Symbolization 象征 In this context we are reminded of Felix Deutsch's notions of objective symbolization and the conversion process. Deutsch envisioned this process as a central element in the production of psychosomatic symptomatology. Deutsch based his notion on Freud's idea that a sense of reality originates from a projection of sensory perceptions of one's own body or body parts onto objects outside of it, and in which the external objects are perceived as if somehow severed from the body and lost. This basic separation is accompanied by a continuing wish to restore the lost part and thus a sense of bodily integrity. 在这个背景下，我们想起了费利克斯·多伊奇 关于客观符号化的概念 和 转换过程。多伊奇认为这一过程是心身症候学产生的中心要素。多伊奇的观点基于弗洛伊德的观点，即 现实感 来源于对自己身体或身体部位的 感官感知 投射到外部客体上，而在这种感知中，外部客体似乎被从身体上切断或丢失了。这种基本的分离伴随着对恢复失去部分即一种身体完整感 的持续愿望。 In the Interpretation of Dreams (1900), Freud mentions that we become aware of living objects around us by way of perception complexes which derive from those objects, but which are fused with memories of similar perceptions of our own bodies. Thus the sensory memories are associatively connected with reactive movements once experienced in the body. Objects are recognized perceptually through recollections which are rooted in sensory perceptions of the body itself. The response to the sensory signal is in part an instinctual one, and represents a tending toward or away from the object. Deutsch goes on to say: 在《梦的解释》(1900)中，弗洛伊德提到，我们通过从这些客体衍生出的 感知复合体 来感知我们周围活的客体，但这些感知复合体与我们对自己身体的类似感知的记忆融合在一起。因此，感觉记忆 与身体曾经经历过的 反应性运动 联系在一起。客体是通过记忆被感知的，而记忆是基于对身体本身的 感觉感知。对感觉信号的反应 在某种程度上是一种本能，代表着对客体的倾向或远离。多伊奇接着说: Thus these feelings are derived from a sensory perception which serves as a warning signal against a wish toward a symbolized object. The desired object is always closely connected with a series of sensory perceptions. The wish has become repressed but is continually reawakened by sensory stimuli. Originally, sensory perception was directed toward the own body only, and there sensu strictori was without an object. When primary sensory perceptions become libidinized, they gradually spread over the objects, keeping them and their perceiver in continuous contact with past and present reality. At the same time, they become the mediators for the symbolized objects (1959, p. 89). 因此，这些感觉源自 感官感知，该感官感知 用作 针对 对 被象征客体 的愿望 的警告信号。所期望的客体总是与一系列的感官感知紧密相连。愿望被压抑了，但又被感官刺激不断地唤醒。最初，感官感知 只是指向自己的身体，严格意义上 是没有客体的。当最初的感官感知 被力比多化时，它们就会逐渐扩散到客体上，使 他们和他们的感知者 不断地与过去和现在的现实中 相接触。同时，他们成为被象征客体的调解者(1959，第89页)。 As Deutsch would see it, then, the symbolized object is a composite of early cathected sense perceptions which were formed into a body ego. These sensory configurations had been fused through partial identification with the perceived parts of other objects. They are the earliest perceived objects with which the child has the most intense and perduring sensory contact, which carry the significant meanings related to these objects. Consequently, the loss of these objects and their attendant meaning signifies and is equivalent to a bodily loss. 就像Deutsch所看到的那样，象征化的客体 是早期 精神投入的观感感知 的合成物，这些感知形成了一个身体自我。通过与其他客体被感知部分 的部分认同，这些感觉结构被融合在一起。它们是儿童最早感知到的客体，与它们有最强烈和最持久的感官接触，它们承载着与这些客体有关的重要意义。因此，失去这些客体及其伴随而来的意义意味着和等同于 身体的损失。 We are not so much concerned at this point with the contribution to the understanding of conversion, but rather we are concerned with the cognitive implications for the perceptual process resident in Deutsch's ideas. What he is describing in terms of projection and reintrojection is an interplay of introjective and projective mechanisms by which perceptual contents contribute to the organization of internal objects, and the projection of introjective content onto external objects provides the context of meaning within which the conversion process takes place. Thus conversion is specifically understood in terms of the projection of bodily significances related to the organization of introjects onto the respective objects. The cognitive implications of this, however, are that the perceptual process involves an interplay and a derivation from the correlative processes of introjection and projection. Consequently the symbolic aspect of the perceptual level of experience is tied in with the history of object relations experienced by a given individual, as bound up in the internal organization of his introjects. 在这一点上，我们不太关心对 理解转换 的贡献，而是关心Deutsch观点中 感知过程 的认知含义。他所描述的 投射和再内摄 是 内摄和投射机制的相互作用，通过这种机制，感知内容 有助于 内部客体组织，在外部客体上的投射和内摄内容 提供了 转换过程发生 的意义环境。因此，转换 被明确地理解为 与在各自客体上内摄物的组织有关的 身体意义的投射。然而，这一现象的认知含义是，感知过程涉及到相互作用，以及从相关的内摄和投射过程派生出来的过程。因此，经验的感知层次 的象征方面 与 特定个体所经历的客体关系的历史 相联系，就像与 他的内摄物 的内部组织 相联系一样。 It is apparent, then, that the perceptual process is from the beginning caught up in the dynamic interaction and interplay of projective and introjective mechanisms. There are unquestionably complex issues involved in this that require closer inspection. For example, we are clearly faced with a problem as to the extent and nature of the influence of projective and introjective processes on perceptual processes and their interplay in the context of understanding the nature of development, as well as the nature of perception itself. There is little doubt that there is a significant area for investigation here, but at this point there is little we can say about it. To focus on only one aspect of the problem, we need to better understand in psychoanalytic terms the nature of object-representations and their derivation and dependence upon perceptual processes. It is clear that they cannot be identified, but at the same time it is clear that they cannot be separated. 很明显，感知过程从一开始就陷入投射和内摄机制的动态交互和相互作用中。毫无疑问，其中涉及一些复杂的问题，需要进行更仔细的检查。例如，我们显然面临一个问题，即投射过程和内摄过程 对感知过程 的影响的程度和性质，以及在理解发展的性质 以及 感知本身的性质 的背景下 它们之间的相互作用。毫无疑问，这里有一个值得调查的重要领域，但在这一点上，我们能说的很少。为了只关注问题的一个方面，我们需要用精神分析的术语更好地理解 客体表征，以及 它们的派生物 和 对感知过程的依赖 的本质。很明显，它们是无法辨认的，但同时也很明显，它们是无法分开的。