The Literary Nature of the Sign

This research deals with the literary nature of the sign, and we must differentiate between two types of signs. First, there are signs whose significance is based on the connection with the external world and the changes that befall it, and others that return to the self. Second, there is the sign that belongs to the literary formulation where the pressing energy is determined artistically and aesthetically, and this requires a kind of experience and practice in using the sign and the areas of dealing with it. In this instance, the poetic field is considered the widest expressive field of the literary sign where the artistic creator finds his special abilities transformed into language and symbols.
The consideration of the literary nature of the sign extends to the consideration of the methods of criticism, especially those that have moved away from the language of the text to non-literary matters, meaning that we cannot call them (literary texts) such as classicism and romanticism.
At the beginning of this century, there was a trend to read the text through its original approach, that is, through its language. This approach has its basis firmly rooted in the heritage of grammatical and rhetorical studies; and despite the emergence of the formal approach and its prominent effects in the Western critical movement, the critical approach remains in the heritage without imposing on this Western import and its potential for analyzing the text and studying its language.
The most important outcome is to stay away from theoretical arbitrariness in separating form from content, as they are, as Saussure says, like the two sides of a paper, one side of which cannot be torn without the other being torn. This cohesion between form and content is the initial step in looking at the text from an internal perspective that cares about its structure, interprets its system, and analyzes its elements. But we must not drown in the distinction between the literary and non-literary sign; this is because linguistic content encompasses all life experiences without singling out one as literary and another as non-literary. We must consider form from a neutral perspective, considering that it contains the raw material that, when combined with the meaning, results in the fully formed structure appearing. Hence, this imaginary separation between form and content proves to be a false notion.