Cover not available
Article published In:
Linguistic Landscape
Vol. 8:1 (2022) ► pp.56–84

Developing beginning language learners’ (meta-)cultural understanding via student-led Linguistic Landscape research

| Loyola Marymount University
| Georgia State University
| Emory University

Practitioners of additional-language (AL) education have consistently argued for the pedagogical benefits of engaging students in Linguistic Landscape (LL) research. The potential of how LL study may contribute to students’ development in (meta-)cultural understanding is yet to be explored. Additionally, while a number of present studies target students at the intermediate or advanced level, student-led LL research projects designed for learners with beginning AL proficiency are under-explored. This paper seeks to fill these gaps by offering a study of undergraduate students learning Chinese and those learning Korean in their first year in the United States. Analysis of student work and pre- and post-project survey data demonstrates that engaging beginning learners of AL in LL research enables them to develop enriched and nuanced understanding of cultural authenticity as well as a deeper appreciation of their target culture. In other words, it is beneficial for promoting their meta-cultural as well as culture-specific learning.

Keywords: student-led Linguistic Landscape research, additional-language education, (meta-)cultural understanding, beginning language learners, cultural authenticity
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Background
    • 2.1Research on AL learning in LL
    • 2.2Cultural authenticity
    • 2.3Chinese and Korean demographics in Atlanta
  • 3.Description of the course project
    • 3.1Instructional context
    • 3.2The students
    • 3.3Procedures
      • Language background survey
      • Grouping
      • Field trips
      • Individual rating
      • Within-language rating
      • Across-language rating
      • Presentation
  • 4.Data collection
    • Pre-project survey
    • Post-project survey
    • Presentations
  • 5.Data analysis and discussion
    • 5.1Chinese learners
      • 5.1.1Student understanding about cultural authenticity
      • 5.1.2Student understanding about the Chinese culture
    • 5.2Korean learners
      • 5.2.1Student understanding about cultural authenticity
      • 5.2.2Student understanding about the Korean culture
  • 6.Conclusion
  • References
Published online: 30 July 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ll.20022.li
References
ACTFL (American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages)
(2012) ACTFL proficiency guidelines. Accessed June 20, 2020. [URL]
Aladje, R. & Jou, B.
(2016) The linguistic landscape as a learning space for contextual language learning. Journal of Learning Spaces 5(2), 66–70.Google Scholar
Appiah, K. A.
(2006) The case for contamination. The New York Times Magazine 1 January. [URL]
Atlanta, Georgia Population
n.d.). Atlanta, Georgia population: Census 2010 and 2000 interactive map, demographics, statistics, quick facts. Retrieved on July 23, 2020 from [URL]
2020 (n.d.). Retrieved on July 23, 2020 from [URL]
Ben-Rafael, E., Shohamy, E., Hasan Amara, M. and Trumper-Hecht, N.
(2006) Linguistic landscape as symbolic construction of the public space: The case of Israel. International Journal of Multilingualism 3(1), pp. 7–30. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cenoz, J., & Gorter, D.
(2008) The linguistic landscape as an additional source of input in second language acquisition. IRAL: International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 46(3), 267–287. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chern, C.-I., & Dooley, K.
(2014) Learning English by walking down the street. ELT Journal, 68(2), 113–123. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Chesnut, M., Lee, V., & Schulte, J.
(2013) The language lessons around us: Undergraduate English pedagogy and linguistic landscape research. English Teaching; Hamilton, 12(2), 102–120.Google Scholar
Cook, V. J.
(1992) Evidence for multicompetence. Language Learning, 42(4). 557–591. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dagenais, D., Moore, D., Sabatier, C., Lamarre, S., & Armand, F.
(2009) Linguistic landscape and language awareness. In E. Shohamy & D. Gorter (Eds.), Linguistic landscape: Expanding the scenery (pp. 253–269). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Demographics of Atlanta
n.d.). Retrieved on July 23, 2020 from [URL]
Handler, R.
(1986) Authenticity. Anthropology Today, 2(1). 2–4. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Handler, R. & Linnekin, J.
(1984) Tradition, genuine or spurious. The Journal of American Folklore, 97(385). 273–290. DOI logoGoogle 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
Hulstijn, J.
(2003) Incidental and intentional learning. In Doughty, C. & Long, M. (Eds.) Handbook of second language acquisition, 349–381. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lee, H. & Choi, B.
(2020) A geolocative linguistic landscape project in Korean as Foreign Language education, In Dubreil, S., Malinowski, D., Hiram, M. (Eds.). Language Teaching in the Linguistic Landscape Educational Linguistics 491. Springer. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Li, Y.
forthcoming). Cultural authenticity in the linguistic landscape: Developing additional-language learners’ critical intercultural understanding. In Krompak, E. & Fernandez-Mallat, V. eds. Linguistic landscape and educational spaces Bristol Multilingual Matters DOI logo
Li, Y., Wen, X., & Xie, T.
(2014) CLTA 2012 survey of college-level Chinese language programs in North America. Journal of the Chinese Language Teachers Association, 49 (1), 1–49.Google Scholar
Lindholm, C.
(2008) Culture and authenticity. Malden, MA; Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Google Scholar
Lou, J.
(2016) The linguistic landscape of Chinatown: A sociolinguistic ethnography. Bristol, UK; Buffalo, NY: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Manan, S., & David, M.
(2016) Language ideology and the linguistic landscape: A study in Petaling Jaya, Selangor, Malaysia. Linguistics and the Human Sciences, 11(1), 51–66. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nakayama, T. K. & Martin, J. N.
(2017) Critical intercultural communication, overview. In Y. Y. Kim (Ed.), The international encyclopedia of intercultural communication (pp. 1–13). Hoboken: Wiley-Blackwell. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
National Standards for Foreign Language Education Project
(1999) Standards for foreign language learning in the 21st century. Lawrence, KS: Allen Press, IncGoogle Scholar
Rowland, L.
(2013) The pedagogical benefits of a linguistic landscape project in Japan. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 16(4), 494–505. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sayer, P.
(2010) Using the linguistic landscape as a pedagogical resource. ELT Journal, 64(2), 143–154. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shohamy, E. & Waksman, S.
(2009) Linguistic land-scape as an ecological arena: Modalities, meanings, negotiations, education. In Shohamy, E. & Gorter, D. (Eds.), Linguistic landscape: Expanding the scenery. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Taylor, J.
(2001) Authenticity and sincerity in tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 28(1). 7–26. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Taylor-Leech, K.
(2012) Language Choice as an index of identity: Linguistic landscape in Dili, Timor-Leste, International Journal of Multilingualism, 9(1), 15–34. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Theodossopoulos, D.
(2013) Laying claim to authenticity: Five anthropological dilemmas. Anthropological Quarterly 86 (2), 337–360. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Van de Port, M.
(2004) Registers of incontestability: The question for authenticity in academia and beyond. Ethnofoor, XVII(1/2). 7–22.Google Scholar
US Census Bureau
(2010–2018) American community survey. Race: Table B02001.Google Scholar
(2012) American community survey 5-year estimates, 2012. Language most commonly spoken at home, other than English or Spanish. AAPI data.Google Scholar
Wilson, Jill H. & Singer, A.
(2011) Immigrants in 2010 metropolitan America: A decade of change. Brookings Institution. Retrieved on July, 6. 2020 from [URL]