You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
An object theory of language, like object theory in general, would seem to be found somewhere between the intrapsychic (structural) and the interpersonal (social) and, it is hoped, to amalgamate the best of both approaches, each of which offers much to advance the understanding of language.
To begin with the interpersonal sphere, one would expect to find here the most natural theory for the analysis of language. Languages are the creations of groups; the nurturing of person-hood depends upon others, and it is difficult to defend the notion of a wholly private language, even in theory (Forrest, 1973). The extensive dependence of the quality of relatedness upon language is seen when one studies the nature of the foreignness of FMG psychiatric residents (Forrest, 1978b). Just as in the World War II spy movies, poor command of American familiar expressions and slang was an egregious factor, although intrapsychic factors also greatly affected the acquisition of these passwords to acceptance. Closer to home, our own native psychiatric residents report their extensive reliance on “buzzwords” to mark affiliations with the separately perceived psychodynamic and psychobiologic camps.
The early interest of analysts of the interpersonal school in language is an indication of the congeniality of their approach to language studies. Sullivan himself was influenced by Alfred Storch, a pioneer student of language in psychopathology. It was appropriate that Sullivan would speak of his most advanced stage of personality development (after the prototaxic, in which experience is all of a piece, and the parataxic, which consists of unconnected states of being) as the syntaxic mode:
The child gradually learns the “consensually validated” meaning of language — in the widest sense of language. These meanings have been
Read at the “Language and Psychoanalysis” panel, Association for Psychoanalytic Medicine, February 6, 1979, and subsequently revised.
Page 513acquired from group activities, interperson