The Power of Absence. Zero Signifiers and their Transgressions - article ; n°130 ; vol.34, pg 59-76

Emiko Ohnuki-Tierney

Description

L'Homme - Année 1994 - Volume 34 - Numéro 130 - Pages 59-76
18 pages
Source : Persée ; Ministère de la jeunesse, de l’éducation nationale et de la recherche, Direction de l’enseignement supérieur, Sous-direction des bibliothèques et de la documentation.

Sujets

• Sociologie, société et politique

Informations

• Publié par: L-HOMME0
• Publié le: 01 janvier 1994
• Nombre de lectures: 16
• Langue: English
• Poids de l'ouvrage: 1 Mo

Extrait

Emiko Ohnuki-Tierney
The Power of Absence. Zero Signifiers and their Transgressions
In: L'Homme, 1994, tome 34 n°130. pp. 59-76.
Citer ce document / Cite this document :
Ohnuki-Tierney Emiko. The Power of Absence. Zero Signifiers and their Transgressions. In: L'Homme, 1994, tome 34 n°130.
pp. 59-76.
doi : 10.3406/hom.1994.369722
http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/hom_0439-4216_1994_num_34_130_369722Emiko Ohnuki-Tierney
The Power of Absence
Zero Signifiers and their Transgressions
Emiko Ohnuki-Tierney, The Power of Absence. Zero Signifiers and their Trans
gressions. — This paper highlights the importance of the dynamic interplay between the
objectified and non-objectified signifiers in any semiotic/symbolic system through an
examination of the nature and power of the zero signifiers — signifiers without materiali
ty of linguistic labels or objects. Zero signifiers are nonetheless predicated, although
often in a complex mode, by objectified signifiers. The power of zero signifiers
becomes evident through transgression — their objectification in words and objects. For
illustrations, I use absent pronouns in discourse, the temporal/spatial zero units of ma,
and the mu (nothingness) in Japanese culture.
In anthropology and related fields, we have a long and productive history
of research on the sign/signifier, the signified/meaning(s), and significa
tion1. While Karcevski (1982 [1929] : 49) in linguistics and Mauss
(1972 [1950] : 108-121) in anthropology represent earlier efforts alerting us to
the elusive and complex nature of signification, the postmodern assault on
logo-centrism and structuralism has brought to light the complexity of signifi
cation from different perspectives from earlier attempts.
Following this tradition, I wish to focus on four issues that I think are crit
ical in our understanding of our semiotic/symbolic systems. First, any
semiotic system relies on a critical importance of the zero signifiers — signifiers
without materiality, that is, without representation by linguistic labels or
objects. Second, in addition to multivocal (Turner 1967) and polytropic
(Ohnuki-Tierney 1990) nature of a symbol, we must recognize the meanings of
the zero signifiers which range from a most concrete and specific to various
types of "nothingness". Third, an assumption, held at least by some, that an
object or a linguistic form is the sole and direct bearer of meaning — "the direct
arrow model", as I call it — must be reexamined, since the mode of signification
involving zero signifiers is quite complex. Fourth, the objectification of zero
signifiers often constitutes transgression, a serious offense, including blas-
L'Homme 130, avr.-juin 1994, XXXIV (2), pp. 59-76. 60 EMIKO OHNUKI-TIERNEY
phemy, thereby, in an inverse manner, pointing to the centrality of the zero sig-
nifiers in a given semiotic system and the culture at large, on the one hand, and
to the importance of transgression as symbolic practice on the part of social
agents, on the other.
For ethnographic illustrations, I introduce three types of zero signifiers in
Japanese culture that have varying types of meaning: absent pronouns; the tem
poral/spatial zero units of ma; and the concept of mu, nothingness. These
practices are by no means unique to Japanese culture.
There has been a plethora of literature that is related to the issues discussed
in this article. It includes works on: silence and pause in sociolinguistics and
discourse analysis2; Goffmanian deletion, gap, etc.; pronouns and indexicality
of pragmatics, discussed later; indeterminacy, either in Gödel's sense or that of
deconstructionists; the réel of Lacan and de Certeau3; and overdetermination of
Freud or Althusser; phenomenological interpretation of Rorty; not to mention
"forms of life" of Wittgenstein. Indeed the list can be much longer. These
works, however, take different perspectives from the present article and are
thus excluded from the discussion.
Zero Signifiers, Zero Meanings: A Review
Although Mauss articulated the problem that the relation between the signi
fier and the signified can be elusive, it was Jakobson' s formulation of the zero
phoneme that provided the source of inspiration for both Lévi-Strauss and
