Cover not available
Part of
Linguistic Landscape in the Spanish-speaking World
Edited by Patricia Gubitosi and Michelle F. Ramos Pellicia
[Issues in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics 35] 2021
► pp. 239–266

Chapter 9
Reframing the question of correlation between the local linguistic population and urban signage

The case of Spanish in the Los Angeles linguistic landscape

| University of CaliforniaBerkeley
While some scholars have argued that signage does not reflect the linguistic population of a particular community, in this chapter I argue for an empirical reexamination of this claim and posit four necessary methodological measures: a comparison of multiple cities, an exhaustive approach to data collection, an analysis of the dominant language of both the main and informative sections, and the use of descriptive and inferential statistics. I apply the proposed model to a case study of three cities in Los Angeles and a corpus of 4,664 signs. Although the LL will never be a perfect mirror of the languages spoken in a community, a nuanced analysis of sign configurations can provide insight regarding local oral languages to varying extents.
Keywords: linguistic landscape, correlation, linguistic population, Los Angeles
Article outline
  • Introduction
  • Los Angeles
  • Methodological considerations
  • Results
    • Monolingual signs
    • Multilingual signs
    • Main section
      • Monolingual main section
      • Multilingual main section
    • Informative section
      • Monolingual informative section
      • Multilingual informative section
  • Discussion and conclusion
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 29 July 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ihll.35.09car
References (43)
References
Amos, H. W., & Soukup, B. (2020). Quantitative 2.0: Toward variationist linguistic landscape study (VaLLS) and a standard canon of LL variables. In D. Malinowski & S. Tufi (Eds.), Reterritorializing linguistic landscapes: Questioning boundaries and opening spaces (pp. 56–76). Bloomsbury. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Backhaus, P. (2007). Linguistic landscapes: A comparative study of urban multilingualism in Tokyo. Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Barni, M., & Bagna, C. (2010). Linguistic landscape and language vitality. In E. Shohamy, E. Ben-Rafael, & M. Barni (Eds.), Linguistic landscape in the city (pp. 3–18). Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ben-Rafael, E., Shohamy, E., Amara, M. H., & Trumper-Hecht, N. (2006). Linguistic landscape as symbolic construction of the public space: The case of Israel. In D. Gorter (Ed.), Linguistic landscape: A new approach to multilingualism (pp. 7–30). Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ben-Rafael, E., Shohamy, E., & Barni, M. (2010). Introduction. In E. Shohamy, E. Ben-Rafael, & M. Barni (Eds.), Linguistic landscape in the city (pp. xi–xxviii). Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Buda, A., & Jarynowski, A. (2010). Life-time of correlations and its applications. Niezależne Wydawnictwo Polskie.Google Scholar
Carr, J. R. C. (2015a, May 8). Comparing Koreatowns: The linguistic landscape of the K-towns of Los Angeles & Mexico City. Linguistic landscape: Questioning boundaries, opening spaces. Talk presented at the 7th Linguistic Landscapes International Workshop, Berkeley, CA.
(2015b, January 9). The vernaculars of Koreatown: Language contact in the linguistic landscape. In C. Gonzalez (Chair), New Approaches to Vernacular Languages in the US. Talk presented at the 130th Modern Language Association Annual Convention (MLA), Vancouver, Canada.
(2017). Signs of our times: Language contact and attitudes in the linguistic landscape of Southeast Los Angeles (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Retrieved from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. (1938263681)Google Scholar
(2019). Linguistic landscapes. In M. Aronoff (Ed.), Oxford bibliographies in linguistics. Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cenoz, J., & Gorter, D. (2006). Linguistic landscape and minority languages. International Journal of Multilingualism, 3(1), 67–80. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ferguson, C. A. (1959). Diglossia. Word, 15(2), 325–340. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Franco Rodríguez, J. M. (2005). El español en el condado de Los Ángeles desde la señaléctica comercial y urbana. Hispania, 88(4). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2008). El paisaje lingüístico del Condado de Los Ángeles y del Condado Miami-Dade: Propuesta metodológica. Círculo de Lingüística Aplicada a la Comunicación, 35(1), 3–43.Google Scholar
(2009). Interpreting the linguistic traits of linguistic landscapes as ethnolinguistic vitality: Methodological approach. Revista Electrónica de Lingüística Aplicada, 8, 1–15.Google Scholar
(2011). Linguistic landscape and linguistic maintenance: The case of Los Angeles and Miami-Dade Counties. In M. A. Morris (Ed.), Culture and language: Multidisciplinary case studies (pp. 69–119). Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Huebner, T. (2006). Bangkok’s linguistic landscapes: Environmental print, codemixing, and language change. International Journal of Multilingualism, 3(1), 31–51. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2009). A framework for the linguistic analysis of linguistic landscapes. In E. Shohamy & D. Gorter (Eds.), Linguistic landscape: Expanding the scenery (pp. 70–87). Routledge.Google Scholar
