This is actually something that has been investigated, at least in some dimension; one prototype aircraft, the XF5F, had one long wing with the leading edge some distance forward of the pilot. The purpose of this prototype was to examine an aircraft with exceptionally high rate of climb, achieved by the two large engines - uncharacteristic for an aircraft so small. The position of the engines means that the centre of gravity is quite far forwards; the wing being in front of the cockpit counters this somewhat by bringing the centre of lift further forwards too.
The prototype apparently performed well and was loved by its test pilots (though some of this can be put down to its innovative contra-rotating propellers, a new development at the time). It was soon replaced with a much altered and more conventional version, so never saw any real action.
Anyway, the point I'm trying to make here is that in Layman's terms, I believe the only reason for canards or wings projecting so far in front of the cockpit would be to counter something which brought the aircraft's mass unusually far forwards. Even then, I see little reason for splitting this wing into 2 segments to give your pronged design - maybe to give the pilot a better view?
Edit: In response to Lucas Flicky's edit, I'll add a thought on how/why this might be practical in a sci-fi setting.
As I've said, we need a reason for the CoM to be further forward, necessitating a lifting body at the front of the fuselage. There are a couple of ideas I can think of - one of which is weaponry. Stick some big, heavy guns on the ends of your forward wings and they'll effectively balance out the cockpit at the rear of the aircraft. A good excuse for this would be dangerous lateral discharge when the weapon is fired - you simply can't have them behind the cockpit on conventional wings, as this would endanger the pilot. And as I said earlier, you can split the canards in the middle to give the pilot a more commanding view.
As a side note - this seems like an impractical design as it means you can't fly any unarmed versions of the same aircraft. In fact a similar issue very nearly existed with the Eurofighter - the RAF very nearly introduced a policy disallowing the use of guns on the aircraft. Had this rule remained in place (it was overturned in 2006), the Typhoon would have been delivered with their cannons installed but disarmed, as they were required for ballast!