Skip to main content

Indication and Occasional Expressions

  • Chapter
Derrida and Phenomenology

Part of the book series: Contributions to Phenomenology ((CTPH,volume 20))

Abstract

In the Logical Investigations, Edmund Husserl argues that a proper understanding of logic requires that one distinguish between the indicative function which signs, including linguistic signs, can have from the expressive function which only linguistic signs can have. This is important for a proper understanding of logic, since that discipline is concerned only with the meanings expressed by linguistic signs. While linguistic signs can exercise both functions, and indeed in communication they exercise both functions simultaneously, Husserl argues that even when both are present, the two functions can be distinguished from one another, and he thinks that in soliloquy we find the expressive function unaccompanied by the indicative function.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Derrida, Jacques. La Voix et le Phénomène (Paris: Presses Universitaires de France, 1967), 107. Speech and Phenomena, translated by David Allison, (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1973), 96. Further references to this text will be abbreviated as “SP” followed by the French/English pagination.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Husserl, Edmund. Logische Untersuchungen (Tübingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag, 1968),IL1, 24/1. Logical Investigations, translated by J. N. Findlay (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1970), 269, trans, altered). Further references to this text will be abbreviated as followed by the German/English pagination.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Derrida translates Husserl’s “bedeuten” with the French phrase “vouloir-dire, ” which does indeed mean “to mean,” but more literally means “to want to say,” and Derrida deliberately appeals to this latter meaning (cf. SP, 17–18/17–18 and 35–36/33; also see J. Claude Evans, Strategies ofReconstruction: Derrida and the Myth of the Voice [Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1991] Chapters 2 and 4).

    Google Scholar 

  4. Findlay translates both Beweisen and Hinweisen as “demonstration. ” I have followed Dorion Cairns’ suggestion of “pointing, ” though Derrida’s suggestion of “allusion indicative” or “indicative allusion” is elegant.

    Google Scholar 

  5. In order to make this clear, Derrida offers his own translation of Husserl’s definition of the indicative sign, since the French translation of the Investigations translates Bestand as “réalité,” and this has led to some rather confusing moments in translations of La Voix et le Phénomène. Allison’s English translation quite properly has Derrida writing that “Husserl intentionally uses very general concepts (Sein, Bestand), which may cover being or subsistence . . .” (SP, English translation 28). “Subsistence” in this passage translates Derrida’s “consistance,” which is Derrida’s translation of Bestand. But when, just a few lines later, Derrida offers his own French translation of Husserl’s definition, using “consistance” to translate “Bestand,” Allison uses Findlay’s translation, which has “reality” for “Bestand,” although Derrida has just pointed out (in an implicit criticism of the French translation which would hit Findlay’s translation equally) that in Husserl’s text Bestand is to be carefully distinguished from Realität. The German translation of Derrida’s text produces similar confusion, translating Derrida’s own phrase as “das Sein oder die Konsistenz” and then following that with Husserl’s original text, which has “Bestand. ”

    Google Scholar 

  6. Cairns, Dorion, Guide to Translating Husserl (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1973), 20.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  7. White, Alan. “Reconstructing Husserl: A Critical Response to Derrida’s Speech and Phenomena” Husserl Studies 4 (1987), 56–57. In his discussion White chooses to follow Findlay in translating “Hinweis” as “demonstration.”

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. The passage which Derrida quotes from 26 of the First Investigation begins “An essentially indicating character…” in the Findlay translation, which Allison takes over (LI II. 1, 85/1, 318, quoted at SP, 105/94). It should read, The essentially occasional character.

    Google Scholar 

  9. The passage which Derrida quotes from 26 of the First Investigation begins “An essentially indicating character...” in the Findlay translation, which Allison takes over (LI II. 1, 85/1, 318, quoted at SP, 105/94). It should read, “The essentially occasional character”

    Google Scholar 

  10. Derrida expresses amazement at Husserl’s appeal to an “individual concept.” This is surely a Leibnizian influence at work.

    Google Scholar 

  11. A more exhaustive analysis of this text would have to bring in Husserl’s distinctions between no less than thirteen different meanings of the word “Vorstellung.”

    Google Scholar 

  12. Robert Scholes has noted that Derrida “claims that what [Bertrand] Russell called the ‘trivial’ sense of the word is the only sense that counts.” (Robert Scholes, “Deconstruction and Communication,” Critical Inquiry 14 [1988], 290.)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Edmund Husserl, Formale und Transzendentale Logik, edited by Paul Janssen (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1974. [Husserliana Volume XVII]), 207. Formal and Transcendental Logic, translated by Dorion Cairns, (The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1969), 199. Further references to this text will be abbreviated as “FTL” followed by the German/English pagination.

    Google Scholar 

  14. This line of analysis was extended by Aron Gurwitsch in his “Outlines of a Theory of ‘Essentially Occasional Expressions’,” in Marginal Consciousness, edited by Lester Embree (Athens, Ohio: Ohio University Press, 1985), 66f.

    Google Scholar 

  15. J. Claude Evans, Strategies of Deconstruction: Derrida and the Myth of the Voice, Chapter 6.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1995 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Evans, J.C. (1995). Indication and Occasional Expressions. In: McKenna, W.R., Evans, J.C. (eds) Derrida and Phenomenology. Contributions to Phenomenology, vol 20. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8498-2_3

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-8498-2_3

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-90-481-4616-1

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-015-8498-2

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics