Abstract
Notions of ineffability, what cannot be put into words, vary depending on the historical and cultural context and, in particular, on shifting linguistic ideologies about the capabilities and limits of language. In recent decades psychoanalysts have embraced a modern notion of ineffability centered around traumatic bodily experiences that are thought to be inexpressible. However, these ideas break with Freudian ideas about language and, most importantly, with his understanding of the processes of interpretation that give meaning to both psychic pain and attempts to heal it. Contra Freud, current theories of ineffable trauma re-inscribe a dominance of the body over the psyche and over-simplify Freud’s ideas about the retro-determination of trauma.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Brunner, J. (1991). Psychiatry, psychoanalysis, and politics during the First World War. Journal for the History of the Behavioral Sciences, 27, 352–365.
Budick, S., & Iser, W. (1987). Languages of the unsayable: The play of negativity in literature and literary theory. New York: Columbia University Press.
Butler, J. (1996). Excitable speech: A politics of the performative. New York: Routledge.
Butler, J. (1997). The psychic life of power: Theories in subjection. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Card, C. (2002). The atrocity paradigm: A theory of evil. New York: Oxford University Press.
Caruth, C. (1995). Trauma: Explorations in memory. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Caruth, C. (1996). Unclaimed experience: Trauma, narrative, and history. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Eyers, T. (2012). Lacan and the concept of the ‘Real’. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Fassin, D., & Rechtman, R. (2009). The empire of trauma: An inquiry into the condition of victimhood. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
Felman, S., & Laub, D. (1992). Testimony: Crises of witnessing in literature, psychoanalysis, and history. New York: Routledge.
Ferenczi, S. (1933). Confusion of tongues between the adults and the child. Final Contributions to the problems and methods of psychoanalysis. pp. 156–167. London: Karnac. 1994. Also in International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 30, 225–230. 1949.
Forrester, J. (1980). Language and the origins of psychoanalysis. New York: Columbia University Press.
Forter, G. (2007). Freud, Faulkner, Caruth: Trauma and the politics of literary form. Narrative, 15, 259–285.
Franke, W. (2007). On what cannot be said: Apophatic discourses in philosophy, religion, literature, and the arts. Notre Dame, IN: University of Notre Dame.
Frede, M. (1999). Monotheism and pagan philosophy in later antiquity. In P. Athanassiadi & M. Frede (Eds.), Pagan monotheism in late antiquity (pp. 41–67). Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Freud, A. (1936). The ego and its mechanisms of defense. New York: International Universities Press. 1966.
Freud, S. (1895). Studies on hysteria (with Joseph Breuer). Standard edition (Vol. 2, pp. 1–323). London: Hogarth.
Freud, S. (1900). Interpretation of dreams. Standard edition (Vol. 4–5, pp. 1–625). London: Hogarth.
Freud, S. (1910). ‘Wild’ psychoanalysis. Standard edition (Vol. 11, pp. 219–228). London: Hogarth.
Freud, S. (1912). Dynamics of transference. Standard edition (Vol. 12, pp. 97–108). London: Hogarth.
Freud, S. (1914). Remembering, repeating and working through. Standard edition (Vol. 12, pp. 145–156). London: Hogarth.
Freud, S. (1920). Beyond the pleasure principle. Standard edition (Vol. 18, pp. 7–64). London: Hogarth.
Freud, S. (1923). The Ego and the Id. Standard edition (Vol. 17, pp. 3–68). London: Hogarth.
Freud, S. (1925). Negation. Standard edition (Vol. 19, pp. 235–239). London: Hogarth.
Friedman, L. (2006). What is psychoanalysis? Psychoanalytic Quarterly, 75, 689–713.
Gondar, J. (2011). Things in words: Ferenczi and language. American Journal of Psychoanalysis, 71, 329–337.
Hacking, I. (1996). Memory sciences, memory politics. In P. Antze & M. Lambek (Eds.), Tense past: Cultural essays in trauma and memory (pp. 67–87). New York: Routledge.
Hirsch, M., & Spitzer, L. (2009). The witness in the archive: Holocaust studies/memory studies. Memory Studies, 2, 151–170.
Jakobson, R. (1960). Linguistics and poetics. In T. A. Sebeok (Ed.), Style in language (pp. 350–377). Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Kristeva, J. (2000). The sense and nonsense of revolt. New York: Columbia University Press.
Kuriloff, E. (2012). History means interpretation. Contemporary Psychoanalysis, 48, 367–393.
