Prefatory remarks: Je suis qui je suis.——Rene Descartes.

When I was facing this kind of question: Words public authority, actually I was facing the Derrida’s classical proposition: all thoughts and the existence opposition, in the philosophy history, only is written and the language opposition. A friend whom is respected by me, did propose this question u non-accidentally, which caused me to remember the influence as language turning to the entire philosophy history.

First, must mention L.Wittgenstein. The personal language theory ,is key of his later period philosophy research. Since the language is the game process which needs highly to participation, participates in game, all must cause own behavior to conform with the language standard, but the language standard also does not have a set to let each person all inevitably receive the restraint the mutual recognition. Therefore, the language participation paradox produced. This time, the personal language characteristic needs by the repeatedly emphasis, the reason is that , the language utilization and the significance, all throughout are a each one person's behavior .The one as the language main body, own decides the language the direction, the language connotation, the language refer, thus sets up set of own to conform with own language standard. Thus, the language, is took the personal behavior appears; the ting referred by the language, as the objective existence, does not relate with language sending out. Because of to understand the significance of the meaning, needs different individual accepting the language meaning, embarks from own personal language, but doesn’t embark by other people's language. 

Furthermore, it was Hermeneutics theory by H.Gadamer and M.Heiddegger. When the words appear as the writing, it no longer merely is one kind of expression, but is containing author's words right; the author makes his creation carrying on in own historical background, this creation immerses in his historical tradition. When the reader produces own explanation as facing the text, he must inevitably by own prejudice participates text history. The two traditions, in the work which explained is obtained links up, also is the so-called arc of visibility fusion. The work attribute, is decided by author's creation history; front but reader's understanding is actually impossible not to dope own prejudice. This is the kind of understanding front structure, is the explanation difficult position the understanding when is full or not fully participates in the work history falling into.

Although it is not to solve this difficult position, P.Ricoeur’s endeavor does come under two forerunners' influences. As my most like philosopher, Ricoeur and his text theory without doubt has the development significance, even how highly appraises all is not excessive. Each text, behind its language, all has some latent narrating. In brief, the text is narrating. This I agreed very much. Cites a simple example, if an apple is put on the table, how we do look at it, has decided it in relates any to us. A sexual desire inflates virgin male, possibly can think this is a forbidden fruit, then falls into fantasy and self-consolation; A mysticist , possibly remembers Muse, then reads the Greek article books; A hungrier, then only can imagine him to throw oneself gnaws nipping the pleasant sensation. This is narrating, the apple certainly does not have said any, but it had related are very many. Each thing all is a text, also is one kind narration.

When Jean-Lyotard proposed a foundational narrative theory to explain the historical significance of event, I felt that, to an open text, actually there are also two kind of narrative directions, this very much likes the Liwu knowledge of which Huang Zongxi said with the Zhanran knowledge. I name this: Tranquil narration with solemn and stirring narration (individual theory unique interpretation).Solemn and stirring narration, are the distant structures that all text experience may course. Although, the narrative starting point is the world intelligibility, the narrative scene had the personal color because of the artificial participation. Solemn and stirring narration is the individual creation of text.

Roland Barthes first come out the prominent value of writing, but the Derrida’s contribution will be having opposed writing and the language. Then we can not but acknowledge that, after the language written, it already no longer was the original intention which the author primary must express, because like on states: personal language, individual differences understanding history, narrative metaphor. This classical interrogation, true holds the very high value for theory. Certainly, also must mention Deleuze’s "the symptom reads", only it appears too the psycho-analysis like this with the latter modern age, I certainly do not appreciate.