Lacan and Jakobson, modeling communication, a rough draft

[drydem]

In his understanding of the Real/Symbolic/Imaginary divide, Lacan does not really distinguish well the mediating force between the Real and the Imaginary. While he understands that language(in its broad sense) is a mediator between the Real and the symbolic, there is not enough focus on why the Real cannot be grasped in the Imaginary. The answer is perception. perception is the (limited) ability of the Self(as distinguished from the ego or the subject) to absorb information from the outside world. Since Perception is necessarily limited to something less than omniscience, the imaginary is thus equally limited to something less than omnicongnizance. The way to look at perception in a Lacanian sense is to understand it as a symbolic mediator between Real and imaginary. One can interpret the reflection of light off of an object as a symbolic representation of that object, as the light is not the object, but a mediating message between object and imaginary. The same with touch or hearing, in the one case it is the mediating nerve impulses that occur when skin touches an object, in the latter it is the movement of molecules between the object and the ear.
In each of these cases between the object and the imaginary is a code, which is interpreted in the imaginary to create meaning.

For instance, a chair. I see a pattern of light reflecting off of the chair and interpret that pattern as representing a chair. I touch the chair and the nerves in my fingers send messages to my brain which I interpret as the texture of the chair. However, these are just fragmentary perceptions. I have learned by practice to interpret things according to the language of objects, but I am still limited by my understanding of this language. When I see an unfamiliar object, the symbolic breaks down and I am limited to my perception of aspects of that object, just as when I hear an unfamiliar word the symbolic breaks down and I am limited to my perception of the sound object.

Thus, according to the process of communicating from one individual to another, you have six mediating steps of communication. First there is the symbolizing of the Real, then the imagining of the symbolic, then the symbolizing of the imaginary, the realizing of the symbolic, the symbolizing of the real, and the imagining of the symbolic. These steps are as follows. The object, the seeing of the object, the interpreting of the sight of the object, the describing of the interpretation of the sight of the object, the transition into sound of the description of the interpretation of the sight of the object, the hearing of the sound of the description of the interpretation of the sight of the object, the interpretation of the sound of the description of the interpretation of the sight of the object. Thus six steps that go from the chair to another's understanding of the chair. Each of these transitions between real/imaginary/symbolic are limited by the fact that they are different systems and transitions between them are necessarily imperfect. Metaphorically, it is like translating between different languages.

However, the advantage of communication as understood by Jakobson(following Malinowski) is that not all communication is about the Real. Communication can fill different functions that smooth function and make communication work. Jakobson describes six different functions of communication that make reference to different aspects of the process of communication.

Referential-The Referential function is the simplest function of language in some ways. It is an attempt to refer to what Jakobson calls the context, which, in short, is the surrounding world. Through referential communication, the addresser attempts to pass information about the surrounding world to the addressee through the message. A simple example of this would be the aforementioned attempt to describe an object. Referential communication is difficult because of the general state of mediation between the described context and the addressee.

Emotive-The emotive function of communication refers to the imaginary of the addresser, his internal state as he understands it. This is an easier form of communication, as it has two fewer steps of mediation than referential communication, requiring only a translation between the imaginary to the symbolic to the real to the symbolic to the imaginary.

Conative-The Conative function of communication is an attempt on the part of the addresser to evoke action on the part of the addressee. This is similar to the emotive function in that it is less mediated by the interpretation of perception.

Poetic-Poetic communication is deliberately addressed to the sound object of the message. In some ways poetic communication is the least mediated, because it is merely a transition between the imaginary to the symbolic to the real, without an effort to pass through the symbolic perception of the addressee to the imaginary. The purpose of the poetic function of communication is sound object creation.

Phatic-Phatic communication is one of two functions of communication that attempt to deal with mediation issues of communication. Phatic communication deals with the contact between the addresser and the addressee, attempting to alleviate the symbolic difficulties on the side of the addressee by assuring that contact is maintained. In its most literal manifestations, this occurs through direct questioning, e.g. "can you hear me?". However, much phatic communication occurs through non-verbal means such as eye contact. Interestingly, it is possible to participate in phatic communication with an object by assuring perceptual contact with the object. This is what often happens when an individual touches an object after seeing it in order to assess its reality, to assure contact between self and object.

Metalingual-Metalingual communication is the other function that deals with mediation issues of communication. Metalingual communication is communication about the code, the symbolic difficulty on the side of the addresser. Metalingual communication is an attempt to make sure the symbolic translation of the addresser is being properly understood by the addressee. In its most literal manifestations, this occurs through direct questioning, e.g. "what do you mean when you say X?" or "do you understand what X means?"

By understanding the ways in which mediation occurs between different realms of experience and how we deal with this mediation in communication, it is possible to put together a more advanced model of communication, as shown below, one which better models the process of transition. By understanding communication more fully as a process of cognition, we can understand better the ways in which communication is performed and the relation between addresser and addressee.