Cover not available
Article published In:
Linguistic Landscape
Vol. 9:2 (2023) ► pp.181–210

Language, translocality and urban change

Online and offline signage in four Gothenburg neighbourhoods

ORCID logo | University of Gothenburg
| University of Southern Denmark
| University of Gothenburg
| University of Gothenburg
| Institute for Language and Folklore

This article addresses the role of translocal interconnectedness between offline and online spaces by examining the varied presence of language displays in such spaces. Quantitative findings on language presence in the offline public spaces of four Gothenburg neighbourhoods are contrasted with the online presence found in three Swedish search portals, and the differences are interpreted in light of the broader socioeconomic processes of gentrification and segregation. The comparison between online and offline presence allows us to give a more holistic picture of the neighbourhoods; it reveals, among other things, the presence of semi-public spaces, with a multilingual presence of commercial enterprises and civil society organizations, and points out that some super-diverse neighbourhoods have more online than offline presence on search portals. Thus, the often-stereotyped mental picture of these neighbourhoods as being passive, static, ‘segregated’ and ‘problematic’ is challenged.

Keywords: online, offline, space, translocal, search portals, gentrification, segregation, semi-public spaces, neighbourhoods, Gothenburg
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Theorizing online-offline relationships in relation to gentrification in LL studies
  • 3.Four unequal Gothenburg neighbourhoods
  • 4.Method and data
  • 5.Findings and discussion
    • 5.1Online and offline languages in the LL
    • 5.2Spatial dynamics in Gamlestaden and Gårdsten
    • 5.3Ongoing processes of socioeconomic change in the neighbourhoods
    • 5.4New forms of translocal connections
  • 6.Conclusions
  • Notes
  • References
Available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial (CC BY-NC) 4.0 license.

For any use beyond this license, please contact the publisher at rights@benjamins.nl.

Published online: 22 November 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ll.22003.ros
References
Baym, N. K., & Boyd, D.
(2012) Socially Mediated Publicness: An Introduction. Journal of Broadcasting & Electronic Media, 56 (3), 320–329. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Benkler, Y.
(2006) The wealth of networks: How social production transforms markets and freedom New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Berezkina, M.
(2018) Language is a costly and complicating factor’: a diachronic study of language policy in the virtual public sector. Language Policy, 17 1, 55–75. 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
Blommaert, J.
(2013) Semiotic and Spatial Scope. Towards a Materialist Semiotics. In Ethnography, Superdiversity and Lingusitic Landscapes: Cronicles of complexity. Bristol: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blommaert, J., & Maly, I.
(2019) Invisible Lines in the Online-Offline Linguistic Landscape. Tilburg Papers in Culture Studies. [URL]
Bolander, B., & Locher, M.
(2020) Beyond the online offline distinction: Entry points to digital discourse. Discourse, context & media, 35 1. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bourdieu, P.
(1984) Distinction: A Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Diaz Cardona, R.
(2016) Ambient text and the becoming space of writing. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 34 (4), 637–654. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Florida, R.
(2002) The Rise of the Creative Class: And How it’s transforming work, leisure, community and everyday life. New York: Perseus Book Group.Google Scholar
Gorter, D.
(2019) Methods and Techniques for Linguistic Landscape Research: About Definitions, Core Issues and Technological Innovations. In M. Pütz & N. Mundt (Eds.), Expanding the Linguistic Landscape: Multilingualism, Language Policy and the Use of Space as a Semiotic Resource (pp. 38–57). Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Gothenburg municipality
(2020) Retrieved from [URL]
Greiner, C., & Sakdapolrak, P.
(2013) Translocality: Concepts, Applications and Emerging Research Perspectives. Geography Compass, 7 (5), 373–384. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hammami, F.
(2021) The Scopic Feast of Heritage and the Invention of Unthreatening Diversity in Neoliberal Cities. Heritage, 4 (3), 1660–1680. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hult, F. M.
(2009) Language ecology and linguistic landscape analysis. In E. Shohamy & D. Gorter (Eds.), Linguistic landscape: Expanding the scenery (pp. 88–103). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Hutton, C. M.
(2011) Vernacular spaces and >non-places<: dynamics of the Hong Kong linguistic landscape. In M. Messling, D. Läpple, & J. Trabant (Eds.), Stadt und Urbanität (pp. 162–184). Berlin: Kulturtverlag Kadmos.Google Scholar
Jurgenson, N.
(2012) When Atoms Meet Bits: Social Media, the Mobile Web and Augmented Revolution. Future Internet, 4 1, 83–91. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Järlehed, J., Löfdahl, M., Milani, T., Nielsen, H. L., & Rosendal, T.
(2021) Entrepreneurial Naming and Scaling of Urban Places: The case of Nya Hovås. In K. Leibring, L. Mattfolk, K. Neumüller, S. Nyström, & E. Pihl (Eds.), The Economy in Names. Values, Branding and Globalization. Proceedings of Names in the Economy 6, International Conference, Uppsala 3–5 June 2019 (pp. 71–86). Uppsala, Sweden: Institutet för språk och folkminnen.Google Scholar
Järlehed, J., Nielsen, H. L., & Rosendal, T.
(2018) Language, food and gentrification: signs of socioeconomic mobility in two Gothenburg neighbourhoods. Multilingual Margins, 5 (1). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kallen, J. L., Ní Dhonnacha, E., & Wade, K.
(2020) Online linguistic landscapes: Discourse, globalization, and enregisterment. In D. Malinowski & S. Tufi (Eds.), Reterritorializing Linguistic Landscapes: Questioning Boundaries and Opening Spaces (pp. 96–116). London: Bloomsbury Academic. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lane, J.
(2018) The Digital Street. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lindström, J.
(2019) Segregation. Stockholm: Liber.Google Scholar
Lou, J. J., & Jaworski, A.
(2016) Itineraries of protest signage. Journal of Language and Politics, 15 1, 609–642. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Lyons, K.
(2019) Let’s get phygital. Seeing through the ‘filtered’ landscapes of Instagram. Linguistic Landscape, 5 (2), 179–197. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moriarty, M.
(2014) Languages in motion: Multilingualism and mobility in the linguistic landscape. International Journal of Bilingualism, 18 (5), 457–463. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Nielsen, H. L., Löfdahl, M., Rosendal, T., Järlehed, J., & Milani, T.
(2022) Moskénamn i Göteborg: Självpositionering i det urbana rummet. Nordic Journal of Socio-Onomastics, 2 1, 89–119.Google Scholar
Papen, U.
(2012) Commercial discourses, gentrification and citizens’ protest: The linguistic landscape of Prenzlauer Berg, Berlin. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 16 (1), 56–80. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peth, S. A. & Sakdapolrak, P.
(2020) Resilient family meshwork. Thai-German migrations, translocal ties, and their impact on social resilience. Geoforum, 114 1, 19–29, DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sahlin, I.
(2010) I trygghetens namn. Gothenburg: Daidalos.Google Scholar
Salonen, T.
(2021) Samhällsbygget Gårdsten : allmännyttans framtid? Stockholm: Premiss.Google Scholar
Scollon, R., & Wong Scollon, S.
(2003) Discourse in place: Language in the material world. London: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Shohamy, E., & Waksman, S.
(2009) Linguistic landscape as an ecological arena: Modalities, meanings, negotiation, education. In E. Shohamy & D. Gorter (Eds.), Linguistic Landscape: Expanding the Scenery (pp. 313–331). New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Stjernholm, K.
(2015) Two Faces of Oslo: A comparative study of sense of place. In M. Laitinen & A. Zabrodskaja (Eds.), Dimensions of Sociolinguistic Landscapes in Europe. Materials and Methodological Solutions (pp. 77–104). Frankfurt am Main, Berlin, Bern, Bruxelles, New York, Oxford, Wien: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Swedish Migration Agency
(2000) Applications for asylum received 1984–1999. Retrieved from [URL]
(2021) Applications for asylum received 2000–2020. [URL]
Thörn, C., & Holgersson, H.
(2014) Gentrifiering – kultur, politik och ekonomi. In C. Thörn & H. Holgersson (Eds.), Gentrifiering (pp. 11–34). Lund: Studentlitteratur.Google Scholar
Tonkiss, F.
(2013) Cities by design. The social life of urban form. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Trinch, S., & Snajdr, E.
(2017) What the signs say: Gentrification and the disappearance of capitalism without distinction in Brooklyn. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 21 (1), 64–89. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
(2020) What the Signs Say: Language, Gentrification, and Place-Making in Brooklyn. Nashville, TS: Vanderbilt University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vertovec, S.
(2007) Super-diversity and its implication. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 30 (6), 1024–1054. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Vuorsola, L.
(2020) Minority positioning in physical and online spaces. Linguistic Landscape, 6 (3), 297–325. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Wei, L., & Hua, Z.
(2021) Making sense of handwritten signs in public spaces. Social Semiotics, 31 (1), 61–87. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Westerström, A.
(2013) Stadens förändrade funktion – En ideologikritisk studie av Göteborgs översiktliga planering mellan 1959 och 2011. Department of Cultural Sciences, University of Gothenburg.Google Scholar
Yao, X.
(2021) Metrolingualism in online linguistic landscapes. International Journal of Multilingualism. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Yousuf, E.
(2019 19 November). Slakthuset ska bli nytt hipstermecka i Gamlestan. Göteborgsposten. Retrieved from [URL]