• 主题
高级搜索  >
历史搜索 清空历史
首页> 外文期刊>Psychoanalytic Dialogues >Lost in Translation: Problems of Interdisciplinary Contributions in Psychoanalysis: Reply to Commentaries
【24h】

Lost in Translation: Problems of Interdisciplinary Contributions in Psychoanalysis: Reply to Commentaries

机译：翻译中的失落：精神分析中的跨学科贡献问题：对评论的答复

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           
页面导航
  • 摘要
  • 著录项
  • 相似文献
  • 相关主题

摘要

Although psychoanalysis is by its nature a social process, conceptualizations of the process have not acknowledged that the two participants function within social roles. The resistance to understanding the way that these subtle role structures affect clinical process is illustrated by the discussants' responses to a paper delineating the analytic role and the patient's role. The author suggests that although psychoanalytic language is increasingly relational, resistance to a social view stems from the persistence of monadic models in analytic thinking and discourse. This tendency, in turn, stems from the vantage point of the clinical theorist, which is as observer of either self or patient. It is difficult to observe the interaction itself. The contribution of the concept of role in the analytic relationship is a beginning effort at providing some terminology for such conceptualization.
机译：尽管心理分析从本质上说是一种社会过程，但对该过程的概念化并未承认两个参与者在社会角色中发挥了作用。讨论者对描述分析角色和患者角色的论文的回应说明了对理解这些细微角色结构影响临床过程方式的抵制。作者认为，尽管心理分析语言越来越具有关系性，但对社会观点的抵制源于分析思维和话语中的一元模型的持续存在。反过来，这种趋势源于临床理论家的优势，后者是自己或患者的观察者。很难观察到交互本身。角色概念在分析关系中的贡献是为这种概念化提供一些术语的开始。

著录项

  • 来源
    《Psychoanalytic Dialogues》 |2008年第1期|104-112|共9页
  • 作者

    Richard Almond;

  • 作者单位

    Palo Alto Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy Training Program,|San Francisco Center for Psychoanalysis,|Stanford University School of Medicine,;

  • 收录信息
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱：kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备：11010802029741号 ICP备案号：京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有

  • 客服微信

  • 服务号