‌‌‌‌　　英：id; 法：Sa; 德：das Es

‌‌‌‌　　弗洛伊德从最早支持精神分析的精神病学家之一格奥尔格·格罗代克②那里借来了“das Es”(《标准版》将其译作“heId”)这一术语，尽管正如弗洛伊德所同样注意到的那样，格罗代克自己似乎又是从尼采那里借来这个术语的（Freud, 1923b: SE XIX, 23,n.3; 见：Nietzsche, 1886:47)。格罗代克声称“我们所谓的自我在生活中的表现基本都是被动的，而且…我们也都是被那些未知的且无法控制的力量所‘居住'的”(Freud, 1923b: SE XIX, 23), 并且用“das Es'”一词来表示这些力量。该术语在1920年代早期首度出现在弗洛伊德著作的第二精神模型的语境之中；在此模型中，精神被划分成了三个机构：它我、自我 (EGO)与超我 (SUPEREGO)。它我大致对应着弗洛伊德在其第一精神模型中所谓的无意识系统，但是在这两个概念之间也存在着一些重要的差异 (见：Laplanche and Pontalis, 1967:197-9).

‌‌‌‌　　拉康对于它我理论的主要贡献，即在于他强调上述“那些未知的且无法控制的力量”并非是原始的生物性需要或是自然的野蛮本能性力量，而必须根据语言学来构想：

分析所关切的“它我”是由业已存在于实在界中的那一能指，那一无法理解的能指所构成的。它已然存在于那里，不过它却是由能指所构成的，它并非是与某种预定的和谐相对而言的某种原始且混乱的属性…

(S4,49)

‌‌‌‌　　拉康把“它我”构想为言语的无意识起源，即超越了想象性的自我的象征性的“它”(与《标准版》中所使用的拉丁文“d”不同，拉康所使用的法文术语“ca”更接近于弗洛伊德的“Es”，两者皆是日常使用的普通词汇)。因而，格罗代克声称“‘我在生活’(IivC)这一断言的正确性仅仅是有条件的，它仅仅道出了‘人被它所居住’(Man is lived by the It)这一基本原则在表面上的一小部分”(Groddeck, 1923:5), 而拉康的观，点也可以用类似的措辞来表达，只不过是用动词“言说”(to speak)代替了动词“生活/居住”(tolive);“我在言说”(I speak)这一断言仅仅是“人被它所言说”(Man is spoken by it)这一基本原则在表面上的一部分。因此，拉康在讨论“它我”时经常使用到的措辞便是“它在言说”(leςaparle)(例如：S7,206)。它我的这一象征性本质，超越了由自我所构成的那种想象性的自体感，从而导致拉康将其等同于“主体”一词。德文术语“Es”与字母“S”之间的同音便阐明了这一等同，后者是拉康用来表示主体的符号 (E, 129; 见：L图式[SCHEMA L]).

‌‌‌‌　　弗洛伊德最著名的箴言之一，便涉及了它我及其与精神分析治疗之间的关系：“它曾在之处，我必将抵达”(Vo Es war, soll Ichwerden)(《标准版》将这句话译作“它我曾经在哪里，自我就应当在那里”[where id was, there ego shall be]; Freud, I933a:SEXXⅡ，80)。有关这则神秘箴言的一种常见的解读，便是把它看作精神分析治疗的任务在于拓展无意识的领域：这样一种解读也明确体现在弗洛伊德此语的最早法文翻译中一“自我应当撵走它我”(le moi doit deloger le ca)。拉康则完全反对这样一种解读(S1,195),相反他指出“应当”(sol)一词要被理解为一项伦理性命令，故而分析的目标是让自我服从于象征秩序的自主性。因此，拉康更喜欢把弗洛伊德的这则陈述翻译为“它曾在之处，或者说其自在之处…即我有义务必将存在之处”(Làoùc'etait,peut-ondire,la ou s'etait...c'est mon devoir que je vienne a etre)(Ec,129,翻译有所修改：Ec,417-18:亦见：E,299-300: S11,44)。因而，根据此种见解，分析的结束便是对于自身存在(being)的那些象征性决定因素的“存在性识别”(existential recognition),即认识到“你即如此”（你仅仅是这道象征链条而已）的事实(S1,3)。

