"What semiotics represents, in fact, is literary criticism transfigured by structural linguistics, rendered a more disciplined and less impressionistic enterprise which, as Lotman's work testifies, is more rather than less alive to the wealth of form and language than most traditional criticism" (Eagleton 90).
The "linguistics" of literature is more important to the "language" than traditional criticism.
So by studying the language which represents a variety of symbols and interpretations a reader is better off than using traditional criticism.
Moreover, I believe that the structure of the text gives us insight into the semiotics which then allows us to analyze the language which provides us with symbols and then the end result is a critical review of a text based on semiotics rather than traditional criticism.
This has been an interesting chapter by Eagleton, but makes me question myself because where do you start first when reading literature.
Do you start with the structure, semiotics, language, word choice, symbols, or traditional criticism?
Click here for the web page devoted to Eagleton.