Could make a connection to Booth's move to "cast some doubt on doubt". We've gone so far in one direction, we've forgotten that we were headed in a direction in the first place.

Oh. Actually, now I get all the strike-throughs when he writes about erasure

Alright, so a rejection of a nihilistic rejection of meaning, but at the same time, I'm not sure I'm so following his point on how to achieve that.

My guess: like with the signature example, just because we don't have a master-reference doesn't mean we can't make pragmatic associations, but it does mean we can't assume there exists a master-reference, and any system that assumes it (e.g. Sheridan's "correct" enunciations, Blair's belief in naturally-inclined taste) is inherently leading to failure. Deconstruction breaks down those structures... but I'm still lost as to what comes next. Bail me out, here.

All this talk of grounding is going to be really important when we get to Derrida and deconstruction. Burke seems to believe in the grounding, the scene, but it's often mutable, unstable, and ambiguous. Derrida's just gonna drop the bottom out and see how it falls.