HieroglyphicsAs an element of the [[real]], 118the [[letter]] is [[meaning]]less in itself. [[Lacan]] illustrates this by referring to ancient [[Egyptian hieroglyphics]], 166which were indecipherable to Europeans for so long. Until Champollion was able to decipher them on the basis of the Rosetta Stone, 190no one knew how to understand these enigmatic inscriptions,209but it was nevertheless clear that they were organized into a signifying system.<ref>Muller, John P. and William J. Richardson. Lacan and Language: A Reader's Guide to Ecrits{{S1}} p. New York: International Universiites Press, Inc., 1982244-5; {{E}} p.160</ref>In the same way, the [[signifier]] persists as a [[meaning]]less [[letter]] which makes the destiny of the [[subject]] and which he must decipher.
<!-- Hieroglyphics, 118, 166, 190,209<ref>Muller, John P. and William J. Richardson. Lacan and Language: A Reader's Guide to Ecrits. New York: International Universiites Press, Inc., 1982.</ref> -->
<!--
==References==
<references/>
-->
