Cover not available
Article published In:
Linguistic Landscape
Vol. 6:1 (2020) ► pp.52–79

Survey area selection in Variationist Linguistic Landscape Study (VaLLS)

A report from Vienna, Austria

| University of Vienna
This article addresses the unresolved issue of systematic survey area selection for large-scale quantitative Linguistic Landscape (LL) studies. It presents a strategy of ‘hypothesis-driven stratified sampling’ whereby survey areas are picked out in a nested, multi-step process on the basis of the configuration of local LL audiences (regarding age, multilingualism, and tourism) and ambient activity types (commercial vs. residential). The rationale for this strategy is drawn from variationist sociolinguistics; and the undertaking is accordingly cast as ‘Variationist Linguistic Landscape Study (VaLLS)’. The details of the design are showcased and implications discussed in the context of the large-scale project ‘ELLViA – English in the Linguistic Landscape of Vienna, Austria’. More generally, it is shown how the application of state-of-the-art variationist principles and methodology to quantitative LL research significantly enhances the latter’s scientific rigor, which has been a major point of criticism.
Keywords: sociolinguistics, variationist sociolinguistics, linguistic landscapes, quantitative linguistic landscape study, data sampling, survey area, methodology, Austria, Vienna, English, German
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Integrating variationist sociolinguistics and quantitative LL study
  • 3.Hypothesis-driven stratified sampling in ELLViA
    • 3.1Hypothesis-driven stratification and selection of sub-areas and streets for surveying
    • 3.2Picking out stretches on the streets to be surveyed
  • 4.The benefits of the sampling scheme: First results from the ELLViA VaLLS survey
  • 5.Conclusion and outlook
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at [email protected].

Published online: 16 March 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ll.00017.sou
References (71)
References
Amos, H. W. (2016). Chinatown by numbers: Defining an ethnic space by empirical linguistic landscape. Linguistic Landscape, 2(2), 127–156. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Amos, H. W., & Soukup, B. (2020). Quantitative 2.0: Towards 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. 56–66). London: Bloomsbury.
Backhaus, P. (2007). Linguistic landscapes. A comparative study of urban multilingualism in Tokyo. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Bakhtin, M. (1986 [1952–53]). The problem of speech genres. In C. Emerson & M. Holquist (Eds.), V. W. McGee (Transl.), Speech genres and other late essays (pp. 60–102). Austin: The University of Texas Press.Google 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. International Journal of Multilingualism, 3(1), 7–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ben-Rafael, E., Shohamy, E., & Barni, M. (2010). Introduction: An approach to an ‘ordered disorder’. In E. Shohamy, E. Ben-Rafael, & M. Barni (Eds.), Linguistic landscape in the city (pp. xi–xxviii). Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Berns, M., de Bot, K., & Hasebrink, U. (Eds.). (2007). In the presence of English. Media and European youth. New York: Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blackwood, R. J. (2011). The linguistic landscape of Brittany and Corsica. A comparative study of the presence of France’s regional languages in the public space. Journal of French Language Studies, 21(2), 111–130. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blackwood, R. (2015). LL explorations and methodological challenges. Analysing France’s regional languages. Linguistic Landscape, 1(1/2), 38–53. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blackwood, R. J., & Tufi, S. (2015). The linguistic landscape of the Mediterranean. French and Italian coastal cities. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brizic, K. (2013). Grenzenlose Biografien und ihr begrenzter (Bildungs-)Erfolg. Das Thema der sozialen Ungleichheit aus der Perspektive eines laufenden soziolinguistischen Forschungsprojekts. In A. Deppermann (Ed.), Das Deutsch der Migranten (pp. 223–242). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Brizic, K., & Hufnagl, C. L. (2011). “Multilingual Cities” Wien. Bericht zur Sprachenerhebung in den 3. und 4. Volksschulklassen. Vorläufiger Bericht für die teilnehmenden Schulen. Retrieved on June 21, 2019, from [URL]
Bruyèl-Olmeido, A., & Juan-Garau, M. (2009). English as a lingua franca in the linguistic landscape of the multilingual resort of S’Arenal in Mallorca. International Journal of Multilingualism, 6(4), 386–411. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cenoz, J., & Gorter, D. (2006). Linguistic landscape and minority languages. International Journal of Multilingualism, 3(1), 67–80. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chambers, J. K. (2008). Sociolinguistic theory. 2nd edition. Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Dörnyei, Z. (2007). Research methods in applied linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Eckert, P. (2012). Three waves of variation study. The emergence of meaning in the study of sociolinguistic variation. Annual Review of Anthropology, 411, 87–100. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Edelman, L. (2014). The presence of minority languages in linguistic landscapes in Amsterdam and Friesland (the Netherlands). International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 2281, 7–28.Google Scholar
Engel & Völkers Commercial GmbH (2013). Frequenzzählung 2013 / Frequency survey 2013. Retail Services. Retrieved on March 19, 2015, from [URL]
Erickson, F. (1986). Listening and speaking. In D. Tannen & J. E. Alatis (Eds.), Languages and linguistics. The interdependence of theory, data, and application (pp. 294–319). Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.Google Scholar
Fasold, R. (1990). The sociolinguistics of language. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Doubleday.Google Scholar
Gorter, D. (Ed.). (2006). Linguistic landscape. A new approach to multilingualism. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013). Linguistic landscapes in a multilingual world. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 331, 190–212. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Grau, M. (2009). Worlds apart? English in German youth cultures and in educational settings. World Englishes, 28(2), 160–174. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Gumperz, J. J. (1982). Discourse strategies. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2001). Interactional sociolinguistics. A personal perspective. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen, & H. E. Hamilton (Eds.), The handbook of discourse analysis (pp. 215–228). Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Guy, G. R. (1993). The quantitative analysis of linguistic variation. In D. R. Preston (Ed.), American dialect research (pp. 223–249). Philadelphia: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hilgendorf, S. K. (2007). English in Germany. Contact, spread and attitudes. World Englishes, 26(2), 131–148. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hofmann, D. (2002). Do you understand Denglish? Eine Umfrage zum Anglizismenverständnis. In R. Hoberg (Ed.), Deutsch – Englisch – Europäisch. Impulse für eine neue Sprachpolitik (pp. 236–245). Mannheim: Dudenverlag.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
Kachru, B. B. (1992). Teaching World Englishes. In B. B. Kachru (Ed.), The other tongue. English across cultures, 2nd edition (pp. 355–366). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.Google Scholar
Kelly-Holmes, H. (2000). Bier, parfum, kaas: Language fetish in European advertising. European Journal of Cultural Studies 3(1), 67–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2005). Advertising as multilingual communication. New York: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kiesling, S. (2011). Language variation and change. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.Google Scholar
Labov, W. (1966). The social stratification of English in New York City. Washington, DC: Center for Applied Linguistics.Google Scholar
(1969). Contraction, deletion, and inherent variability of the English copula. Language, 45(3), 715–762. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Leppänen, S., Pitkänen-Huhta, A., Nikula, T., Kytölä, S., Törmäkangas, T., Nissinen, K., Kääntä, L., Räisänen, T., Laitinen, M., Koskela, H., Lähdesmäki, S., & Jousmäki, H. (2011). National survey on the English language in Finland. Uses, meanings and attitudes. Helsinki: VARIENG. Available from [URL]
Levy, P. S., & Lemeshow, S. (2008). Sampling of populations. Methods and applications, 4th edition. Hoboken: Wiley. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Linell, P. (2017). Dialogue, dialogicality and interactivity. Language and Dialogue, 7(3), 301–335. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Magistrat Wien (2014). Statistisches Jahrbuch der Stadt Wien – 2014. Retrieved on February 19, 2015, from [URL]
Milroy, L. & Gordon, M. (2003). Sociolinguistics. Method and interpretation. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Piller, I. (2003). Advertising as a site of language contact. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 231, 170–183. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Piritidis, K. (2014). The linguistic landscape of Vienna’s ‘Westbahnstraße’. A comparison of methods. Unpublished Mag. phil. thesis, University of Vienna.Google Scholar
Pitkänen-Huhta, A., & Nikula, T. (2013). Teenagers making sense of their foreign language practices. Individual accounts indexing social discourses. In P. Benson & L. Cooker (Eds.), The applied linguistic individual. Sociocultural approaches to autonomy, agency and identity (pp. 101–120). Sheffield: Equinox.Google Scholar
Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. Part 1. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1–6. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reichl, S. (2009). Cognitive principles, critical practice. Reading literature at university. Göttingen: V&R unipress.Google Scholar
Rode, P., Schier, H., Giffinger, R., & Reinprecht, C. (2010). Soziale Veränderungsprozesse im Stadtraum. Wiener Sozialraumanalyse mit Vertiefung in acht ausgewählten Stadtvierteln. Vienna: Stadtentwicklung Wien, Magistratsabteilung 18.Google Scholar
Sankoff, D. (2005). Problems of representativeness/Probleme der Repräsentativität. In U. Ammon, N. Dittmar, K. J. Mattheier, & P. Trudgill (Eds.), Sociolinguistics/Soziolinguistik. Vol. 21, 2nd edition (pp. 998–1002). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter.Google Scholar
Schiffrin, D. (1994). Approaches to discourse. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Schilling, N. (2013a). Sociolinguistic fieldwork. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2013b). Investigating stylistic variation. In J. K. Chambers & N. Schilling (Eds.), The handbook of language variation and change, 2nd edition (pp. 325–349). Oxford: Wiley. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schuster, C. (2018). Analyzing stickers in the linguistic landscape of Vienna, Austria. Unpublished MA thesis, University of Vienna.Google Scholar
Seidlhofer, B. (2011). Understanding English as a Lingua Franca. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Siricharoen, A. (2016). Multilingualism in the linguistics landscape of the Faculty of Arts, Chulalongkorn University, Thailand. Manusya: Journal of Humanities, Special Issue 221, 12–25. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Soukup, B. (2009). Dialect use as interaction strategy. A sociolinguistic study of contextualization, speech perception, and language attitudes in Austria. Vienna: Braumüller.Google Scholar
(2013). Austrian dialect as a metonymic device: A cognitive sociolinguistic investigation of Speaker Design and its perceptual implications. Journal of Pragmatics, 521, 72–82. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2015). Mixing methods in the study of language attitudes: Theory and application. In A. Prikhodkine & D. R. Preston (Eds.), Responses to language varieties. Variability, processes and outcomes (pp. 55–84). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(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. Views, 251, 1–24.Google Scholar
(2018). Contextualizing the third wave in variationist sociolinguistics: On Penelope Eckert’s (2018) Meaning and Linguistic Variation . Views, 271, 51–66.Google Scholar
Spolsky, B., & Cooper, R. L. (1991). The languages of Jerusalem. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Statistik Austria (2013). Census 2011 Wien. Ergebnisse zur Bevölkerung aus der Registerzählung. Vienna: Statistik Austria.Google Scholar
(2019). Durchschnittsalter der Pensionsneuzuerkennungen in der gesetzlichen Pensionsversicherung 1970 bis 2018. Retrieved on October 20, 2019, from [URL]
Tagliamonte, S. A. (2006). Analysing sociolinguistic variation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2012). Variationist sociolinguistics. Change, observation, interpretation. Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
Tannen, D. (1989). Talking voices. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
(2004). Interactional sociolinguistics/Interaktionale Soziolinguistik. In U. Ammon, N. Dittmar, K. J. Mattheier, & P. Trudgill (Eds), Sociolinguistics/Soziolinguistik, Vol.11, 2nd edition (pp. 76–88). Berlin: Walter de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Thompson, S. K. (2012). Sampling. 3rd edition. Hoboken: Wiley. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Walker, J. (2010). Variation in linguistic systems. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Weinreich, U., Labov, W., & Herzog, M. I. (1968). Empirical foundations for a theory of language change. In W. P. Lehmann & Y. Malkiel (Eds.), Directions for historical linguistics (pp. 95–188). Austin: University of Texas Press.Google Scholar
Wirtschaftsagentur Wien (2017). Richtlinie des Förderprogramms Nahversorgung 2017. Retrieved on June 21, 2019, from [URL]
Cited by (10)

Cited by ten other publications

Buschfeld, Sarah, Claus Weihs & Patricia Ronan
2024. Modeling Linguistic Landscapes. Linguistic Landscape. An international journal 10:3 ► pp. 302 ff. DOI logo
Mazzaro, Natalia & Raquel González de Anda
2024. Socio-Economic Status and Language Prestige in the Linguistic Landscape of the U.S.-Mexico Border. Journal of Borderlands Studies ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Pienimäki, Hanna‐Mari, Tuomas Väisänen & Tuomo Hiippala
2024. Making sense of linguistic diversity in Helsinki, Finland: The timespace of affects in the linguistic landscape. Journal of Sociolinguistics 28:2 ► pp. 3 ff. DOI logo
Guarin, Daniel & Larissa Oliveira Cardoso
2023. A Virtual Linguistic Landscape Analysis of Higher Education Institutions and Their Use of Pronouns of Address in the Hispanic and Lusophone World. In Transformation of Higher Education Through Institutional Online Spaces [Advances in Higher Education and Professional Development, ], ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Niehaus, Konstantin
2023. The temporality of commodified landscapes at events & local constructions of identity in Salzburg. Linguistic Landscape. An international journal 9:4 ► pp. 357 ff. DOI logo
Toró, Tibor
2023. Selective bilingualism: official language use and linguistic landscape in Hungarian-Romanian mixed schools in Romania. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Buchstaller, Isabelle, Seraphim Alvanides & Frauke Griese
2022. Changes in the commemorative streetscape of Leipzig over the past 100 years. Journal of Linguistic Geography 10:2 ► pp. 112 ff. DOI logo
Lu, Xinyue, Bethany Martens & Peter Sayer
2022. Examining social class and multilingualism through the Linguistic Landscape. Linguistic Landscape. An international journal 8:1 ► pp. 32 ff. DOI logo
Carr, Jhonni Rochelle Charisse
2021. Chapter 9. Reframing the question of correlation between the local linguistic population and urban signage. In Linguistic Landscape in the Spanish-speaking World [Issues in Hispanic and Lusophone Linguistics, 35], ► pp. 239 ff. DOI logo
Nekvapil, Jiří
2020. On the continuity and discontinuity of sociolinguistic research: language, languages and interaction processes in Hradec Králové. Journal of Linguistics/Jazykovedný casopis 71:2 ► pp. 247 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 24 october 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.