Changes

====Translation=========''Parole''=====The [[French]] term ''[[parole]]'' presents considerable difficulty to the [[English ]] translator because it does not correspond to any one [[English ]] [[word]].

In some contexts it corresponds to the [[English ]] term "[[speech]]," and in [[others ]] is best translated as "[[word]]."

====Jacques Lacan===="''[[Parole]]" '' becomes one of the most important [[terms ]] in [[Lacan]]'s [[work ]] from the early 1950s on.

=====Psychoanalysis=====In his famous "[[Rome Discourse]]," [[Lacan]] denounces the way that the [[role ]] of [[speech ]] in [[psychoanalysis ]] had come to be neglected by contemporary [[psychoanalytic theory]], and argues for a renewed focus on [[speech]] and [[language]].<ref>{{L}}. "[[Works of Jacques Lacan|Fonction et champ de la parole et du langage en psychanalyse]]," 1953a, in {{E}} p.237-322. ["[[The Function and Field of Speech and Language in Psychoanalysis]]," in {{E}}. p. 30-113]</ref>

=====Anthropology== ===[[Lacan]]'s [[concept ]] of [[speech]] as a "symbolic [[exchange]]" which "[[links ]] [[human ]] beings to each [[other]]'" <ref>{{S1}} p. 142</ref> is clearly influenced by the work of [[Anthropology|Mauss ]] and [[Lévi-Strauss]], especially their [[analysis ]] of the [[Anthropology|exchange of gifts]].

Thus [[Freud]]'s interpretations [[interpretation]]s are described as "a symbolic [[gift ]] of speech, pregnant with a [[secret ]] pact."<ref>{{E}} p. 79</ref>

=====Theology=====[[Speech ]] also takes on [[religion|religious ]] and [[religion|theological ]] connotations in [[Lacan]]'s work, in terms derived both from [[religion|Eastern religions religion]]s<ref>{{E}} p. 106-7</ref> and the [[Judaism|Judaeo]]-[[Christianity|Christian ]] [[religion|tradition ]].<ref>{{E}} p. 106</ref>

In 1954, [[Lacan]] discusses [[speech]] with reference to [[St Augustine]]'s ''[[St Augustine|De locutionis significationesignification]]e''.<ref>{{S1}} p. 247-60</ref>

Like the [[words ]] uttered by [[Religion|God ]] in [[Religion|Genesis]], [[speech]] is a "[[symbolic|symbolic invocation]]" which creates, ''ex nihilo'', "a new [[order ]] of [[being ]] in the relations between men."<ref>{{S1}} p. 239</ref>

=====Metaphysics== === [[Lacan]] draws on [[Heidegger]]'s [[distinction ]] between ''[[speech|Rede]]'' (''[[speech|discourse]]'') and ''[[speech|Gerede]]'' (''[[speech|chatter]]'') to elaborate his own distinction between "[[speech|full speech]]" (''[[speech|parole pleine]]'') and "[[speech|empty speech]]" (''[[speech|parole vide]]'').<ref>{{E}} p. 40ff</ref>

[[Lacan]] first makes this distinction in 1953, and though it no longer plays an important part in his work after 1955, it never [[disappears ]] completely.

<blockquote>"[[Full ]] speech is a speech full of [[meaning ]] [sens]. Empty speech is a speech which has only [[signification]]."<ref>{{L}} [[Seminar XXIV|Le Séminaire. Livre XXIV. L'insu que sait de l'une bévue s'aile à mourre, 1976-77]]'', published in ''[[Ornicar?]]'', nos 12-18, 1977-9. p. 11</ref></blockquote> ---

<blockquote>"Full speech is speech which aims at, which forms, the truth such as it becomes established in the [[recognition ]] of one person by [[another]]. Full speech is speech which performs [''qui fait [[acte]]'']."<ref>{{S1}} p. 107</ref></blockquote> <blockquote>"Full speech, in effect, is defined by its identity with that which it speaks about."<ref>{{Ec}} p. 381</ref></blockquote> ---

In [[speech|empty <blockquote>"Full speech]], on the other handin effect, the [[subject]] is defined by its [[alienatedidentity]] from his with that which it speaks [[desire]]; in [[speech|empty speechabout]] "the subject seems to be talking in vain about someone who . . . can never become one with the assumption of his desire."<ref>{{EEc}} p. 45381</ref></blockquote>

One of the In [[analystspeech|empty speech]]'s tasks when listening to , on the other hand, the [[analysandsubject]] is to discern the moments when [[alienated]] from his [[desire]]; in [[speech|full empty speech]] emerges"the subject seems to be talking in vain about someone who . . . can never become one with the assumption of his desire."<ref>{{E}} p. 45</ref>

=====Analytic Treatment=====One of the [[analyst]]'s tasks when [[listening]] to the [[speech|Full speechanalysand]] and is to discern the moments when [[speech|empty full speech]] are the extreme points on a continuum, and "between these two extremes, a whole gamut of modes of realisation of speech is deployed."<ref>{{S1}} pemerges. 50</ref>

The [[end of analysisspeech|aim]] of [[psychoanalytic treatmentFull speech]] is to articulate and [[speech|full empty speech]]are the extreme points on a continuum, and "between these two extremes, which is hard work; a [[speech|full speechwhole]] can be quite laborious (''pénible'') to articulate gamut of modes of realisation of speech is deployed."<ref>{{ES1}} p. 25350</ref>

It is never possible to articulate in [[speech]] the whole [[truth]] of one's [[desire,]] because of a fundamental "incompatibility between desire and speech."<ref>{{E}} p. 275</ref>.

<blockquote>"I always tell the truth; not the whole truth, because we are not capable of telling it all. Telling it all is materially [[impossible]]."<ref>{{TV}} p.9</ref></blockquote>

[[Speech|Full speech]], then, is not the articulation in [[speech]] of the whole [[truth]] about the [[subject]]'s [[desire]], but the [[speech]] which articulates this truth as fully as possible at a [[particular ]] [[time]].

====See Also====

==== References ====<div style="font-size:11px" class="references-small">