Abstract

In both “Answering for Sense” and “Sharing Voices,” Jean-Luc Nancy offers an account of the poet as an interpreter of the gods. The voice of the poet in both Homer’s Iliad and Plato’s Ion is intrinsically and originally doubled. Although there is no divine voice outside of the poet’s voice, the divine voice speaks in the poet’s voice and the poetic voice gives a voice to that of the goddess or the muse. What exactly is at stake in this phenomenon that we encounter here in the poet, namely that of gods making us speak? How is it related to the threshold of speech and communication that Nancy invokes in Adoration, when he also mentions the gods that make us speak? In this essay, I want to think with Nancy to see what is at stake in the figure of a voice on the threshold of speech and communication. I consider how the figure of the gods that make us speak is brought into play to elucidate the threshold of language and how this figure, as that which makes us speak, somehow offers the crossing of this threshold. To this end, I want to discuss three different figures or scenes in which the gods make us speak. In the first part of this article, I explore in more detail Nancy’s own account of the poet as interpreter of the divine voice. What does it mean for the poet to give a voice to the goddess and to desire this giving a voice? What is the demand or call to which the poet in giving a voice answers? To further the analysis of this divine interpreter, I want to compare this interpreter with two other ones which arise in two other basic scenes in which the gods make an interpreter speak. The first concerns the scene of the calling of the prophet Jeremiah in the book of the same name. The second concerns Saint Paul’s reflections on the glossolalist in the First Letter to the Corinthians. By exploring the differences between these three divine interpreters, I aim to further elucidate and assess the phenomenon of the interpreter and the double voice that characterizes Nancy’s poet.

摘要

在“对意义的回答”和“分享声音”中，让-吕克·南希都将诗人描述为众神的诠释者。荷马的《伊利亚特》和柏拉图的《离子》中诗人的声音本质上和最初都是双重的。虽然在诗人的声音之外没有神圣的声音，但神圣的声音在诗人的声音中说话，而诗意的声音赋予了女神或缪斯女神的声音。我们在诗人中遇到的这种现象，即神让我们说话的现象，究竟有什么利害关系？它与 Nancy 在Adoration 中调用的言语和交流的门槛有什么关系，当他还提到让我们说话的神灵？在这篇文章中，我想和 Nancy 一起思考，看看在演讲和交流的门槛上，一个声音的形象有什么关系。我考虑如何让我们说话的神的形象发挥作用来阐明语言的门槛，以及这个形象如何作为让我们说话的东西，以某种方式提供了跨越这个门槛的机会。为此，我想讨论神使我们说话的三个不同的人物或场景。在本文的第一部分，我更详细地探讨了南希自己对诗人作为神圣声音的解释者的描述。诗人为女神发声并渴望这种发声意味着什么？诗人在发声时回应的要求或呼唤是什么？为了进一步分析这位神圣的解释者，我想将这个解释器与另外两个出现在众神让解释器说话的其他两个基本场景中的解释器进行比较。第一个是关于在同名书中呼召先知耶利米的场景。第二个涉及圣保罗在哥林多前书第一封信中对语言学家的反思。通过探索这三位神圣的诠释者之间的差异，我旨在进一步阐明和评估诠释者的现象以及南希诗人的双重声音。第二个涉及圣保罗在哥林多前书第一封信中对语言学家的反思。通过探索这三位神圣诠释者之间的差异，我旨在进一步阐明和评估诠释者现象以及南希诗人的双重声音特征。第二个涉及圣保罗在哥林多前书第一封信中对语言学家的反思。通过探索这三位神圣的诠释者之间的差异，我旨在进一步阐明和评估诠释者的现象以及南希诗人的双重声音。