*1.2.2 The point of view of representation*

The study of language is then orientating us toward a new scientificity within both verifiability and structure interfacing (internal/external): this new episteme includes the consequence of redefining not only the object of language but also its relations to its supplements, to evolution and brain impairments. Thus, the tensions arising between the real object and its analytical components, more specifically the discrepancies between bidirectional representation and analytical geometries, imply a new consideration of the linguistic event, its hierarchies and the instantiation. We will in the following chapter present our results stemming from both empirical data and theoretical development on both linguistic and semiotic inquiries of the

**1.1 A signifying gestalt: the biolinguistic instantiation as one point of view/the**

In the horizon of the structuralist turn, analysis has been an important consequence of an intuition rethinking another domain: the consequence of hypothetic-deductive methodology on the definition of the *real object* grounding in the methodological object. First, the consequence of both representational phonology meeting the isolation of psycholinguistic empirical tokens but also inscribing language in a potential acquisition actant suggesting since the generativist turn that immanence is also a result of a biolinguistic instance [1] whose analytical component is both universal and competence/performance derivability. On the other hand, the semiotic principle, epistemologically, split up—so to speak—in paradigmatic/syntagmatic axes of analysis contributes by a new turn to emphasize the double static/dynamic structure of signification/meaning and the semiotic

Beyond reflexivity principle or the consciousness basis of the semiotic principle—its object language—and beyond metalinguistic operations [2, 3], we owe this specificity to the observer/gestalt structure where schematization implies the predisposition/disposition of both mediation—interpretability. Henceforth, triggered by the semiotic principle (SP, semiotic function and semiotic stratification hierarchy), the points of view are the observer/epistemic link between real and structural object within the relation between immanence and manifestation. This link is not a faithful relation, it is defined by optimality rules, visibility/invisibility,

**1.2 The parallax<sup>1</sup> of language gestalt: defining the theoretical framework**

We postulate in the following insight a framework of analysis/catalysis,

We define the structural points of view of analysis/catalysis as the following: first, the condition of articulation to refer to its own immanent event of distinctiveness/significativeness deriving its levels from form selection, value as being extracted and abstracted from the continuum in virtue of certain rules defined by the structural network of functions. Analysis is the *human* computational faculty of

relation between form—meaning and consciousness.

specificity of being a represented representation.

ordering and inversion, markedness and co-selection.

representation, formantization and instantiation.

*1.2.1 The structural point of view: analysis/catalysis*

**of points of** *view*

<sup>1</sup> Ref. [4].

**106**

**neurophysiologic point of view**

*Cognitive and Intermedial Semiotics*

Representation within the gap between perception (analysis) and apperception [5], articulation/production but also the gap between recursivity [6] and reflexivity (meta-linguistic, etc.) is the cognitive (also memory-based) and recognition condition of language faculty oriented by an internal interpretability principle that mediates the relation between hierarchical levels and merge operations of input-output dynamic. Both conceptual-semantic and phonological-phonetic (acoustic) representations interact grounding in the "need" to open computational modules by cognitive ones (acquisition for instance).
