자아 담론과 대타자 담론 - 서술 언어의 전복적 해체구조

Ego Discourse and the Other"s Discourse: Deconstructive Structure of the Narrative Language

  Freudian Ichspaltung and Lacanian ‘self’s radical ex-centricity to itself’ manifest themselves especially in the dichotomy between ego discourse and the Other"s discourse.   The ego discourse, which is conscious and intentional, constituting the imaginary axis o-o" in the schema L, is sharply contrasted with the discourse of the Other, which is unconscious and unintentional, constituting the symbolic axis S-O.   Arguably, these two distinct discourses are compared with the classic distinction made in linguistics between ？nonc？, which is concerned with ‘the said’ and ？nonciation, which is concerned with ‘the saying.’   The Lacanian subject is not the subject of the statement and thus appears nowhere in what is said. Accordingly, the truth of the subject, which has to do with the authentic discourse of the Other, appears in the mi-dit, the half-said. To put it otherwise, psychoanalytically speaking, the bien-dire is the mi-dire, the half-saying.   Lacanian dictum, ‘The signifier is that which represents the subject for another signifier’ is discussed in connection with the unconscious savoir, or structured knowledge, that is, the way in which the unconscious knows how to actualize in an opportune signifier what the subject says without knowing what it is saying.   Lastly, this essay draws attention to the way in which something like the psychoanalytic difference between ego and Other discourse also occurs in the narrative text in the form of ‘narration as repetition,’ more specifically, in the difference between narration as reporting and narration as performance.