Kelleher, W. (2014). Linguistic landscape and the local: A comparative study of texts, visible in the streets of two culturally diverse urban neighborhoods in Marseille and Pretoria (Unpublished MA thesis). University of Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa.Google Scholar
Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. Routledge.Google Scholar
Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images: The grammar of visual design. London; Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Labov, W. (1969). Contraction, deletion, and inherent variability of the English copula. Language, 45(4), 715–762. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Landry, R., & Bourhis, R. Y. (1997). Linguistic landscape and ethnolinguistic vitality: An empirical study. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 16(1), 23–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lanza, E., & Woldemariam, H. (2009). Language ideology and linguistic landscape: Language policy and globalization in a regional capital of Ethiopia. In E. Shohamy & D. Gorter (Eds.), Linguistic landscape: Expanding the scenery (pp. 189–205). Routledge.Google Scholar
Leeman, J., & Modan, G. (2009). Commodified language in Chinatown: A contextualized approach to linguistic landscape. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 13(3), 332–362. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leimgruber, J. R. (2017). Global multilingualism, local bilingualism, official monolingualism: The linguistic landscape of Montreal’s St. Catherine Street. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 23(6), 1–16. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lopez, M. H., & Dockterman, D. (2011). US Hispanic country-of-origin counts for nation, top 30 metropolitan areas. Pew Hispanic Center, Washington, DC. Retrieved on 5 August, 2016 from: [URL]
Lou, J. (2012). Chinatown in Washington, DC: The bilingual landscape. World Englishes, 31(1), 34–47. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Maurais, J., & Monnier, D. (1996). Le statut des langues dans l’affichage à Montréal en 1996. Conseil de la langue française, Québec.Google Scholar
May, J. (2018). Multivariate analysis. Scientific e-resources.Google Scholar
Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. W. (2003). Discourses in place: Language in the material world. Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shohamy, E., & Gorter, D. (2009). Introduction [to LL: Expanding the Scenery]. In E. Shohamy & D. Gorter (Eds.), Linguistic landscape: Expanding the scenery (pp. 1–10). Routledge.Google Scholar
Smalley, W. A. (1994). Linguistic diversity and national unity: Language ecology in Thailand. The University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Soukup, B. (2016). English in the linguistic landscape of Vienna, Austria (ELLViA): Outline, rationale, and methodology of a large-scale empirical project on language choice on public signs from the perspective of sign-readers. Vienna English Working Papers, 25, 1–24.Google Scholar
(2020). Survey area selection in Variationist Linguistic Landscape Study (VaLLS): A report from Vienna, Austria. Linguistic Landscape: An International Journal, 6(1), 52–79. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Toolan, M. (1988). The language of press advertising. In M. Ghadessy (Ed.), Registers of written English: Situational factors and linguistic features (pp. 52–64). Pinter.Google Scholar
Troyer, R. A., Cáceda, C., & Eguíbar, P. G. (2015). Unseen Spanish in small-town America: A minority language in the linguistic landscape. In R. Rubdy & S. Ben Said (Eds.), Conflict, exclusion and dissent in the linguistic landscape (pp. 52–76). Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
U.S. Census Bureau. (2012). Survey of business owners. Retrieved on 15 October, 2016 from: [URL]
. (2015a). Quick facts. Retrieved on 1 July, 2016 from: [URL]
. (2015b). Table DP05: ACS demographic and housing estimates. Retrieved on 5 August, 2016 from: [URL]
. (2015c). Table S1601: Language spoken at home. Retrieved on 5 August, 2016 from: [URL]
Van Mensel, L., Vandenbrouke, M., & Blackwood, R. (2017). Linguistic landscapes. The Oxford handbook of language and society. Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yan, L., & Lee, M. Y. (2014). Tourist perceptions of the multi-linguistic landscape in Macau. Journal of China Tourism Research, 10(4), 432–447. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Cipria, Alicia & Erin O’Rourke
2024. Multimodal Analysis of the Spanish Linguistic Landscape in Alabama. Languages 9:8 ► pp. 264 ff. DOI logo
Mazzaro, Natalia, Natalia Minjarez Oppenheimer & Raquel González de Anda
2024. Spanish Loyalty and English Prestige in the Linguistic Landscape of Ciudad Juárez, Mexico. Languages 9:2 ► pp. 41 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 5 august 2024. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.