Barthes who developed it into a problem of signification. For Jakobson and
Lotz (1949 : 155), the zero phoneme is simultaneously opposed to "all other
French phonemes" and to "the absence of any phoneme"; the latter in turn testi
fies to its presence.
The voiceless vowel is another type of zero phoneme. In Japanese and
many other languages, voiceless vowels are vowels, such as/i/ and /u/ in Japa
nese, that are not pronounced in certain positions {cf. Heffner 1964: 212). Their
absence as a vocalized or objectified sound does not mean that they are absent
in the phonological system; every voiceless sound is assigned a distinct sound
type in the system and thus is pronounced when it appears in
other contexts. Jakobson, Fant, and Halle (1967: 39) briefly mention another
type of zero phoneme, different from the one in Jakobson and Lotz, whose
absence is opposed to a specific phoneme, as in the case of /#/ in the opposition
between /h/ and /#/ in English in prevocalic position.
Although the postmodern attack on modernism is sharper against structural
ism than against any other isms, it is Lévi-Strauss who developed Mauss' s
observation of mana and Jakobson' s zero phoneme. According to Lévi-
Strauss, mana typifies what he calls signifiant flottant which represents une
valeur indéterminée de signification. It is in itself devoid of sens and thus
"susceptible of receiving any meaning at all". Having a surplus of significa- Signifier s 61 Zero
tion, mana or any other signifiant flottant represents "a symbol in its pure state
[symbole à l'état pur]" with "a zero symbolic value [une valeur symbolique
zéro] (Lévi-Strauss 1950: xliv, xlix-l; [1987: 55-56, 63-64]).
Lévi-Strauss views the nature of signification of floating signifier as "di
screpancy" or "inadequate", and thus detrimental to "the prior complementary
relationship". While I do not share this part of his formulation, he must be
credited for developing the zero phoneme of Jakobson and Lotz beyond pho
nology into broader cultural context. Whereas the Turnerian multivocal symb
ol is assigned a finite set of meanings, the floating signifier brims with infinite
possibilities for meaning, since it is not attached to any meaning or a set of
meanings.
Barthes briefly discusses zero degree and zero sign in his Elements of
Semiology (1979 [1964]). His propositions derive from the linguistic opposi
tion of the marked and the unmarked. According to Barthes, the zero degree
of the opposition is therefore not a total absence but is "a significant
absence". The zero degree, or the zero sign in semantics, thus "testifies to the
power held by any system of signs, of creating meaning 'out of noting'" (ibid.:
77). Relegating to a place in parentheses a most important statement, he
observes: "the absence of any explicit signifier functions by itself as a signi
fier". This is Barthes' s most articulate formulation of zero signs as absent sig-
nifiers4, while in Empire of Signs (1982 [1970]5, he offers an example of a zero
meaning. The face of a Japanese kabuki actor is whitened out, as it were, only
to create infinite possibilities for meaning, just as a biological male can be more
feminine precisely because of the absence of constraints, which act
as a limitation for a biological female.
If we develop the zero signifiers in phonology into a general problem of
signification, the above propositions of zero signifiers constitute two types: the
zero signifier that does not constitute an absence of specific material qualities,
like the zero phoneme of Jakobson and Lotz; the zero signifier, like the voicel
ess vowels and the unmarked, whose zero form represents specific propert
ies. Parallels of these two types of zero signifiers are found in zero meani
ngs: the floating signifier represents empty but full meaning, while the
unmarked is assigned the absence of a specific property that characterizes the
marked counterpart.
Zero Signifiers and Zero Meanings in Japanese Culture
As examples of zero signifiers and zero meanings, I introduce the absent
pronouns in Japanese discourse, the concept ma (empty space and time), and
the concept of raw (nothingness). They are also three important practices and
concepts of Japanese culture and thus countless publications are availa
ble. Some authors, however, have presented these concepts as if they were
expressions of thought patterns and modes of discourse unique to the Japa- 62 EMIKO OHNUKI-TIERNEY
nese. The concept of mu has been discussed only in its highly developed form
as developed in Zen Buddhism, and there has been little attempt to tease out the
differences between the two concepts ma and raw. Below I examine them as
folk concepts and the day-to-day practices from a semiotic perspective.
Absent Pronouns as Zero Signifiers