Cover not available
Article published In:
Linguistic Landscape
Vol. 9:4 (2023) ► pp.357–386

The temporality of commodified landscapes at events & local constructions of identity in Salzburg

ORCID logo | University of Salzburg
This paper presents a study of how temporary, fixed-term local semiotic landscapes in Salzburg, Austria, contribute to a construction of local identity. For this purpose, two main events in the city’s calendar were investigated, the Ruperti fair in the autumn and the Christmas market in the winter. I explore how and the extent to which semiotic resources such as linguistic features index local pride and become commodified, i.e., utilized for economic gain. The indexicality can be temporary or even volatile with some signs and creates an event-specific or non-event specific semiotic ‘register’ (enregisterment). The analysis follows two major commodifying practices, historicizing (in particular, the use of blackletter) and localizing (use of non-standard Austro-Bavarian dialect), and employs a multimodal approach. A qualitative analysis reveals how signs add to the temporary local authentication and discusses how LL research can benefit from capturing event spaces and the temporality of signs.
Keywords: semiotic landscape, language and identity, commodification, variation in German, enregisterment, multilingualism, social indexicality, multimodality, temporality of signs
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction: Commodification and local identity in Austria
  • 2.On semiotic landscapes at fairs and markets, the temporality of signs, and enregisterment
  • 3.Research site(s)
    • 3.1The Ruperti fair as a local (and regional) event
    • 3.2The Christmas market in Salzburg as an event of international tourism
  • 4.Method: Lingscape documentation and database
  • 5.Analysis
    • 5.1Temporality of multilingualism through tourism and Covid-19-related effects
    • 5.2‘Linguistic historicizing’: The (non-)temporality of local heritage
    • 5.3‘Linguistic localizing’: The commodification of ‘dialect’ and the volatility of local ‘authenticity’
  • 6.Conclusion: The temporal ‘local corporate identity’ and the diachrony of events
  • Notes
  • References
Published online: 13 December 2022
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/ll.22008.nie
References (59)
References
Agha, A. (2007). Language and Social Relations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Appadurai, A. 1986. Commodities and the Politics of Value. In Arjun Appadurai (ed.), The Social Life of Things: Commodities in Cultural Perspective. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 3–63. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Auer, P. (2009). Visible dialect. In H. Hovmark, I. Stampe Sletten & A. Gudiksen (Eds.), I mund og bog. 25 artikler om sprog tilegnet Inge Lise Pedersen på 70-årsdagen d. 5. juni 2009 (pp. 31–46). Copenhagen: Nordisk Forskningsinstitut.Google Scholar
(2010). Sprachliche Landschaften. Die Strukturierung des öffentlichen Raums durch die geschriebene Sprache. In A. Deppermann & A. Linke (Eds.), Sprache intermedial. Stimme und Schrift, Bild und Ton (pp. 271–298). Berlin, New York: de Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Blahak, B. (2021). „Daham statt Islam“. Zur funktionalen Einbindung von Dialektstrukturen in die Sprache politischer Werbeplakate. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik, 88 (1–2), 21–56. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Busch, B. (2009). Local actors in promoting multilingualism. In G. Hogan-Brun, C. Mar-Molinero & P. Stevenson (Eds.), Discourses on Language and Integration: Critical perspectives on language testing regimes in Europe (pp. 129–152). Amsterdam: John Benjamins. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bock, C. F. & Busch, F. (2021). Der Mittelaltermarkt als historisierende sprachliche Landschaft. Skriptural-graphische Ideologien des ‚Vergangenen‘. In E. Ziegler & H. F. Marten (Eds.), Linguistic Landscapes im deutschsprachigen Kontext. Forschungsperspektiven, Methoden und Anwendungsmöglichkeiten im Unterricht und Sprachmarketing (pp. 109–137). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Cenoz, J. & Gorter, D. (2009). Language economy and linguistic landscape. In E. Shohamy & D. Gorter (Eds.), Linguistic Landscape. Expanding the scenery (pp. 55–69). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Charmaz, K. 2014. Constructing Grounded Theory. 2nd edition. London: SAGE.Google Scholar
Dannerer, M., Franz, M. & Ortner, H. (2017). „Da pendelt sich die Sprache automatisch so ein“: Sprachliche Identität, Akkommodation und Management von innerer und äußerer Mehrsprachigkeit bei Tiroler Privatvermietern. Zeitschrift für Angewandte Linguistik, 67 (1), 115–147. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dorner, D. & Vasiljev, I. (2010). ‘Linguistic landscapes’ versus economic participation in multilingual cities. In C. Hülmbauer, E. Vetter & H. Böhringer (Eds.), Mehrsprachigkeit aus der Perspektive zweier EU-Projekte. DYLAN meets LINEE (pp. 97–112). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Duchêne, A. & Heller, M. (2012). Pride and profit: changing discourses of language, capital and nation-state. In A. Duchene & M. Heller (Eds.), Language in Late Capitalism. Pride and profit (pp. 1–21). Abingdon: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Eckert, P. (2000). Linguistic Variation as Social Practice: The Linguistic Construction of Identity in Belten High. Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Elmentaler, M. & Niebuhr, O. (2017). Platt – Missingsch – Petuh: Enregistermentprozesse zwischen Hamburg und Flensburg. In L. Anderwald & J. Hoekstra (Eds.), Enregisterment. Zur sozialen Bedeutung sprachlicher Variation (pp. 107–142). Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.Google Scholar
Elspaß, S. & Möller, R. (n.d.). Ähnlichkeit Salzburg. In S. Elspaß & R. Möller (Eds.), Atlas zur deutschen Alltagssprache. Retrieved February 23, 2022, from [URL]
Fairclough, N. (1992). Discourse and Social Change. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
Gully, J. M. (2011). Bilingual Signs in Carinthia: International Treaties, the Ortstafelstreit, and the Spaces of German. Transit, 7(1), 1–14. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hall-Lew, L., Couceiro, I. P. & Fairs, A. (2020). Credibility Without Intelligibility: Implications for Hearing Vernacular Speakers. In R. Blake & I. Buchstaller (Eds.), The Routledge Companion to the Work of John R. Rickford (pp. 220–230). New York, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Heller, M. (2010). The commodification of language. Annual Review of Anthropology, 39 1, 101–114. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Hobsbawm, E. & Ranger, T. (Eds.). (1983). The invention of tradition. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hofer, K. & Wally, S. (2011). Die Salzburger Milieulandschaft. Untersuchung der Sozialstruktur Salzburgs nach den Kriterien der SINUS-Milieus. Salzburg: Neue Forschungsgesellschaft.Google Scholar
Horner, K. (2018). Linguistic Landscapes. In P. Stevenson, K. Horner, N. Langer & G. Reershemius (Eds.), The German-speaking world. A practical introduction to sociolinguistic issues (pp. 102–120) (2nd ed.). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Huyer, M. (2019). Linguistic landscaping at school – a teaching design. GI_Forum 21, 206–212. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Jarowski, R. (2014). Einführung in Fragestellungen und Themenfelder. In P. Stachel, M. Thomsen (Eds.), Zwischen Exotik und vertrautem. Zum Tourismus in der Habsburgermonarchie und ihren Nachfolgestaaten (pp. 11–30). Bielefeld: Transcript Verlag.Google Scholar
Johnstone, B. (2009). Pittsburghese Shirts: Commodification and the Enregisterment of an Urban Dialect. American Speech, 84 (2), 157–175. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kammerhofer-Aggermann, U. & Keul, A. G. (Eds.). (2000). The Sound of Music zwischen Mythos und Marketing. Salzburg: Salzburger Landesinstitut für Volkskunde.Google Scholar
Kelly-Holmes, H. (2014). Linguistic fetish: the sociolinguistics of visual multilingualism. In D. Machin (Ed.), Visual communication (pp. 135–151). Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Krackowizer, P. (2021). Rupertitag. Salzburgwiki. Retrieved February 23, 2022, from [URL]
Krackowizer, P. & Fuchs, F. (2021). Rupertikirtag. Salzburgwiki. Retrieved February 23, 2022, from [URL]
Kroskrity, Paul V. (2001). Identity. In: A. Duranti (Eds.), Key Terms in Language and Culture. (pp. 106–109). Malden: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Lameli, A. (2019). Areale Variation im Deutschen “horizontal”: Die Einteilung der arealen Varietäten des Deutschen. In J. Herrgen & J. E. Schmidt (Eds.), Language and space. An international handbook of linguistic variation. Volume 4: German (pp. 185–205). Berlin: De Gruyter. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Langer, N. (2018). Standard German. In P. Stevenson, K. Horner, N. Langer & G. Reershemius (Eds.), The German-speaking world. A practical introduction to sociolinguistic issues (pp. 55–65) (2nd ed.). Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Matras, Y. & Gaiser, L. (2020). Signage as event: Deriving ‘community’ from language practice. Linguistic Landscape, 6 (2), 213–236. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Matrisciano, S. (2020). Dialect goes business: subtextual dialect use as part of a new naming strategy in Italy. In L. Caiazzo, R. Coates & M. Azaryahu (Eds.), Naming, Identity and Tourism (pp. 113–134). Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.Google Scholar
