英：signifying chain; 法：chaine signifiante, chaine du signifiant
从1950年代中期开始，“链条”这一术语便越来越多地被拉康使用，而且也总是指涉象征秩序。起初，在1956年，他讲的不是能指链条而是象征链条 (symbolic chain), 他借此来表示每个主体甚至在其诞生之前且在其死亡之后皆被铭写于其中，并无意识地影响其命运的一连串世系传衍 (Ec, 468)。同年，他还谈到了“话语链条" (the chain of discourse)(S3,261).
拉康是在1957年引入“能指链条”这一术语的，以指称一系列能指 (SIGNIFIERS)被联系在一起的能指序列。一个能指链条从来都不可能是完整的，因为总是有可能给它添加上另一能指，永无止境 (ad infinitum), 这在某种程度上也表达了欲望的永恒本质，出于这个原因，欲望是换喻性的。此种链条在意义的生产上也同样是换喻性的，意指并不呈现于链条上的任何一点，毋宁说，意义“坚持”(insist)从一个能指到另一个能指的运动之中 (见：E, 153).
拉康有的时候会用线性 (linearity)的隐喻来谈论能指链条，而其他时候则用环形 (circularity)的隐喻：
·线性“线性被索绪尔认为是话语链条的构成性要素，只有在它被定位于时间的方向上，这种线性才适用于话语链条。”（E, 154)
环形能指链条被比喻为“一条项链上的圆环，而这条项链则是由圆环组成的另一条项链上的一环”(E, 153).
一方面，线性的概念意味着能指链条是言语的流动，能指在其中是按照语法规则被组合起来的（索绪尔将其称作“句段”[syntagmatic]关系，而拉康则遵循雅各布森的观点，将其定位在语言的换喻轴上）。另一方面，环形的概念则意味着能指链条是一系列能指通过自由联想而被联系起来的能指序列，只是一条经由能指网络的路径，这个能指网络构成了主体的象征世界(索绪尔将其命名为“联想”[associative]关系，而拉康则遵循雅各布森的观点，将其定位在语言的隐喻轴上)。事实上，能指链条同时包括了这两个方面。在其历时性的维度上，它是线性的、句段的、换喻的：在其共时性的维度上，它是环形的、联想的、隐喻的。此两者纵横交错：“实际上，没有任何能指链条【历时链】(diachronic chain),不与相关语境【共时链】(synchronic chain)发生整体上的链接，这就好似前者依附于对其每个单位的标，点，而后者则可以说是被‘垂直地’悬挂于那一点的。”(E,154)因而，拉康便在一个概念里结合了两种类型的关系(“句段”与“联想”)，虽然索绪尔认为它们存在于符号之间，但是对拉康而言，此种关系则是介于能指之间，而非介于符号之间。
(chaine signifiante, chaine du signifiant) The term 'chain'is used increasingly by Lacanfrom the mid-1950s on, always in reference to the symbolic order. At first, in 1956, hespeaks not of the signifying chain but of the symbolic chain, by which he denotes a line ofdescendence into which each subject is inscribed even before his birth and after his death, and which influences his destiny unconsciously (Ec, 468). In the same year he speaks ofthe chain of discourse' (S3,261).
It is in 1957 that Lacan introduces the term'signifying chain'to refer to a series ofSIGNIFIERS which are linked together. A signifying chain can never be complete, sinceit is always possible to add another signifier to it, ad infinitum, in a way which expressesthe eternal nature of desire; for this reason, desire is metonymic. The chain is alsometonymic in the production of meaning; signification is not present at any one point inthe chain, but rather meaning 'insists'in the movement from one signifier to another (see E, 153).
At times Lacan speaks of the signifying chain in linear metaphors, and at other timesin circular metaphors;
.Linearity 'The linearity that Saussure holds to be constitutive of the chain ofdiscourse applies to the chain of discourse only in the direction in which it is orientated intime' (E, 154).
Circularity The signifying chain is compared to 'rings of a necklace that is a ring inanother necklace made of rings' (E, 153). On the one hand, the idea of linearity suggests that the signifying chain is the streamof speech, in which signifiers are combined in accordance with the laws of grammar (which Saussure calls 'syntagmatic'relationships,and Lacan,following Jakobson,locates on the metonymic axis of language).On the other hand,the idea of circularitysuggests that the signifying chain is a series of signifiers linked by free associations,justone path through the network of signifiers which constitutes the symbolic world of thesubject (which Saussure designates 'associative'relationships,and which Lacan,following Jakobson,locates on the metaphoric axis of language).In truth,the signifyingchain is both of these things.In its diachronic dimension it is linear,syntagmatic,metonymic;in its synchronic dimension it is circular,associative,metaphoric.The twocross over: 'there is in effect no signifying chain [diachronic chain]that does not have,asif attached to the punctuation of each of its units,a whole articulation of relevant contexts[synchronic chains]suspended "vertically",as it were,from that point'(E,154).Lacanthus combines in one concept the two types of relationship ('syntagmatic'and'associative')which Saussure argued existed between signs,though for Lacan,therelationship is between signifiers,not signs.