In a very synthetic and concise way I can argue that reality is a direct consequence of the agentive capacity of each system of signs to construct it. In this sense we agree with Jacques Lacan (1972-73 [1981]: 113-114), that “the real is that which never ceases not to inscribe itself in the symbolic”. Although by the real, Lacan does not refer to reality, the semiotic effect of metonymy is valid. However, it is worth clarifying that Lacan was able to add the concept of the real only after having learned in a seminar that, by means of the Peircean logical triad, he could overcome his dyadic-structuralist explanation related only to the imaginary and the symbolic. Anyway, seen that Peirce himself –father of logic-based triadic semiotics– never used his semiotic proposal for the classification of signs to analyze any concrete concept or object in its three or nine aspects, I propose the Semiotic Nonagon (Guerri 1984; 2000; 2003; 2003; 2016: pp. 3-40; 2019; 2022) as an operative tool for qualitative semiotic analysis “although not strictly Peircean” according to James Liszka (2019: 155). In relation to the concept of logic recursivity of the sign, the semiotic nonagon is presented as a double-entry table that allows the construction of an explanation that interrelates the nine or twenty-seven aspects of any subject under analysis. During the presentation, case analyses of how the semiotic nonagon constructs an explanation of reality will be shown with examples applied to verbal languages, graphic languages and market research.