Literature Review on Linguistic Landscapes

well of my literature review is linguistic landscapes the dissonance between top-down and bottom-up signage and I'll define the terms used here and some of the upcoming slides so I have experience studying and teaching abroad and I now teach in a dual language School in Rochester my research interest center around language acquisition in children I'm specifically interested in themes of agency power and identity as they relate to language acquisition and learning for this literature review I decided to focus on language environments linguistic landscapes which I will sometimes refer to as el ELLs have been defined as the language of public road signs advertising billboards street names place names commercial commercial shop signs and public signs on government buildings which combine to form the linguistic landscape of a given territory region or urban agglomeration and that's by landry and boris and that's a seminal work on linguistic landscapes research on el else has focused on the themes listed on the slide here power relations for example refer to how the languages represented reflect private or public interests individual and community identities and how they symbolize domination and/or policy enacted by those in power political motives for example include the endorsement or elimination of the use of a particular language additionally linguistic landscapes can represent language ideologies of the government communities groups and individuals and lastly LLS can visibly show clashes between majority and minority languages school escapes is a term that has emerged under the larger umbrella of linguistic landscapes and they're defined as artifacts and images in a school setting that represent these ideologies and identities about local minority languages linguistic landscape research research reveals two major types of signage top-down also referred to as public signage refers to official government signs including street signs and markers signage and government buildings in and around public transportation and in post offices etc on the right you can see bottom up also referred to as private signage referring to which is created and posted by private businesses organizations and individuals this can include signage in and on private shops and stores as well as posted flyers in graffiti and in schools bottom-up signage is posted by teachers and students and includes things such as bulletin boards and student work samples so I want to answer the question of why is this research or this work important globalization has led to a mixing of languages and cities and schools around the world majority and minority languages as well as local and foreign languages come into contact both in their spoken and written form this contact can inevitably cause conflict a study of the dissonance between and within top-down and bottom-up signage can help reveal implications for the roles that all types of sign creators play in creating a linguistic landscape that either includes or excludes individuals and groups of individuals there are some distinct differences in language use language preference and types of signage in both top-down and bottom-up signage which show some clear dissonance in terms of ideologies values and motives which can lead to potential conflict of languages and individuals or groups of people examining these differences can help us identify ways to create more cohesive and inclusive linguistic landscapes in terms of key findings some of the factors that influence linguistic landscapes are language policy community identity language ideologies school programs etc I found that the majority of l-l research use a similar method which is photography with a frequency counting I also found that LLS are often described in terms of the two types of signage previously outlined top-down and bottom-up these types often serve different purposes and often represent majority and minority languages to varying degrees there's some distinct difference in language use preference and the types of signage which can both represent and lead to potential conflict of language and individuals or groups of people though language policy can greatly affect expectations and regulations for both top-down and bottom-up signage legislature is what actually connects the policy to practice and it's lacking in many multilingual communities which means that policy is not necessarily enacted another finding is that of agency and how it can be powerful in working either with or against policy and legislature linguistic landscapes can either represent inclusive or exclusive multilingual arenas through their representation of the languages display and finally school scape research reveals that schools often rely on much on majority bottom-up signage which perhaps inadvertently gives great power to the teachers and students who create and coordinate these displays I've included some quotes below from the research that represents some of these key findings and I'll give you a minute here to read them to yourself the major research gaps that have emerged in my compilation of literature on linguistic landscapes are outlined here firstly there seems to be a lack of depth in the methodologies which is a gap that was actually also mentioned in one of my articles Blackwood 2011 most of the methods include taking photographs and then sorting those photographs into groups based on them being monolingual or bilingual and then counting how often each language appeared so a type of frequency counting sometimes studies further broke down the data and considered which language appeared first or in larger print or was more prominent there's also very limited discussion of how top-down and bottom-up signage interact or clash with each other much of the research separates their data in terms of these two types of groups but does not examine their relationship there's also a lack of mixing the methodologies both quantitative and qualitative to help examine this interaction between the two types of signage and finally as a related gap there is little discussion of the agents behind the signage and linguistic landscapes whose motives could be examined using myth using mixed methods so here I've created a sort of forget progression moving from left to right to help show some of the changes I saw in my own writing and thinking throughout the semester early on I felt confident about presenting my own voice but tended to lean on this and let the research take a backseat I also usually found success in writing intros and conclusions and in general APA formatting during the semester I started keeping a research journal and I began to seek out additional sources from my strong articles especially if these sources were frequently cited which helped me make sure that I had included all the important and relevant research in my review I began to look more deeply into the methodologies and methods to be able to compare and contrast studies based on these as well as to look for gaps in these areas I also created an outline that we were we were asked to do which is not something I typically do when writing but then I could use this outline to help fill in gaps in my information and then seek out more research in those specific light areas and now as we near the end of the semester I still got a lot that I'm working on but I feel as though I've increased in my understanding of APA not just the formatting but the writing style itself and I've been working at synthesizing on smaller levels and with more frequency because I tend to connect big ideas and make big broad conclusions which leaves out many details from the research and doesn't allow me to demonstrate to the reader that I have a real depth of understanding of the research which I think is very important in increasing my credibility as a researcher thank you for your time I look forward to interacting with each other's literature reviews

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *