Glossar

In Lacan’s theory, the chain of signifiers refers to the sequence of linguistic signs (signifiers) in which meaning is never fixed, but continually reconstituted through the ongoing play of differences.

In language, there is no natural or inherent connection between a word (the signifier – the external form of the sign) and what it refers to (the signified – the content or meaning). This connection is arbitrary – or as linguistics puts it: unmotivated. That is, there is no internal reason why the word “tree” should refer to this particular object. The association is historically shaped and results from a social convention.

Crucially, a word does not derive its meaning in isolation, but through its position within a sentence – within the chain of signifiers. Just as in music, meaning emerges from what comes before and what follows. A sign means something only because it is embedded in a larger sequence of signs. This chain is potentially infinite, and its movement prevents any final, fixed meaning.

Function in Lacan’s theory: Lacan draws on Ferdinand de Saussure’s theory of language and reworks it under the influence of Claude Lévi-Strauss and later Jacques Derrida. For Lacan, the unconscious is structured like a language — and that language operates precisely through the chain of signifiers.

The subject is not the origin of its thoughts, but is constituted within language itself – through the movement of signifiers, through what is said, and through what resonates or shifts in the gaps between words.
Lacan writes:

“Un signifiant ne signifie que pour un autre signifiant.“
(“A signifier only means through another signifier.“)

This quote comes from “La signification du phallus ” (Écrits, 1966) and is a central expression of Lacan’s structuralist conception of language, developed in close dialogue with Saussure and Roman Jakobson, and extended into psychoanalytic theory. The sentence means: A single signifier has no inherent meaning — it always refers to another signifier. Meaning arises only through relation, through the chain, through the play of difference.

Depending on the divination method (yarrow stalks, coins or electronic oracle as we use it on no2DO), different numerical values result for each individual “throw”:

• no2DO oracle (electronic): 7 or 8
• coins or yarrow stalks: 6 or 7 or 8 or 9

The values 6 and 9 are regarded as changing lines, i.e. they change into their respective opposite: 6 (Yin) becomes 7 (Yang), 9 (Yang) becomes 8 (Yin). This transforms the original hexagram into another one of the 64 hexagrams. (More explanations and an example can be found here).

I regularly receive requests if or why not I do consider the changing lines of the I Ching’s hexagrams in no2DO. My perspective on this issue is as follows: My opinion, working with the I Ching means first of all to thoroughly understand the (original) hexagram. This takes time and effort. However, I consider this step essential and an effort worth taking. For this reason I have expanded the individual hexagrams’ interpretation pages step by step and thus given the users a variety of material at hand.

Without tools or if someone shies away from this effort, it is actually tempting to quickly turn to the changing lines. This is, for example, often the case when solely working with the original texts. Let’s be honest: “Perseverance furthers!” does not say much. It is natural to turn to the changing lines in search of more “meat”. Unfortunately, the texts offered in the changing-lines-section are equally cryptic and bring enlightenment only in few cases. An explanation for this could be that the original texts possibly contain political messages from the times of the texts’ origins. Dominique Hertzer investigated this phenomenon in her book “Das Mawangdui- Yijing”.

However, if you still want to consider the changing lines, I’d offer following advice: The changing lines result in a further, a second hexagram. Once you have worked extensively with the first hexagram, you could then do the same with the second hexagram.