Jakobson interprets the bridge between poetics and linguistics in his theory. Exactly what makes a verbal communication poetic? Poetics analyze a works ability to communicate a verbal message into art. The link between poetics and linguistics is bridged between the way they are reliant on the way a word is taken, used and the context of such a word. Even the structure is crucial.

Semiotics are crucial to such an evaluation because of its ability or point to analyze signs and symbols in their interpretation. Linguistics is reliant on interpretations of communication. Much like Nietzsche had theorized, the languages we use come from the words that we derive from the symbols and signs we associate them with as an individual.

The way it becomes different is the way this chain of communication goes. The communicator to the communicated, the subject and specific words used to communicate are all carefully chosen to prove a specific point. Jakobson touches upon poetics by expressing how carefully words can be used in order to be poetic instead of linguistic. Even though one is related to each other, it is important to know they are not one in the same. To Jakobson, linguistics is a more ‘casual’ verbal structure, whereas poetics are a designed structure. The way this more carefully designed language becomes entwined with semiotics is the way the symbol or subject of the communicated is metaphorically referred to. The metaphor becomes the symbol and they take on the same meaning or subject. This ability to design a verbal structure without coming out right and using the actual name or the ‘black and white’ or usual/realistic term, explanation, description, etc is what poetic analysis is all about.

Jakobson also picks apart language from two different sides. One side being object language and the other being metalanguage. Object language is speaking of objects while metalanguage is speaking of language, or the kind of unspoken rules and ways of verbally communicating. Most commonly, metalanguage helps us to identify whether the person were communicating to uses the same words, expressions, or follow the same type of verbal expression as ourselves.

This is a considerable insight into the idea of how we communicate. We don’t always realize how we speak to each other, and how the way we speak is reliant on who we are talking to, as well as how we respond when spoken to in different ways. When spoken to in different tones or dialects, we respond accordingly or the communication is lost, or literally lost in translation.

Metalanguage works into poetic analysis because metalanguage effects the way we interprete or understand what is being communicated. It is because of this that the message can be deciphered, many times in different ways varying upon individuals. Focusing on the message itself is a poetic function, but how we decipher the message has everything to do with metalanguage.

Jakobson focuses on poetics and how really no specific field of linguistics can be deciphered or anaylsized just based off of one field alone, in fact it takes many because of the way people are programmed to communicate and process communication/messages.