Lacan, J. (1973). Four fundamental concepts of psychoanalysis. New York: Norton. 1978.
Lacan, J. (1978). The seminar of Jacques Lacan 1954–1955 II. In J-A. Miller (Ed.) The seminar, book II. The ego in Freud’s theory and in the technique of psychoanalysis, 1954–1955. (S. Tomaselli, Trans.). New York: Norton. 1988.
Lacan, J. (2002) “The direction of the treatment and the principles of its power”, Report to the Colloque de Royaumont, 10–13 July, 1958. In: Écrits: A selection (B. Fink, Trans.) (pp. 226–280). New York: Norton.
Lambek, M. (2014). Word as act: Varieties of semiotic ideology in the interpretation of religion. In E. V. D. Hemel and A. Szafraniec (Eds.), Words: Religious language matters (pp. 17–34). New York: Fordham University Press. 2016.
Lee, B. (1997). Talking heads: language, metalanguage, and the semiotics of subjectivity. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Leys, R. (1996). Death masks: Kardiner and Ferenczi on psychic trauma. Representations, 53, 44–73.
Leys, R. (2000). Trauma: A genealogy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Leys, R. (2007). From guilt to shame: Auschwitz and after. Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Louth, A. (2012). Apophatic and cataphatic theology. In A. Hollywood & P. Z. Beckman (Eds.), The Cambridge companion to Christian mysticism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Miller, E. P. (2014). Head cases: Julia Kristeva on philosophy and art in depressed times. New York: Columbia University Press.
Miller, N. K., & Tougaw, J. D. (2002). Extremeties: Trauma, testimony, and community. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press.
Moorjani, A. (2000). Peirce and psychopragmatics: Semiosis and performativity. In J. P. Muller & J. Brent (Eds.), Peirce, semiotics, and psychoanalysis (pp. 102–121). Baltimore, MD: John Hopkins University Press.
Muller, J. P. (1996). Beyond the psychoanalytic dyad: Developmental semiotics in Freud, Peirce and Lacan. London: Routledge.
Nietzsche, F. (1917). Thus spake Zarathustra (T. Common, Trans.). New York: The Modern Library.
Petocz, A. (1999). Freud, psychoanalysis and symbolism. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Reis, B. (2009). Performative and enactive features of psychoanalytic witnessing: The transference as the scene of address. International Journal of Psychoanalysis, 90, 1359–1372.
Scarfone, D. (2015). The unpast: The actual unconscious. New York: The Unconscious (in Translation).
Scarry, E. (1985). The body in pain: The making and unmaking of the world. New York: Oxford University Press.
Sedley, D. N. (2003). Plato’s Cratylus. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press.
Segal, H. (1957). Notes on symbol formation. International Journal of Psycho-Analysis, 38, 391–397.
Sells, M. (1994). Mystical languages of unsaying. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Silverstein, M. (1979). Language structure and linguistic ideology. In P. Clyne, W. Hanks, & C. Hofhaur (Eds.), The elements (pp. 193–247). Chicago, IL: Chicago Linguistic Society.
Silverstein, M. (1993). Metapragmatic discourse and metapragmatic function. In J. Lucy (Ed.), Reflexive language: Reported speech and metapragmatics (pp. 33–58). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Silverstein, M. (2000). Whorfianism and the linguistic imagination of nationality. In P. Kroskrity (Ed.), Regimes of language: Ideologies, politics, and identity (pp. 85–138). Santa Fe, NM: School of American Research.
Trezise, T. (2001). Unspeakable. Yale Journal of Criticism, 14, 39–66.
Trezise, T. (2013). Witnessing witnessing: on the reception of Holocaust survivor testimony. New York: Fordham University Press.
Van der Kolk, B. A. (2014). The body keeps the score: Brain, mind, and body in the healing of trauma. New York: Viking.
Whorf, B. L. (1956). Language, thought, and reality. Cambridge, MA: MIT.
Williams, B. (1981). Moral luck: philosophical papers, 1973–1980. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Wilson, D. (2015). The Freudian thing and the ethics of speech. Konturen, 8, 133–154.
Wolfson, H. (1957). Negative attributes in the church fathers and the Gnostic Basilides. Harvard Theological Review, 50, 145–156.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Naomi Janowitz, Ph.D. is Professor of Religious Studies at University of California–Davis and a graduate of the San Francisco Center for Psychoanalysis.
Address correspondence to: Naomi Janowitz Ph.D., Religious Studies, University of California–Davis. One Shields Ave., Davis CA 95616, USA.
