So then, in the Derridean dialectic, we can say that if the sign is arbitrary and differential, as Saussure would have us believe, then it is also caught up in an integral, ad-hockiness, which persists throughout time. Signs are created by chance, they are caught up in a history of conquests, and class wars. I'm not supposed to eat with my elbows on the table, because that's how sailors eat to keep their trays from sliding about, and I don't want to be associated with them. See how this works? It's hardly the Difference Engine of analytic distinctions that Saussure is making it out to be, and in fact, I believe he thinks he can reduce the entire system to some sort of mathematics that he himself is unqualified to produce. Anyone who operates on this principle should see Charles Babbage's difference engine. This is the limit of your reason, it will end where Babbage ends, and then to Turing.
The line of signification, can then be transformed into a circle. If there is continuity at the extremes, that is to say, something defined in contradiction, like a word made out of flesh, an alpha and omega, we have a continuum bounded at the extremes, the extremes meeting, and the first and the last are situated next to each other in a one dimensional circle (See Urizen).
This knowledge is not new, it has always existed so long as men have had systems they've had rules and orders that transcend the linear temporal unity of signifier, signified, and symbol, which itself is defined as the fusion of opposites.
This system of circularity is not the end all and be all of the story, it is still merely two dimensional, and as we'll see, the Book of Revelation and the Book of Job boast an even more advanced spiral geometry.