abailart said:

«"Tyler playfully deconstructs a phrase from semiotics ("movement along the syntagmatic axis...") by showing that when the meanings of each word are fully traced, the phrase actually means, "the second world war pitted the anally fixated Germans against the orally fixated British." In a mirthic burst, Tyler than rapidly heaps one discursive tradition on another to animate the argument:

The simultaneity of paradigmatic implication interrupts the urgent forward flow of signifiers in the singularity of time. Don't follow forking paths! Don't fork! Get thee behind me Borges! Time marches on! "

Please refer to my post on Writing as Relationship available in the classic view of C...

abailart said:

«"Tyler playfully deconstructs a phrase from semiotics ("movement along the syntagmatic axis...") by showing that when the meanings of each word are fully traced, the phrase actually means, "the second world war pitted the anally fixated Germans against the orally fixated British." In a mirthic burst, Tyler than rapidly heaps one discursive tradition on another to animate the argument:

The simultaneity of paradigmatic implication interrupts the urgent forward flow of signifiers in the singularity of time. Don't follow forking paths! Don't fork! Get thee behind me Borges! Time marches on! "

Please refer to my post on Writing as Relationship available in the classic view of Clapmirths.»

I surely would if I only could. But your premises are oozing with misjudgements of the real reality (which seems to be typically Anglo-Saxon): We continent-Germans don't even know what a Brit is talking about when they talk about the anal. (Methinks we don't have such a thing.) The British were "orally fixated"? Maybe, if suspended upside down?
“Sexual fixation is meaninglessly intrinsic,” says Judith Butler (Undoing Gender, 2004); however, according to Martha Nussbaum (The Professor of Parody), it is not so much fixated sexuality that is intrinsically meaningless, but rather the horizontal exaggeration of the socio-sexual discourse.
“Mirths are part of the rubicon of existence,” says Sartre. But the subject is contextualised into a narrativity that includes a single paradox.
I think this had to be said.