Why diachronicity matters in the study of linguistic landscapes

It is commonly argued that the proliferation of urban writing known as linguistic landscapes represents “a thoroughly contemporary global trend” (Coupland, 2010: 78). The purpose of this paper is to show that linguistic landscapes are by no means modern phenomena and to draw on our shared interest i...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Pavlenko, Aneta, Mullen, Alex
Format: Article
Published: John Benjamins Publishing 2015
Subjects:
Online Access:https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/44674/
_version_ 1848796972114247680
author Pavlenko, Aneta
Mullen, Alex
author_facet Pavlenko, Aneta
Mullen, Alex
author_sort Pavlenko, Aneta
building Nottingham Research Data Repository
collection Online Access
description It is commonly argued that the proliferation of urban writing known as linguistic landscapes represents “a thoroughly contemporary global trend” (Coupland, 2010: 78). The purpose of this paper is to show that linguistic landscapes are by no means modern phenomena and to draw on our shared interest in multilingual empires to highlight the importance of diachronic inquiry and productive dialog between sociolinguists of modern and ancient societies. We will argue that while signs do operate in aggregate, the common focus on all signs at a single point in time on one street is problematic because the interpretation of signs is diachronic in nature, intrinsically linked to the preceding signs in the same environment and to related signs elsewhere, and the process of reading “back from signs to practices to people” (Blommaert, 2013: 51) is not as unproblematic as it is sometimes made to look.
first_indexed 2025-11-14T19:56:28Z
format Article
id nottingham-44674
institution University of Nottingham Malaysia Campus
institution_category Local University
last_indexed 2025-11-14T19:56:28Z
publishDate 2015
publisher John Benjamins Publishing
recordtype eprints
repository_type Digital Repository
spelling nottingham-446742020-05-04T17:09:58Z https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/44674/ Why diachronicity matters in the study of linguistic landscapes Pavlenko, Aneta Mullen, Alex It is commonly argued that the proliferation of urban writing known as linguistic landscapes represents “a thoroughly contemporary global trend” (Coupland, 2010: 78). The purpose of this paper is to show that linguistic landscapes are by no means modern phenomena and to draw on our shared interest in multilingual empires to highlight the importance of diachronic inquiry and productive dialog between sociolinguists of modern and ancient societies. We will argue that while signs do operate in aggregate, the common focus on all signs at a single point in time on one street is problematic because the interpretation of signs is diachronic in nature, intrinsically linked to the preceding signs in the same environment and to related signs elsewhere, and the process of reading “back from signs to practices to people” (Blommaert, 2013: 51) is not as unproblematic as it is sometimes made to look. John Benjamins Publishing 2015-06-26 Article PeerReviewed Pavlenko, Aneta and Mullen, Alex (2015) Why diachronicity matters in the study of linguistic landscapes. Linguistic Landscape, 1 (1-2). pp. 114-132. ISSN 2214-9961 Greek; Latin; Multilingualism; Roman Empire; Russian; diachronicity; epigraphy; indexicality; linguistic landscapes http://www.jbe-platform.com/content/journals/10.1075/ll.1.1-2.07pav doi:10.1075/ll.1.1-2.07pav doi:10.1075/ll.1.1-2.07pav
spellingShingle Greek; Latin; Multilingualism; Roman Empire; Russian; diachronicity; epigraphy; indexicality; linguistic landscapes
Pavlenko, Aneta
Mullen, Alex
Why diachronicity matters in the study of linguistic landscapes
title Why diachronicity matters in the study of linguistic landscapes
title_full Why diachronicity matters in the study of linguistic landscapes
title_fullStr Why diachronicity matters in the study of linguistic landscapes
title_full_unstemmed Why diachronicity matters in the study of linguistic landscapes
title_short Why diachronicity matters in the study of linguistic landscapes
title_sort why diachronicity matters in the study of linguistic landscapes
topic Greek; Latin; Multilingualism; Roman Empire; Russian; diachronicity; epigraphy; indexicality; linguistic landscapes
url https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/44674/
https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/44674/
https://eprints.nottingham.ac.uk/44674/