‌‌‌‌　　(ca) Freud borrowed the term das Es (which the Standard Edition translates as 'the Id') from Georg Groddeck, one of the first German psychiatrists to support psychoanalysis, although as Freud also noted, Groddeck himself seems to have taken the term from Nietzsche (Freud, 1923b: SE XIX, 23,n.3; see Nietzsche, 1886:47). Groddeck arguedthat 'what we call the ego behaves essentially passively in life, and... We are "lived"byunknown and uncontrollable forces' (Freud, 1923b: SE XIX, 23), and used the term das Es to denote these forces. The term first appears in Freud's work in the early 1920s, inthe context of the second model of the psyche; in this model, the psyche is divided intothree agencies: the id, the EGO and the SUPEREGO. The id corresponds roughly to what Freud called the unconscious system in his first model of the psyche, but there are alsoimportant differences between these two concepts (see Laplanche and Pontalis, 1967:197-9)

‌‌‌‌　　Lacan's main contribution to the theory of the id is to stress that the 'unknown anduncontrollable forces'in question are not primitive biological needs or wild instinctualforces of nature, but must be conceived of in linguistic terms:

The Es with which analysis is concerned is made of the signifier which isalready there in the real, the uncomprehended signifier. It is already there, but it is made of the signifier, it is not some kind of primitive andconfused property relevant to some kind of pre-established harmony.

(S4,49)

‌‌‌‌　　Lacan conceives of the id as the unconscious origin of speech, the symbolic 'it'beyondthe imaginary ego (the French term ca used by Lacan is much closer to Freud's Es, bothbeing ordinary terms in everyday use, unlike the Latin id used in the Standard Edition). Thus whereas Groddeck states that 'the affirmation "I live"is only conditionally correct, it expresses only a small and superficial part of the fundamental principle "Man is livedby the It"" (Groddeck, 1923:5), Lacan's view could be summed up in similar terms, onlyreplacing the verb 'to live'with the verb 'to speak'; the affirmation 'I speak'is only asuperficial part of the fundamental principle 'Man is spoken by it'. Hence the phrasewhich Lacan frequently uses when discussing the id;'it speaks' (le ca parle)(e.g.S7,206). The symbolic nature of the id, beyond the imaginary sense of self constituted by theego, is what leads Lacan to equate it with the term 'subject'. This equation is illustrated by the homophony between the German term Es and the letter S, which isLacan'ssymbol for the subject (E, 129; see SCHEMA L).

‌‌‌‌　　One of Freud's most famous statements concerns the id and its relationship withpsychoanalytic treatment; Wo Es war, soll Ich werden (which the Standard Editionrenders 'Where id was, there ego shall be'Freud, 1933a: SE XXII, 80). One commonreading of this cryptic statement has been to take it as meaning that the task ofpsychoanalytic treatment is to enlarge the field of consciousness; it is just such a readingthat is crystallised in the original French translation of Freud's statement-le moi doitdeloger le ca (the ego shall dislodge the id). Lacan is completely opposed to such areading (S1,195), arguing instead that the word soll is to be understood as an ethicalinjunction, so that the aim of analysis is for the ego to submit to the autonomy of thesymbolic order. Thus Lacan prefers to translate Freud's statement as There where it was, or there where one was... It is my duty that I should come into being La ou c'etait, peut-on dire, la ou s'etait... C'est mon devoir que je vienne a etrel' (E, 129, translationmodified; Ec, 417-18; see also E, 299-300; S11,44). The end of analysis, according tothis view, is thus a kind of 'existential recognition'of the symbolic determinants of one'sbeing, a recognition of the fact that 'You are this' (You are this symbolic chain, and nomore)(S1,3).