Language and affects in the analytic practice

Abstract

Opening the panel, Jacqueline Amati Mehler pointed out that language lies at the heart of human psychic development, and she referred to the ‘psycho-archeology’ of language as it is embedded in early affects and psychosensory experiences related to the world of primary object relationships and primary process. The acquisition and development of language implies the development of the symbolic function and the transition from bodily to mental. She mentioned that the possibility of translation, transcription and signifi cation or resignifi cation of lost or hidden meanings through free association constitute the main challenge to our ‘talking cure’. There seems to be an essential difference between what words can express and what they do not express because it is not in their domain. In this respect, she pointed out the importance of making the distinction—evident, but often overlooked—between pre-verbal and non-verbal. All three panellists presented papers about the centrality of language and affects in the psychoanalytic endeavour. Ana-Maria Rizzuto’s paper, ‘Language and affects in the analytic practice’, continues from her research on speech, language and clinical practice, dating back over the last ten years. Rizzuto reiterated that the transformation of the analysand effected by analysis is mediated by verbal exchanges between the two participants. The transformative power of words is not limited to their cognitive or semantic meaning. Spoken words are always embedded in the affective matrix of the self. Drawing support from well-known studies on the foetal and baby early recognition and relating to the prosodic (i.e. intonation, melody and rhythm) components of the maternal voice, Rizzuto suggests that the mother’s voice mirroring of the infant’s internal state should be considered as important as Winnicott’s favoured mirroring of the face. The prosodic contour—a pattern of successive levels of pitch—of adults’ speech towards babies always conveys a communicative intent in the speaker, in response to the infant’s affective state. Rizzuto reminds us that prosodic engagement precedes semantic understanding in language development and that the analyst relies on his and the patient’s prosody for revealing communicative intent (or lack of it). From a technical point of view, Rizzuto notices that the ever-present diffi culties in free associating that patients may have might be compounded not only by Int J Psychoanal 2004;85:1479–83