本文主要探討《名字》中，迪立羅如何凸顯語言成為倫理的他者。迪立羅並非聚焦在一般的語言或文字上，而是以空間的感受和時間的認知來形塑語言的概念。在這本以不同地景為書寫特色的小説中，語言的空間面向呼應梅洛龐帝的感受概念─將世界視為和人們對話的第一語言，這第一語言包含可看見的、可聽到的、及可感受的。然而，在空間中，親身經歷或感受的並非一定是可命名或可訴說的，這些經驗往往超越文字可吸納的範圍，而成為生活中無法避免和抗拒的他者。《名字》中，這可感受但無法言喻的部份可透過列維那斯的「說」（the saying）進一步了解。「說」不同於「上述」（the said），隱含斷時性（diachrony）的概念，指的是時間的不可通約性，及意義上的無法化約或表達的特質。列維那斯斷時性的概念可以闡釋迪立羅語言中的時空概念，而其中時間的面向是開啟語言為倫理他者的首要元素。特別的是，在這倫理關係中，也就是在回應語言這個他者時，自我顯得被動、易受影響且不再具有完整的自主性。因此，迪立羅在強調對環境的感官認知的書寫主軸中，呈現時空交錯的感受，同時也牽涉一個相當複雜的語言概念。他用地理的多樣性和無法改變的時間差異來說明語言如何成為一個不可知且無法觸及的他者。而語言既非工具性的呈現也非一個自我指涉的框架，而是一個倫理的他者，同時賦予自我絕對的被動性（radical passivity）及回應他者的必要性。

The paper aims to explore how Don DeLillo foregrounds language as the ethical Other in The Names. Prominently, DeLillo construes the notion of language with the perception of the spatial and the recognition of the temporal, instead of focusing on the generally-recognized dialects or words. The spatial dimension of language as presented in this landscape-featured novel corresponds to Merleau-Ponty’s idea of perception, taking the world as the first language that addresses people. The first
language comprises the visible, the audible and even the perceivable. However, what is empirically experienced or perceived in the space is not necessarily nameable or speakable, going beyond what words could subsume. The perceivable but unnameable in The Names could be understood in terms of Emmanuel Levinas’s notion of the saying in language. The saying, different from the said (language as actual facts), is marked by diachrony. It designates the incommensurable temporal planes,defying the meaning-reducing thematization and signification. It refers to the
irreducible and non-thematizable. Levinas’s notion of diachrony helps shed light on DeLillo’s spatial-temporal loop in language. And it is the temporal dimension that initiates the ethical relation with language as the Other. Nevertheless, the self in confrontation with language is passive, vulnerable and de-throned, being obliged to answer the call of the Other. Hence, with the visible and audible landscape featuring
The Names, DeLillo’s presentation of the wor(l)dly perception implicates the incomprehensible abyss underlying language. It is DeLillo’s premier observationlanguage as an unknown and unbridgeable Other marked by the geological diversity and the perpetual temporal lapse. That is, language is neither instrumental nor self-referential but the ethical Other, which talk in a way that the self with absolute passivity is obliged to respond.