‌‌‌‌　　英：signification; 法：signification

‌‌‌‌　　在拉康1950年以前的作品中，一般说来，“意指”这一术语都被用来同时表示意义性 (meaningfulness)与重要性 (importance)的意思 (例如：Ec, 81)。例如，在1946年，拉康就批评唯器质论精神病学 (organicist psychiatry)忽视了“疯癫的意指”(Ec, 167; 见：Ec, 153-4)。在1953一1957年，该术语同意义和语言的领域保持着这些模糊的联系，并因而被定位于象征秩序 (S4,121).

‌‌‌‌　　但是从1957年开始，拉康对于该术语的使用呈现出了一种对于索绪尔概念的直接参照，并且从象征秩序转换到了想象秩序。索绪尔将“意指”这一术语保留给能指 (SIGNIFIER)与所指 (SIGNFIED)之间的关系，每个声像 (sound-image)都被说成是“意指”着一个概念 (Saussure, 1916:114-17)。对索绪尔而言，意指是一种牢不可破的联结，能指与所指如同一张纸的两面是不可分割的。

‌‌‌‌　　拉康则以为，能指与所指之间的关系较不稳定，他把索绪尔式算法 (见：图16)中能指与所指之间的那道杠 (BAR)看作并非在表现一种联结，而是在表现一种断裂，一种针对意指的“阻抗”（E, 164)。首先，能指在逻辑上是优先于所指的，所指仅仅是能指游戏的一种效果而已。其次，即便当所指被产生出来的时候，它们也是在能指的下面不断滑动 (SLP)与滑行的：唯一能够暂时阻滞这一运动，同时让能指瞬间依附于所指并且创造出一种稳定意义之幻象的事物，即结扣点 (POINTS DE CAPITON)。在拉康的著作中，意指并非能指与所指之间的一种稳定的联结，而是一种过程凭借此种过程，能指游戏便经由换喻和隐喻这两种修辞而产生了所指的幻象

‌‌‌‌　　意指之所以是换喻性的，是因为“意指总是指涉于另一意指”(S3,33)。换句话说，意义并不处在任何一个能指之中，而是处在沿着能指链条的众多能指之间的运作之中，因此它是不稳定的，“正是在能指链条中，意义坚持着，但是在其诸多元素中没有任何一个存在于它此刻可将其容纳的意指之中”(E, 153).

‌‌‌‌　　意指之所以是隐喻性的，是因为它涉及对杠的穿越，即“能指进入所指的通道”(E, 164)。一切意指赖以产生的基本隐喻即父性隐喻，一切意指也因此都是阳具化的。

‌‌‌‌　　在拉康的代数学中，意指是由符号5所表示的 (譬如在标记着欲望图解中的几个主要结点之一的符号s (A)之中）。表示所指的符号同样是5，而这就意味着对拉康而言，“意指”（意义的效果借以产生的过程）与“所指”（意义的效果本身）这两个术语往往都是倾向于重叠的

‌‌‌‌　　在1950年代后期，拉康在意指与意义 (法：scns; 英：neaning)之间建立了某种对立。这些术语此前被翻译成英文时，其译法的多样性，给拉康著作的英文读者带来了一些困难。这本辞典所遵循的译法是以英文的“signification”（意指）一词来翻译法文的signification, 而保留英文单词“meaning”（意义）来翻译法文的sens一词。

‌‌‌‌　　意指是想象的，并且隶属于空洞言语 (SPEECH)的辖域：意义是象征的，并且隶属于充实言语的辖域 (后来，在1970年代，拉康并未把意义定位于象征秩序，而是定位于象征界与想象界的交界；见：图1)。精神分析的解释是反对意指并瞄准意义及其相关的无意义 (法：non-sens; 英：non-meaning)的。尽管意指与意义是相对立的，但是它们两者都联系着“享乐”(jouissance)的产生。拉康创造了两个新词来指明这一与享乐的联系：“意爽”或译为“享乐的意指”(signifiance,根据“意指”[signification]与“享乐”[jouissance]两词而来)，以及“爽义”或译为“意义的享乐”(jouis~sens,根据“享乐”[jouissance]与“意义”[sens]两词而来D)。

‌‌‌‌　　(signification) In Lacan's pre-1950 writings, the term 'signification'is used in a generalway to connote both meaningfulness and importance (e.g.Ec, 81). In 1946, for example, Lacan criticises organicist psychiatry for ignoring 'the significations of madness' (Ec, 167; see Ec, 153-4). In the period 1953-7 the term retains these vague associations withthe realm of meaning and language, and is thus located in the symbolic order (S4,121).

‌‌‌‌　　It is from 1957 on that Lacan's use of the term takes on a direct reference to the Saussurean concept, and shifts from the symbolic to the imaginary order. Saussurereserves the term 'signification'for the relation between the SIGNIFIER and theSIGNIFIED; each sound-image is said to 'signify'a concept (Saussure, 1916:114-17). Signification is, for Saussure, an unbreakable bond; the signifier and the signified are asinseparable as the two sides of a sheet of paper.

‌‌‌‌　　Lacan argues that the relationship between signifier and signified is far moreprecarious; he sees the BAR between them in the Saussurean algorithm (see Figure 18,p.184) as representing not a bond but a rupture, a 'resistance'to signification (E, 164). Firstly, the signifier is logically prior to the signified, which is merely an effect of theplay of signifiers. Secondly, even when signifieds are produced, they constantly SLIP andslide underneath the signifier, the only things that detain this movement temporarily, pinning the signifier to the signified for a brief moment and creating the illusion of astable meaning, are the POINTS DE CAPITON. Signification is, in Lacan's work, not astable bond between signifier and signified, but a process-the process by which the playof signifiers produces the illusion of the signified via the two tropes of metonymy andmetaphor.

‌‌‌‌　　Signification is metonymic because 'significationalways referstoanothersignification' (S3,33). In other words, meaning is not found in any one signifier, but inthe play between signifiers along the signifying chain and is therefore unstable;'it is inthe chain of the signifier that the meaning insists, but none of its elements consists in thesignification of which it is at the moment capable' (E, 153).

‌‌‌‌　　Signification is metaphoric because it involves the crossing of the bar, the 'passage ofthe signifier into the signified' (E, 164). The fundamental metaphor on which allsignification depends is the paternal metaphor, and all signification is therefore phallic.

‌‌‌‌　　Signification is designated by the symbol s in Lacanian algebra (as in the notation s (4) which labels one of the main nodes in the graph of desire). The notation for the signifiedis also s, which suggests that for Lacan the term 'signification' (the process by which theeffect of meaning is produced) and the term'signified' (the effect of meaning itself) tendto overlap.

‌‌‌‌　　In the late 1950s, Lacan establishes an opposition between signification and meaning (Fr. Sens). The variety of ways in which these terms have been translated into Englishprovides difficulty for the English reader of Lacan. This dictionary follows the practice ofrendering the French signification by the English term 'signification', and reserves theEnglish word 'meaning'to translate the French term sens.

‌‌‌‌　　Signification is imaginary and is the province of empty SPEECH; meaningissymbolic and is the province of full speech. (Later, in the 1970s, Lacan locates meaningnot in the symbolic order but at the junction of the symbolic and the imaginary; see Figure 1.) Psychoanalytic interpretations go against signification and bear on meaningand its correlate, non-meaning (non-sens). Although signification and meaning areopposed, they are both related to the production of jouissance. Lacan indicates this bycoining two neologisms: signifiance (from the words signification and jouissance-see E, 259; S20,23), and jouis-sens (from jouissance and sens)