The link between language and world is conceived by two apparently different ways of expression namely verbal and visual. These ways of expression rely on words that are used either in literature or visual arts. Words have many meanings when said aloud; however, in fact visual language has no language. Thus, if words would exist when said aloud, this rule wouldn’t apply to visual language. It can be said that there is an intermediary language existing through colors and forms, thereby connecting verbal and visual languages. Intermediary language connects visual and plastic languages by using the words and letters-symbols used competently in literature. If works of visual arts would be read by intermediary language again, it would be discovered that they have some unsolved ciphers. Once these ciphers have been deciphered it will be clear that the main point of artist gains a new secret way of expression if it is opened up by intermediary language while it is apparently close. Therefore, contrary to common misbelief that is the works go away from narrative language when the level of abstraction in visual arts is higher, they gain a new way of expression thanks to intermediary language. In this article, it will be attempted to explain intermediary language by comparing Jacques Derrida’s and Ludwig Wittgenstein’s approaches to language. It will be stated that deconstruction enables more options compared to Wittgenstein’s view of language and deconstruction is more successful at reading and receiving works. It will be demonstrated that deconstruction theory is the most important element in enlightening intermediary language which creates new ways to read and receive works. As an application of this assertion, the works of Jaume Plensa will be interpreted again by intermediary language.

Intermediary language, Language, Linguistics, Meaning, Cipher, Letter, Deconstruction, Derrida, Wittgenstein, Plensa