英：enunciation; 法：enonciation
在欧洲的语言学理论中，一个重要的区分是能述与所述 (英：statement; 法：enonce)之间的区分。这一区分涉及看待语言生产 (linguistic production)的两种方式。当语言生产乃根据一些抽象的语法单位（诸如句子）且独立于发生事件的特定环境而加以分析的时候，它便被指称为一则所述。另一方面，当语言生产乃作为一个特定言说者在特定时间/地点与特定情境下执行的某一个体行动而加以分析的时候，它则被指称为一则能述（Ducrot and Todorow, 1972:405-10).
早在拉康使用这些术语的很久以前，他就已经做出了一个类似的区分。例如，在1936年，他便强调言说的行动本身即包含某种意义，即便说出的话语是“无意义”的 (Ec, 83)。先于它在“传递信息”上可能具有的任何功能，言语首先是一种对于他者的诉求。这种不管说话内容而对言语行动本身的关注，便预期了拉康对于能述维度的关注。
当拉康最终在1946年使用“能述”这个术语的时候，它首先便是要描述精神病式语言的那些奇怪的特征，以及其“能述的表里不一”(duplicity of the enunciation)(Ec, 167)。后来，在1950年代，这个术语便被用来定位无意识的主体。在欲望图解中，低阶链条是所述，即在其意识维度上的言语，而高阶链条则是“无意识的能述”(E, 316)。在把能述指派为无意识之时，拉康断言言语的来源既不是自我，也不是意识，而是无意识；语言来自大他者，而“我”是我的话语的主人这一观念则仅仅是一种幻象。“我”(法：J)这个词本身便是模棱两可的；作为转换词 (SHIFTER),它既是一个充当所述主体 (subject of statement)的能指，又是一个指派 (designate)却不代表 (signify)能述主体 (subject of enunciation)的指示符 (E, 298)。因而，主体在这两个层面之间便是分裂的，即主体被割裂在说出这个呈现了统一性幻象的“我”的行动本身之中（见：S11,139)。
(enonciation) In linguistic theory in Europe, one important distinction is that between theenunciation and the statement (Fr. Enonce). The distinction concerns two ways ofregarding linguistic production. When linguistic production is analysed in terms ofabstract grammatical units (such as sentences), independent of the specific circumstancesof occurrence, it is referred to as a statement. On the other hand, when linguisticproduction is analysed as an individual act performed by a particular speaker at a specifictime/place, and in a specific situation, it is referred to as an enunciation (Ducrot and Todorov, 1972:405-10).
Long before Lacan uses these terms, he is already making a similar distinction. In1936, for example, he stresses that the act of speaking contains a meaning in itself, even if the words spoken are meaningless' (Ec, 83). Prior to any function it may have in'conveying a message', speech is an appeal to the other. This attention to the act ofspeaking in itself, irrespective of the content of the utterance, anticipates Lacan'sattention to the dimension of the enunciation.
When Lacan does come to use the term 'enunciation'in 1946, it is first of all todescribe strange characteristics of psychotic language, with its 'duplicity of theenunciation' (Ec, 167). Later, in the 1950s, the term is used to locate the subject of theunconscious. In the graph of desire, the lower chain is the statement, which is speech inits conscious dimension, while the upper chain is 'the unconscious enunciation' (E, 316). In designating the enunciation as unconscious, Lacan affirms that the source of speech isnot the ego, nor consciousness, but the unconscious; language comes from the Other, andthe idea that 'I'am master of my discourse is only an illusion. The very word 'I'Je) isambiguous; as SHIFTER, it is both a signifier acting as subject of the statement, and anindex which designates, but does not signify, the subject of the enunciation (E, 298). Thesubject is thus split between these two levels, divided in the very act of articulating the Ithat presents the illusion of unity (see S11,139).