Medicus, R., Krackowizer, P. & Fuchs, F. (2021). Salzburger Christkindlmarkt. Salzburgwiki. Retrieved February 23, 2022, from [URL]
Michalovich, A., Naaman, S., Trijnes, M., Agbaria, I. & Shohamy, E. (2021). Dynamic walking tour methodology for LL research: A case study in Jaffa. In G. Niedt & C. A. Seals (Eds.), Linguistic Landscapes beyond the classroom (pp. 217–236). London: Bloomsbury. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Niedt, G. (2020). Tempo and affect in the Linguistic Landscape. Linguistic Landscape, 6 (1), 80–103. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pennycook, A. (2018). Linguistic Landscapes and semiotic assemblages. In M. Pütz & N. Mundt (Eds.), Expanding the linguistic landscape. Linguistic diversity, multimodality and the use of space as a semiotic resource (pp. 75–88). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Peck, A. & Stroud, C. (2015). Skinscapes. Linguistic Landscape, 1 (1/2), 133–151. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Petkova, M. (2017). Linguistic landscapes in der Innerschweiz: Dialekt, Toponyme und heraldische Zeichen als Ausdruck von Raumzugehörigkeit. Linguistik Online 85:6/17, 153–180. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pietkäinen, S. & Kelly-Holmes, H. (2011). The local political economy of languages in a Sámi tourism destination: authenticity and mobility in the labelling of souvenirs. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 15 (3), 323–346. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Purschke, C. (2017). Crowdsourcing the linguistic landscape of a multilingual country. Introducing Lingscape in Luxembourg. Linguistik Online, 85 (6), 181–202. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pütz, M. & Mundt, N. (2018). Multilingualism, Multimodality and Methodology: Linguistic Landscape Research in the Context of Assemblages, Ideologies and (In)visibility – An Introduction. In M. Pütz & N. Mundt (Eds.), Expanding the linguistic landscape. Linguistic diversity, multimodality and the use of space as a semiotic resource (pp. 1–22). Bristol: Multilingual Matters. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Rasinger, S. M. (2014). Linguistic Landscapes in southern Carinthia (Austria). Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 35 (6), 580–602. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Salzburg24. (2021). Über 100000 Besucher feiern am Rupertikirtag. Salzburg24.at. Retrieved February 23, 2022, from [URL]
Salzburg Info. (2022a). St. Rupert’s Day Fair. Salzburg.info – your official travel guide to Salzburg. Retrieved February 23, 2022, from [URL]
. (2022b). Salzburg Christkindlmarkt. Salzburg.info – your official travel guide to Salzburg. Retrieved February 23, 2022, from [URL]
Salzburg.ORF.at. (2012). Fixpunkt jedes Kirtags: Die Schausteller. Salzburg.ORF.at. Retrieved February 23, 2022, from [URL]
Seals, C. A. (2018). Analyzing the linguistic landscape of mass-scale events. Linguistic Landscape, 3 (3), 267–285. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Schenker, S. (2021). Gute Stimmung zum Start des Rupertikirtags. Salzburger Nachrichten. Retrieved February 23, 2022, from [URL]
Schiegg, M. & Sowada, L. (2019). Script switching in nineteenth-century lower-class German handwriting. Paedagogica Historica, 55(6), 772–91. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Scollon, R. & Scollon, S. W. (2003). Discourses in place: Language in the material world. Abingdon: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
van Mensel, L., Vandenbroucke, M. & Blackwood, R. (2017). Linguistic landscapes. In O. García, N. Flores & M. Spotti (Eds.), The Oxford handbook of language and society (pp. 421–449). Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Verein Salzburger Christkindlmarkt. (2019). Historisches Turmblasen in der Salzburger Altstadt seit 1952. Retrieved February 23, 2022, from [URL]
. (2021). Chronik & Tradition. Retrieved February 23, 2022, from [URL]
Wahl, S. (2020). „Iss was Gscheit’s!“ – Formen und Funktionen von Dialekten in der Werbung. In M. Hundt, A. Kleene, A. Plewnia & V. Sauer (Eds.), Regiolekte. Objektive Sprachdaten und subjektive Sprachwahrnehmung (pp. 389–406). Tübingen: Narr.Google Scholar
Wildfeuer, A. & Franz, S. (2021). Mehrsprachigkeit – Identität – Authentizität. Zentrale Forschungsbereiche. Zeitschrift für Dialektologie und Linguistik, 88 (1–2), 3–20. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cited by (2)

Cited by two other publications

Choksi, Nishaant & Kalpesh Rathwa
2024. Language and Landscape among the Displaced Residents of the Narmada Valley, Western India. Journal of Anthropological Research 80:3 ► pp. 287 ff. DOI logo
Niehaus, Konstantin
2024. Enregistering ‘Austrian German’ on YouTube: A qualitative socio-semiotic analysis. Zeitschrift für Angewandte Linguistik 2024:80 ► pp. 61 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.