Untitled - Sexey's School Moodle

As is the case with canonical discourses, the roots of strictures to identify, isolate,
and punish transgression can be traced back to Judaism, the early church, and the Bible.
Anthony Julius points out that for theologians, “transgression” meant an offence against
God. Within a historical perspective, Julius explains the various shifts in the meaning of
the word “transgression” since it entered the English language in the sixteenth century:
The word was soon secularized to describe disobedience of the
law. It was then enlarged, first to include the violating of any rule
or principle and then to embrace any departure from correct
behaviour … And in this broadening of meaning, expanding from
questions of theology to those of mere good manners, by the end of
the 17 th century ‘transgressions’ came to include digressions:
deviations from the rule of one’s discourse. … Parallel to this
expansion lie two additional developments in meaning. ‘to
transgress’ acquires in the 16 th century (though then later loses) a
transitive sense: the transgressor ‘transgresses against’ a person,
offending in some very serious manner. ‘Transgression’ here
detaches itself from rule-breaking and becomes instead a kind of
assault, although not necessarily a physical one—an insult perhaps,
or a provocation. It is not the rule that is violated but the person. It
acquires this meaning: an act of aggression that causes injury. This
act of aggression can also be against a discourse or a style:
disrupting it with low, excluded material (a shout, the breaking of
wind, a belch, a profane interjection) or by exposing its internal
contradictions (drawing out inherent antinomies, introducing
exception, identifying impurities) …‘Transgression’ is also used to
refer to any exceeding of boundaries. This is closest to its
etymological sense: to trans-gress, pass beyond, go over. This
relates the word to ‘trespass’—the illicit crossing of a boundary.
To subvert a hierarchy, placing the subordinate above the elevated,
or to mix distinct concepts or substances, upsetting demarcations
that have some institutional or tacit sanction, could be transgressive
in this sense. (17-18)
This comprehensive overview outlines a multilayered definition of transgression that is
still pertinent in today’s theoretical discourses. The first development reveals the
insubordinate nature of transgression as law-breaking, as a departure from accepted rules
and conventions; the second implies that transgressions are purposely offensive or
61