common practice

The storyteller explored the possibilities implied in his own language by combining and changing the permutations of the figures and the actions, and of the objects on which these actions could be brought to bear.After a while language dissipated into symbols and words, which were there to play with, not to make meanings, but to make various arrangements.If there exists something like a singular approach with the practice of reading, how can this approach become common? Can reading be held as a common practice? Wouldn't to some degree reading always alreeady ask of you to make yourself common?
  All this concerns the question of an intellectuality that could be held in common practice
 Is there a question of quantity to language, to words? An element of forgetting and unlearning seems to be involved in the production of meaning, as if there was some kind of limitation that would be required in order for meaning to assure its capability to designate and be meaningful? Otherwise, would it drown in too much meaning? What is with too many words? 
 Any code includes the question of translation, the passage of meaning in a manner that is enciphered. Any enciphered message contains the very code it requires to be deciphered. 
 That as well offers an immediate passage of language, it's similarity, a translation that is executed in playing, but passes somehow unnoticed at the same time. 
 Meaning=use - does such a use has the potential to erase the awareness for meaning or shift it towards the awareness about that use?
Awareness of it word by word, or rather of each sign lingering in each word. a sign then that asks for use. It's almost as if the words change places with punctuation.
Words become the punctuation. And punctuation = vocabulary, this kind of vehicular language, that borrows from the language of coding, but turns to a poetic or expressive end. Is that somehow more open to a common authoring?
These fragments are not only more open to common authoring, they ask for it. If so, in which manner might they allow for reading and writing something that otherwise wouldn't find a modality of articulation?
Fuzzyness and temptation surronding this play with language.  
What about the mode of existence that comes into play here? What about this silence? Remaining without response belongs to this work on language.  
A configuration that suggests a certain practice of language. The question of teaching regarding language played out here addresses a modality of attention. We have the suggestion of a work of anonymity that answers to this modality. This work can be situated in a particular manner regarding the distinction between activity and passivity. There is the notion of translation involved as well - coming along with qualities like flaw and perfection - and the topos of a radical intervention.