Frozen actions in the Arctic linguistic landscape: a nexus analysis of language processes in visual space

Pietikäinen, Sari; Lane, Pia; Salo, Hanni; Laihiala-Kankainen, Sirkka

doi:10.1080/14790718.2011.555553

Cited by 95 publications

(50 citation statements)

References 13 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Previous linguistic landscape research has focused on signage within a city (Boudreau & Dubois, 2005;Curtin, 2009;Lai, 2013), neighbourhoods (Boudreau & Dubois, 2005;Cenoz & Gorter, 2006) or geographic areas (Pietikäinen, Lane, Salo, & Laihiala-Kankainen, 2011), noting how the signs of a setting reflect and inform the language use of a given area. Yet, as linguistic landscape research develops further, investigations are beginning to include schools (Brown, 2012;Dagenais, Moore, Sabatier, Lamarre, & Armand, 2008;Sayer, 2009) and incorporate new methodologies such as nexus analysis (Pietikäinen & Kelly-Holmes, 2011).…”

Section: The Linguistic Landscape Of a Schoolmentioning

confidence: 99%

Signgeist: promoting bilingualism through the linguistic landscape of school signage

Dressler

2014

International Journal of Multilingualism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study is an examination of signage and sign-making practices in one elementary (Kindergarten to sixth grade) public school which offers a German Bilingual Program (GBP) for the development of German-English bilingualism. Schools are public spaces in which the visible language choice on signs reveals the circulating discourses around language status. Surprisingly, little is known about the creation of these signs and the decision-making behind their creation. This linguistic landscape is analysed using nexus analysis which sheds light on the convergence of (1) the historical body of social actors in which teachers are primarily responsible for sign making, (2) an interaction order in which teachers practise organic sign placement and (3) discourses in place which include the promotion of bilingualism. This research reveals that signage is limited in its promotion of German-English bilingualism, constrained strongly by practices that define sign maker's responsibility and the GBP's reach. This study contributes to our understanding of linguistic landscape research by exploring the degree to which a school offering a Bilingual Program promotes bilingualism through signage. Educators and researchers looking critically at school signs are given cause to question accepted practices and strong discourses which limit the promotion of bilingualism.

show abstract

Section: The Linguistic Landscape Of a Schoolmentioning

confidence: 99%

Signgeist: promoting bilingualism through the linguistic landscape of school signage

Dressler

2014

International Journal of Multilingualism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The inclusion of two peripheral minority language communities adds to the growing literature in this field (cf. Gorter, Marten, & van Mensel, 2012;Pietikäinen, Lane, Salo, & Laihiala-Kankainen, 2011). With the exception of these studies, the possibilities for LL research afforded by the linguistic peculiarities of peripheral locations, where often the relationship between majority and minority languages are more flexible and fluid, have been largely ignored.…”

Section: Avenues For Further Researchmentioning

confidence: 99%

Languages in motion: Multilingualism and mobility in the linguistic landscape

Moriarty

2014

International Journal of Bilingualism

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This special issue of the International Journal of Bilingualism is concerned with the interplay of multilingualism and mobility in the linguistic landscape (henceforth LL). The various contributors to this special issue view LL studies as offering a way of investigating multilingualism and mobility. The LL is understood herein as an expression of multilingualism in society, a site where language, together with other semiotic resources, is involved in the symbolic construction of multilingual spaces. The LL is a crucial site in which the mobility of language resources can be mapped. This dual attention to multilingualism and mobility is motivated by recent theorising in sociolinguistics, as well as our collective interest in the ever-expanding discipline of LL studies. The aim is to bring together research that addresses complex theoretical and methodological issues within the emerging paradigm of the sociolinguistics of globalisation (Coupland, 2010;Heller, 2007;Pennycook, 2010) in which mobility plays a crucial role in the study of multilingualism (Blommaert, 2010). By investigating language practices in the LL, our focus is specifically on language in motion, a process by which different linguistic resources are in a state of translocality, meaning they are on the move across various trajectories of time and space (cf. Blommaert, 2010;Johnstone, 2010). Such a focus allows us to begin to examine what the consequences for languages may be through these processes of mobility enabled by globalisation. Specifically, we seek to investigate how these processes manifest themselves in the LL. We take an approach to LL research proposed by Stroud and Mpendukana (2009), where the LL embodies the social distribution of multilingual resources that in turn have consequences for language ideologies, discourses and practices. Throughout each of the articles we seek to trace the trajectories of mobile linguistic resources and analyse the consequences of these flows for language ideologies.Recently, there have been calls for a more contextualised, historical and critical approach that can produce a 'greater understanding of the larger socio-political meanings of linguistic landscapes' (Leeman & Modan, 2009, p. 332). Indeed, the LL of a given community has become an influential site of contestation and negotiation, appropriation and resistance of multilingualism. The LL provides important clues to the nature of multilingualism in the community and often provides a more accurate account of the lived sociolinguistic reality of a given community than official language policies do. By viewing the LL in this way we see it as an important site for the investigation of how the processes of mobility are impacting on the linguistic hierarchy of given

show abstract

“…In this study, we adopt a nexus analysis approach (Scollon and Scollon, 2004) which puts social action at its theoretical center. The display of a linguistic sign is therefore seen as the social action at the center of this LL study, as already explicated by other LL researchers (for example, Pietikäinen et al, 2011). Taking the discourse-ethnographic stance which is pivotal to a nexus analysis of the LL, we open up the analysis to incorporate the wider discourses within which the LL signs operate.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 90%

Conflict, Exclusion and Dissent in the Linguistic Landscape

2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Frozen actions in the Arctic linguistic landscape: a nexus analysis of language processes in visual space

Cited by 95 publications

References 13 publications

Signgeist: promoting bilingualism through the linguistic landscape of school signage

Signgeist: promoting bilingualism through the linguistic landscape of school signage

Languages in motion: Multilingualism and mobility in the linguistic landscape

Conflict, Exclusion and Dissent in the Linguistic Landscape

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About