish writer Beckett uses the reduction of meaning to construct sinthome.The fourth chapter talks about the expansion of the signifier,When the May Storm happened in Paris,Lacan put forward four kinds of discourse pattern:the discourse of university,the discourse of master,the discourse of hysteric,the discourse of analyst.These four kinds of discourse pattern all rely on the different transposition of(?)(subject),S1(master signifier),S2(knowledge)and a(surplus jouissance).Combined with the historical background,Lacan saw the popularity of the discourse of university and the discourse of master,he also realized the limitation of linguistic signifier,It always suppressed the truth.Therefore,he began to turn to mathematics and topology,because mathematical signifier is pure,and topological signifier itself is structure,it does not rely on speech,it only shows,this is the extension and prolongation Lacan made on linguistic signifier,whose purpose is to get rid of the ideology linguistic signifier may bring,and return the signifier to its purity.The fifth chapter,After tracing Lacan’s path of signifier systematically,then placed Lacan’s theory of signifier in linguistic background,and analyzed the criticism made by some scholars such as Derrida and Deleuze.On the one hand,Derrida pointed that,the analysis Lacan made on the text the purloined letter,falls into the area of hermeneutics,he did not regard the text as a signifier to combine with other texts made by Allan Poe,so he take the signifier as signified.On the other hand,Derrida challenged the positioning problem of the signifier,according to Derrida’s analysis,Lacan’s signifier always return to the place it should be,which makes Lacan’s theory of signifier have a transcendental character.Besides,Derrida also made a critique on Lacan’s discourse of master,he pointed that Lacan made his analysis of the purloined letter in the perspective of God,ignore that himself is also a ring of the signifying chain,and was bring to the place for analyze by the signifier of the text temporarily.On the basis of the critique of Lacan’s priority of signifier,Deleuze pointed that this may bring the autarchy of signifier,while Phallus is the representative of such autarchy.In order to oppose the the autarchy of signifier,he proposed the schizophrenic use of language,to highlight the purely generation of signifier.On the basis of the critique,we further introduce the inheritance many scholars made on Lacan’s theory of signifier.Zizek,Kristeva and Cixous all made their deduction on the basis of the critical reading of Lacan.In the conclusion,besides affirming the value of Lacan’s theory of signifier,the author proposed her own critique.the critique of Lacan needs to be returned to Saussure’s theory,The biggest problem in Lacan’s signifier is the misunderstanding of Saussure,on the one hand,he ignores the "relationship"in Saussure’s theory,which replaced the primary point of "relationship" in Saussure’s semiotics with the "barrier"signifier made on signified,this have deviated Saussure’s semiotics proposition.on the other hand,he misreads the linear features of the signifier,the linear features of the signifier in Saussure,is not the unidirectional expansion of phonemes,but a multidimensional spatial form when auditory impression generated in the brain,which Lacan ignored is the mental character of Saussure’s signifier.After excluding the signified,the variability of semiotics system caused by the transfer of relationship between signifier and signified is in question,as far as metonymy and metaphor are the means of meaning production of signifying chain,but these two means are difficult to realize the freedom and richness of signifier combination.Lacan proposed the concept of "letter," in later times to seek the irregularity and novelty of signifier use,whose purpose is to solve the problem.Besides linguistics and psychoanalysis,Lacan’s theory of signifier can be applied to various areas,art appreciation,text analysis,and film interpretation etc.Until now,the analysis of works which regarding Lacan’s theory of signifier is still popular,while a systematic explanation of Lacan’s theory of signifier is lacked.In reference to the related research at home and abroad,the author made a critical reading of Lacan,the purpose is not only to comb Lacan’s thought,but also put it on the background of linguistics,contacted Lacan’s signifier with other scholars’ signifier,construct several signifying chains,observe the operating mode of them.For Lacan,his theory of signifier is also a ring of the signifying chain,according to different motion,it can generate different meaning.The explanation made by the author,is anchor it on some place temporarily,to seek the transient shelter of the meaning.With the continuous wandering of signifying chain,this anchoring point will be fading,the signifier of Lacan’s will be overlapping with other signifiers ceaselessly,and produce new meanings.So,the understanding of Lacan’s theory will be various,This dynamic mode of operation,continue inject vitality into Lacan’s theory.