The ontological turn in anthropology has altered how we interrogate the question of « meaning », and has helped to call into question the presuppositions of anthropology and semiotics. In particular, it has systematically challenged the major epistemological oppositions that underpinned our relationship to experience. In this context, a heterogeneous set of authors and theoretical proposals has emerged, self-defined as 'new realism' or 'neo-materialism'. These theories share the idea that 'things in themselves' should recover a ontological dignity as irreducible to language and to the subjects. Faced with this social ontology, semiotic anthropology can, on the contrary, question itself and sketch out a different route. To do this, we will combine two different perspectives: on the one hand, the 'semio-phobia' of the phenomenological anthropologist Ingold, and on the other, a revival of the perspectivism of Viveiros De Castro. For Ingold, anthropology should be understood as a network of significant 'correspondences' contributing to the construction of a common world and a plurality of coexisting niches. For De Castro, on the other hand, 'perspectivism' provides a critique of Western ontological dualism, which persists in the realist ontology of Ferraris. The notion of perspectivism allows us to understand that ontology does not begin with things but "with points of view": in other words, in a plurality of positions, none of which has a privileged position. This is a challenge for semiotics because it means going beyond cultural relativism and instead rethinking the common ontology of points of view in their radically different meanings.