Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-14T12:09:38.120Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sense and Word in Liturgical Language

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 April 2024

David Birch
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

When E. Gordon Craig in 1922 wrote,

“To man words come easiest and earliest to lie with. So that now in this twentieth century nearly all speech is a lie. I would not go so far as to laughingly admit that speech of that kind was an art. I should rather call it a mess.”

he was making the distinction between the role of language as a vehicle for communicating essentials, and the role of language as an art-form. As a theatrical designer who was to revolutionise traditional concepts of theatre, he was keenly aware of the difficulty in using language to represent exactly those things we wish to communicate to others. One word may have a variety of meanings, or because of constant use in a multitude of ways, have lost much of its original meaning. Reliance on the word itself is therefore not always the best or most effective guide to meaning. He continues:

“Once a merely natural thing—it became an art; but when it exceeded its natural term of life, having talked itself hoarse-black in the face—the silver of speech rubbed off and we came to the lead underneath, and inside the lead . . . lies.”

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
New Blackfriars , Volume 59 , Issue 695 , April 1978, pp. 176 - 183
Copyright
Copyright © 1978 Provincial Council of the English Province of the Order of Preachers

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable