Cover not available
Article published In:
Multilingual Landscapes and the Construction of Community
Edited by Leonie Gaiser and Yaron Matras
[Linguistic Landscape 6:2] 2020
► pp. 128–154

Semiotic rural landscapes and the performance of community in villages

A case study from low German-speaking northern Germany

ORCID logo | Aston University
This article analyses the semiotic landscapes of 19 villages in Low German-speaking northern Germany, thus contributing to the growing body of research in the field of semiotic landscapes in rural settings. Drawing from Blokland’s (2017) typology of community, it analyses the semiotic landscapes of the villages as material manifestations of communicative practices and performances which create fluid, flexible configurations of community. The analysis reveals that signage in this particular rural context reflects social processes by which individuals and communities have constructed new images of themselves by using elements of local tradition, culture, language, and history. In doing so, they have also carved out a specific approach to tourism for themselves, which is opposed to mass and package tourism.
Keywords: semiotic landscapes, rural communities, commodification, Low German, tourism
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.The area under observation
  • 3.Data and methodological approach
  • 4.Analysis
    • 4.1Economic Transactions
    • 4.2Attachments
    • 4.3Bonds: Celebrations and conflict
  • 5.Conclusion
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 14 July 2020
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ll.19027.ree
References (50)
References
Adler, A., Ehlers, E., Goltz, R., Kleene, A., & Plewnia, A. (2016). Status und Gebrauch des Niederdeutschen. Erste Ergebnisse einer repräsentativen Erhebung. Mannheim: Institut für deutsche Sprache and Institut für niederdeutsche Sprache.Google Scholar
Auer, P. (2009). Visible dialect. In: H. Hovmark, I. Stampe Sletten, Iben, & A. Gudiksen (Eds.), I mund og bog. 25 artikler om sprog tilegnet Inge Lise Pedersen pa ̊ 70-a ̊rsdagen d.5.juni 2009 (pp. 31–45). Copenhagen: Nordisk Forskningsinstitut.Google Scholar
Backhaus, P. (2007). Linguistic Landscape: A Comparative Study of Urban Multilingualism in Tokyo. Clevedon.Google Scholar
Banda, F. & Jimaima, H. (2015). The semiotic ecology of linguistic landscapes in rural Zambia. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 19 (5), 643–670. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bell, D. (2006). Variations on the rural idyll. In P. Cloke, T. Marsden & P. Mooney (Eds.), Handbook of Rural Studies (pp. 149–160). London: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blokland, T. (2017). Community as urban practice. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Blommaert, J. (2005). Discourse. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Britain, D. (2017). Which way to look? Perspectives on ‘urban’ and ‘rural’ in dialectology. In E. Moore & C. Montgomery (Eds.) Language and a Sense of Place: Studies in Language and Region (pp. 171–187). Cambridge: CUP. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cloke, P. (2006). Conceptualizing rurality. In P. Cloke, T. Marsden & P. Mooney (Eds.), Handbook of Rural Studies (pp. 18–28). London: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cohen, A. (1985). The symbolic construction of community. London: Tavistock. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coulmas, F. (2009). Linguistic landscaping and the seed of the public sphere. In D. Gorter & E. Shohamy (Eds.), Linguistic Landscape: Expanding the Scenery (pp. 13–24). New York/London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Daveluy, M. & Ferguson, J. (2009). Scripted Urbanity in the Canadian North. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology, 19 (1), 78–100. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Day, G. & Murdoch, J. (1993). Locality and community: coming to terms with place. Sociological Review 411, 82–111. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dunlevy, D. A. (2012). Linguistic Policy and Linguistic Choice: A Study of the Galician Linguistic Landscape. In C. Hélot, M. Barni, R. Janssens, & C. Bagna (Eds.), Linguistic Landscapes, Multilingualism and Social Change (pp. 53–68). Frankfurt am Main: Lang.Google Scholar
DuPuis, M. E. (2006). Landscapes of desire? In P. Cloke, T. Marsden & P. Mooney (Eds.), Handbook of Rural Studies (pp. 124–132). London: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Ehlers, K.-H. (2018). Geschichte der mecklenburgischen Regionalsprache seit dem Zweiten Weltkrieg. Varietätenkontakt zwischen Alteingesessenen und immigrierten Vertriebenen. Berlin: Lang. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Halfacree, K. (2006). Rural space: constructing a threefold architecture. In P. Cloke, T. Marsden & P. Mooney (Eds.), Handbook of Rural Studies (pp. 44–62). London: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Harding, A. & Blokland, T. (2014). Urban theory: A critical introduction to power, cities and urbanism in the 21st century. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Heller, M., Jaworski, A., & Thurlow, C. (2014). Introduction: Sociolinguistics and tourism – mobilities, markets, multilingualism. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 18(4), 425–458. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Heller, M., Pujolar, J., & Duchêne, A. (2014). Linguistic commodification in tourism. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 18(4), 539–566. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoggart, K. (1990). Let’s do away with rural. Journal of Rural Studies, 61, 245–257. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hoogstraat, J. (1997). Von Ostfriesland nach Amerika. Second edition. Norden: Soltau Kurier.Google Scholar
Järlehed, J. & Jaworski, A. (2015). Typographic landscaping: creativity, ideology, movement. Social Semiotics, 25 (2), 117–125. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jaworski, A. & Thurlow, C. (2010). Introducing Semiotic Landscapes. In A. Jaworski & C. Thurlow (Eds.), Semiotic Landscapes: Language, Image, Space (pp. 1–40). London: Bloomsbury.Google Scholar
Juffermans, K. & Coppoolse, J. (2012). How literate, low-literate and non-literate readers read the linguistic landscape in a Gambian village. In C. Hélot, M. Barni, R. Janssens, & C. Bagna (Eds.), Linguistic Landscapes, Multilingualism and Social Change (pp. 233–248). Frankfurt am Main: Lang.Google Scholar
Kamwangamalu, N. M. & Tovares, A. V. (2019). Urban and rural language contact. In J. Darquennes, J. S. Salmons & W. Vandenbussche (Eds.), Language Contact. An International Handbook. Volume 11 (pp. 310–332). New York: de Gruyter Mouton.Google Scholar
Kelly-Holmes, H. & Pietikäinen, S. (2014). Commodifying Sami culture in an indigenous tourism site. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 18 (4), 518–538. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Laitinen, M. (2014). 630 kilometres by bicycle: observations of English in urban and rural Finland. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 2281, 55–77.Google Scholar
Liepins, R. (2000a). New energies for an old idea: reworking approaches to ‘community’ in contemporary rural studies. Journal of Rural Studies, 161, 23–36. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2000b). Exploring rurality through ‘community’: discourses, practices and spaces shaping Australian and New Zealand rural ‘communities’. In: Journal of Rural Studies, 161, 325–342. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Möller, F. (2008). Plattdeutsch im 21. Jahrhundert. Bestandsaufnahmen und Perspektiven. Leer: Schuster.Google Scholar
Mühlan-Meyer, T. & Lützenkirchen, F. (2017). Visuelle Mehrsprachigkeit in der Metropole Ruhr – eine Projektpräsentation: Aufbau und Funktionen der Bilddatenbank ‘Metropolenzeichen’. Zeitschrift für Angewandte Linguistik, 661, 79–98. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pietikäinen, S., Lane, P., Salo, H., & Laihiala-Kankainen, S. (2011). Frozen actions in the Arctic linguistic landscape: a nexus analysis of language processes in visual space International Journal of Multilingualism , 8(4), 277–298. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pietikäinen, S., Kelly-Holmes, H., Jaffe, A. & Coupland, N. (2016). Sociolinguistics from the periphery. Small languages in new circumstances. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Reershemius, G. (2002). Bilingualismus oder Sprachverlust? Zur Lage und zur aktiven Verwendung des Niederdeutschen in Ostfriesland am Beispiel einer Dorfgemeinschaft. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik 69 (2), 163–181.Google Scholar
(2009). Post-Vernacular Language Use in a Low German Linguistic Community. Journal of Germanic Linguistics 211, 131–147. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2011). Reconstructing the past? Low German and the creating of regional identity in public language display. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 32(1), 33–54. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2017). Autochthonous heritage languages and social media: writing and bilingual practices in Low German on Facebook. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 38 (1), 35–49. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2018). Lamppost Networks: stickers as a genre in urban semiotic landscapes. Social Semiotics. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(in press). Transgressive Diskurse im ländlichen Raum. Eine Untersuchung der ‘semiotic landscapes’ in einer nordwestdeutschen Landgemeinde. In H. F. Martens & E. Ziegler (Eds.), Linguistic Landscapes im deutschsprachigen Raum. Berlin: Lang.
Scollon, R. & Scollon, S. W. (2003). Discourses in Place: Language in the Material World. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2001). Discourse and Intercultural Communication. In D. Schiffrin, D. Tannen & H. Hamilton (Eds), The Handbook of Discourse Analysis (pp. 538–547). Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Short, B. (2006). Idyllic Ruralities. In P. Cloke, T. Marsden & P. Mooney (Eds.), Handbook of Rural Studies (pp. 133–148). London: Sage. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Spitzmüller, J. (2015). Graphic Variation and Graphic Ideologies: A Metapragmatic Approach. Social Semiotics, 25 (2), 126–141. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Stöckl, H. (2005). Typography: body and dress of a text – a signing mode between language and image. Visual Communication, 4(2), 205–214. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vandekerckhove, R. (2010). Urban and rural language. In P. Auer & J. E. Schmidt (Eds), Language and Space. An International Handbook of Linguistic Variation. Theories and Methods (pp. 315–332). Berlin/New York: Mouton de Gruyter.Google Scholar
van Leeuwen, T. (2005). Typographic meaning. Visual Communication, 4 (2), 138–143. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Woods, M. (2011). Rural. London/New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Ziegler, E. (2013). Visuelle Mehrsprachigkeit in der Metropole Ruhr. Zeitschrift für Germanistische Linguistik, 101, 299–301.Google Scholar
Ziegler, E., Eickmans, H., Schmitz, U., Uslucan, H.-H., Gehne, D. H., Kurtenbach, S., Mühlan-Meyer, T., & Wachendorff, I. (2018). Metropolenzeichen. Atlas zur visuellen Mehrsprachigkeit der Metropole Ruhr. Duisburg: Universitätsverlag.Google Scholar
Cited by (7)

Cited by seven other publications

Bhujel, Birendra & Sweta Sinha
2024. Linguistic landscape as a tool of identity negotiation: The case of the Nepali ethnic communities in West Bengal. Ethnicities DOI logo
Buschfeld, Sarah, Claus Weihs & Patricia Ronan
2024. Modeling Linguistic Landscapes. Linguistic Landscape. An international journal 10:3 ► pp. 302 ff. DOI logo
Liu, Nancy & Roswita Dressler
2024. The contribution of exterior schoolscapes to neighbourhoods: a linguistic landscape analysis during COVID-19 school closures. International Journal of Multilingualism ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Reershemius, Gertrud K.
2024. Leaving one’s mark: self-authorized commemorative practices in a rural semiotic landscape. Multimodal Communication 13:2 ► pp. 233 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
Nguyen, Anh Khoi
2022. Degrees of authenticity. Linguistic Landscape. An international journal 8:1 ► pp. 85 ff. DOI logo
Sorescu-Marinković, Annemarie & Aleksandra Salamurović
2022. The rural linguistic landscape of Banat. Eastern European Countryside 28:1 ► pp. 51 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.