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.
This paper offers a contribution towards furthering our understanding of a theme more usually associated with the Freudian tradition, namely the role and function of words as action, particularly in relation to the representational process and its somatic roots. Some reference to neuroscience research will be offered in this respect. It also considers the value of differentiating Empathy from Empathism, as defined by the Italian psychoanalyst Stefano Bolognini who distinguishes informing complementary countertransference from states of over-concordance. Two analytic sessions taken from the intensive analysis of a deeply deprived late-latency child showing violent behaviour are provided with the aim of illustrating the application of these concepts. It is argued that, given the same elaboration of the countertransference and the adequate empathic position on the part of the analyst, the difference in the outcome of the interpretation was made by the specific use of words—in this case the use or not of the personal pronoun—in the two sessions. As the case material is taken from the clinical work of a supervisee, some elements regarding the supervisory situation are also discussed in the paper.