Class use only. Do not cite w/o permission.
 

I.[Letter A] To explain why meaning is tied to oral discourse in the expression of meaningful signs, we need to examine a sheaf of reasons: [32-34]
    A.expression is exteriorization
        1.economy of exteriority
        2.act-object scheme of LI becomes noesis-noema of Ideas I
        3.objectivity fixed for gaze of intuition
            a.in pre-expressive sense,
            b.mirrored by non-productive expression
                (1)NB oddity: voice, a temporal medium, allows space of vision
                (2)this can only be if voice, time, is spacing
    B.expression is voluntary
        1.intention of subject animates the expressive sign
        2.indication has two limits
            a.body of the sign
            b.what is indicated [a worldly existent]
        3.expression has neither of these limits
            a.internal voice [no body]
            b.what is expressed is an ideal object, a Bedeutung
    C. Deutung [interpretation] of Bedeutung only in Rede [oral discourse]
II."common fund of metaphysical implications" [34-35]
    A.the physical incarnation of meaning is foreign to expression
        1.interiority = spirituality = reduction of body
        2."incarnation" is carefully chosen word here
            a.pre-existing meaning having only empirical reason for incarnation
            b.versus ITOG where writing, history is essential
    B.involuntary association is to be excluded from expression
        1.this interiority is a voluntarism
        2.here we have a spirit/flesh hierarchy
            a. Geist that transforms Körper [corpse, mere body] into Leib [living body]
            b.see Aristotle's distinction between
                (1)dead body as collection of flesh and bones [accidental unity of time & place]
                (2)and living body as organism with psyche as principle of organization
            c. see also Deleuze and Guattari on BwO and organism
        3.body / soul depends on an interpretation of language
            a.i.e., on speech / writing hierarchy
   C.visibility and spatiality destroy self-presence of will
        1.writing is death of T life
        2.writing [spacing] is staging of T life/death scene
III.interpretation of gestures confirms earlier distinction [36-37]
    A.interpretation of non-expressive signs
        1.= bringing out hidden meaning
        2.indication is what resists interpretation
    B.Conclusion: distinction of indication/expression w/in language, btw explicit and nonexplicit
        1.in interpretation by other, indication is irreducible:
        2.the most the other does is express himself on the occasion of your indicative gestures
IV.[Letter B] Reduction of communication [= manifestation of mental experiences] [= non-expressive w/in speech] [37-40]
    A.not just the physical aspect of expression but also manifestation of mental experience
        1.justification of this move teaches us about metaphysics of phen.
            a.in final analysis expression / indication distinction rooted in
                (1)immediate non-self-presence of LP
                (2)existence, etc, as determinants of indication unified here
                (3)relation of self to
                    (a)time
                    (b)other
        2.all communicative speech must be excluded from expression
            a.communication = animation of a body by intention of subject
            b.the intention is then to be understood by another subject
            c.but the intention is not pure and complete
                (1)it must traverse body
                (2)and lose part of itself therein
        3."core of indication": whenever sense-giving act is not fully present
    B.analysis of the other:
        1.JD's sketch:
            a.other's lived experience can never be present to me
            b.all that is present is my intuition of his body: gestures/sounds
            c.these then are signs indicating other's lived experience
        2.remark on parallel of CM and LI:
            a. CM in transcendental reduction
            b. LI in mental sphere
V.Notion of presence is the core of the demonstration [40-
    A.non-full presence of signified [= Bedeutung] means indicative signifier
    B.pure expression = pure active intention of act of meaning animating a discourse whose content is present
        1.in consciousness
        2.inner intuition or perception
    C.indication = process of death at work in signs
        1.because life = interiority, presence, immediacy
        2.and indication = exteriority, non-presence, mediation
    D.reduction to the interior monologue
        1.twofold parallel w/ CM
        2.first advantage: physical event of language seems absent
            a.unity of word is ideal, is possibility of repetition
            b.loses nothing by reduction of empirical events of its appearance
            c.needs only form as animated by meaning-intention
    E.EH's answer to objection that one communicates w/ self in monologue
        1.indication = sign; expression is not a sign
        2.two kinds of reference: Hinzeigen/Anzeigen
        3.reduction to inner monologue is reduction of empiricity
            a.thus we use only imagined words
            b.lived experience does not need signs: it is self-present
            c.non-existent [imagined] signs show ideal and certain meanings
        4.perception vs. imagination of the word
            a.in perception there is a reference to existence
            b.in imagination there is only the imagination of the word, not the imagined word
        5.image is intentional sense
            a.not only not a Realität [nature], but also
            b.non-reell component of cness
        6.predelineation of Ideas I doctrine:
            a. hyle/morphe and noesis belong really [reell] to consciousness
            b.but noema does not [it belongs intentionally]