In this paper, I begin by examining the early, albeit sporadic and literaly disembodied interpretations of Peirce's ideas in France, which have been influenced largely by selective readings from the Collected Papers, notably by Roman O. Jakobson and Émile Benveniste. These two authors have long been regarded as primary interpreters of sign theory within the French intellectual landscape. Their influence, along with the misunderstandings they fostered regarding Peirce's semiotics, continues to resonate today. Despite the gradual and problematic establishment of Peirce's legacy in post/structuralis tradition through such interpretations, the primary focus of this paper is a comparative analysis of two enduring and contentious readings. The first "privileged text" under scrutiny is Jacques Derrida's seminal critique of structuralism in De la grammatologie, which incorporates Peircean semeiotic. In Derrida's interpretation, the systematic metaphysician Peirce is depicted as a defining critic of metaphysics and potentially an early advocate for the deconstruction of the "transcendental signifier." Contrary to the prevailing belief that Derrida misinterprets Peirce, I aim to illustrate some valuable and thought-provoking insights on general semiotics that can be derived from this philosophical margins. The second pivotal framework for comparison is the “schizoanalysis” of Peirce and Louis Hjelmslev in the philosophical works of Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, resulting in a distinctive interpretation of pragmatism.