• John Llewelyn


Pharmakon is one of those syllepses in whose undecidability Derrida takes no less delight than Mallarmé takes in the resonances of hymen1 and than Hegel takes in the oxymoronic semantics of speculative words like Aufhebung.2 But it is not simply the words that interest them or the word play to which they give rise [Diss 249 (220)]. What interests them primarily is rather that from which such words arise, that of which they are symptomatic. Derrida’s response to this question is different from Hegel’s. This difference, it might be said, grossly oversimplifying, is due to the fact that between Hegel and Derrida comes Mallarmé; and Nietzsche. In the present chapter an attempt will be made to substantiate this statement while bringing out why it is a gross oversimplification. This will call for an amplification of the brief references made to the middle voice in the preceding chapter and a resumption (in Chapter 7) of the task begun there of showing what relevance, if any, Derrida’s work has to the preoccupations of such post-Fregean philosophers as Wittgenstein, Quine and Goodman, Proprietary Ltd.


Active Voice Forced Marriage Passive Voice Preceding Chapter Middle Form 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes and References

  1. 2.
    G. W. F. Hegel, Science of Logic (London: Allen and Unwin, 1969); p. 107.Google Scholar
  2. 3.
    Hegel, Encyclopœdia, Logic, section 82, Zusatz (Oxford: Clarendon, 1975) p. 121.Google Scholar
  3. 5.
    Alexandre Koyré, Etudes d’histoire de la pensée philosophique (Paris: Gallimard, 1971) p. 212.Google Scholar
  4. 7.
    F. Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil, 2 (London: Penguin Books, 1973) p. 16.Google Scholar
  5. 8.
    Gilles Deleuze, Nietzsche et la philosophie, (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1970) p. 197.Google Scholar
  6. 9.
    Emile Benveniste, Problèmes de linguistique générale (Paris: Gallimard, 1966) vol. 1, p. 172.Google Scholar
  7. 10.
    Jan Gonda, ‘Reflections on the Indo-European Medium’, Lingua, IX (1960) p. 49.Google Scholar
  8. 12.
    Oswald Szemerényi, Einführung in die vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft (Darmstadt: Wissenschaftliche Buchgesellschaft, 1970) p. 232.Google Scholar
  9. 13.
    Sigmund Freud, Standard Edition of the Complete Psychological Works (London: Hogarth Press and the Institute of Psycho-analysis, vol. XVII, 1955) pp. 218ff.Google Scholar
  10. 15.
    Alexander Bain, Logic (London: Longmans, Green and Co., 1870) vol. 1, p. 54.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© John Llewelyn 1986

Authors and Affiliations

  • John Llewelyn

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations