1 / 22

From CASA* to a ndegrand The Linguistic Landscape at the University of S zczecin

From CASA* to a ndegrand The Linguistic Landscape at the University of S zczecin. A qualitative analysis. Structure. Introduction The University of Szczecin The Study: object , analytical frameworks The Items International Office Facutly of M athematics and Physics

duyen
Download Presentation

From CASA* to a ndegrand The Linguistic Landscape at the University of S zczecin

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. From CASA* toandegrandThe LinguisticLandscapeatthe University ofSzczecin A qualitative analysis Laura Zieseler, B.A.

  2. Structure • Introduction • The University of Szczecin • The Study: object, analyticalframeworks • The Items • International Office • FacutlyofMathematicsandPhysics • Institute of German Philology • Hall ofResidence • Conclusion Laura Zieseler, B.A.

  3. The University of Szczecin • Szczecin: capital of the Polish region of West Pomerania, 400.000 inhabitants, basically monolingual • UniwersytetSzczecinski: • founded in 1985, • 9 faculties, • more than 33,000 students • joined the ERASMUS programme in 1998 • mutual cooperation agreements with more than 70 European academies & scientific institutions, approx. 30 partner institutions world-wide Laura Zieseler, B.A.

  4. The study • To what degree has the university’s commitment to internationalisation left visible traces in its linguistic landscape? • index of this internationalisation: the presence of English as a world language Laura Zieseler, B.A.

  5. The Study:A multidimensional approach Laura Zieseler, B.A.

  6. The International Office Laura Zieseler, B.A.

  7. The International Office • unregulated “forest of signs” (Ben-Rafael 2009: 43) • high density of Anglophone items – mostly posters issued by non-Polish academic institutions • items issued by the staff of the international office: Polish only • intended readership: outgoingPolish-speaking exchange students of the University of Szczecin Laura Zieseler, B.A.

  8. The International Office contd. • interplay between situated emplacement (Scollon & Scollon 2003) and highly recognisable international key words  language barrier can be overcome Laura Zieseler, B.A.

  9. The International Office • duplicating bilingual item  conveyed information is identical in both codes • preferred code: English addresses incoming ERASMUS students as well • taped to the inside of the office door AND obsolete  discarded item • transgressive semiotics - a “sign that is in the ‘wrong’ place” (Scollon & Scollon) Laura Zieseler, B.A.

  10. The FacultyofMathematicsandPhysics Laura Zieseler, B.A.

  11. The FacultyofMathematicsandPhysics prestigious code indexing the ambition to perceived as a “global player” eyecatcher: apronym, Italianfor „house“, allusionto NASA trilingual. function: largelypoetic • top-down item, overlapping multilingual writing • apronym: “The word CASA* means “house” in Italian, and it is indeed the purpose of our centre to be a house to those who conduct exobiological research in Poland.” (Universitätsrevue 2005, my translation) Laura Zieseler, B.A.

  12. relevant code: atfirstglancesemioticallymostimportant, mostvisible dominant code: mostfullyencodesmeaning The FacultyofMathematicsandPhysics • bottom-up ad, private language school • English  symbolic function: connotes modernity and self-improvement; meta-linguistic” • Polish: “That means three months’ worth of English (lessons) for free!”  core message, accessory function • type of bilingual writing: complementary or overlapping multilingualism? „ambiguous multilingualism” (Cenoz and Gorter 2006: 77) Laura Zieseler, B.A.

  13. The Institute ofGerman Philology Laura Zieseler, B.A.

  14. Laura Zieseler, B.A.

  15. The Institute ofGerman Philology • “no to sru“ phonetic pun based on interlingual homophony: colloquial Polish „notosru“ „wellthen, down withit!“ • The situation described in the advertisement is re-contextualised into an ironic comment on academic life “new interdiscursivity” • variation on the global advertising catch-phrase: “smoking kills”  excellent example of Linguistic Landscapes as a space of global heteroglossia, i.e. of hybridised global intertexts(Duszak 2004: 118/119) Laura Zieseler, B.A.

  16. Hall ofResidence • apartment door  threshold between public and private space • English predominates • choice of language  signals membership of an internationally oriented sub-group – skateboard scene • function: purely symbolic • high degree of unconventional linguistic creativity • “incomprehensible hieroglyphic signatures” (Pennycook 2009: 308)  reminiscent of the art of graffiti Laura Zieseler, B.A.

  17. Hall ofResidence • indexes the homepage of a Polish supplier of skateboarding equipment • an idiosyncratic spelling of “underground“ alluding to phonetic interference between English and Polish • “English from below” – the creative and non-standard appropriation of English by subcultural groups vs. “proper” “English from above”, i.e. English as promoted by the hegemonic culture or “establishment” (Preisler 1999: 241/ 242) Laura Zieseler, B.A.

  18. Conclusion • A multi-faceted picture: • different types of multilingual writing, • situated and transgressive emplacement, • interlingual hybridisation • quasi-graffiti • This indicates that the theoretical frameworks developed so far are very well suited for analysing indoor linguistic landscapes, at least in a qualitative manner. • the impact of internationalisation on the Linguistic Landscape • English: a prestigious harbinger of globalisation, predominantly used as a symbolic and decorative ingredient rather than as a genuine means of communicating information • the lingua franca of international student exchange,: mostly aimed at outgoing exchange students  the linguistic minority of incoming students on the whole lacked visual public representation. • the desired globalisation and internationalisation process is still in its initial stages  low number of incoming students • the Linguistic Landscape of the university appears to adequately reflect its actual sociolinguistic reality Laura Zieseler, B.A.

  19. Bibliography • Barni, M. andBagna, C. 2009. A Mapping TechniqueandtheLinguisticLandscape. In: Shohamy, E. andGorter, D., eds. LinguisticLandscape : ExpandingtheScenery, New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 126 - 140. • Ben-Rafael, E. 2009. A Sociological Approach tothe Study ofLinguisticLandscapes. In: Shohamy, E. andGorter, D., eds. LinguisticLandscape : ExpandingtheScenery, New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 40-54. • Ben-Rafael, E., Shohamy, E., Amara, M. H. and Trumper-Hecht, N. 2006. Linguistic landscape as symbolic construction of the public space: The case of Israel.In: D. Gorter (ed.) Linguistic Landscape: A New Approach to Multilingualism, Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, pp. 7–30. • Berns, M. 2009. English as a lingua franca and English in Europe, World Englishes28(2): 192-199. • Cenoz, J. and Gorter, D. 2006. Linguistic landscape and minority languages. In: D. Gorter (ed.) Linguistic Landscape: A New Approach to Multilingualism, Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, pp. 67–80. • ___________________. 2009. Language Economy andLinguisticLandscape. In: Shohamy, E. andGorter, D., eds. LinguisticLandscape : ExpandingtheScenery, New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 55-69. Laura Zieseler, B.A.

  20. Crystal, D. 2004. The Cambridge Encyclopediaofthe English Language, 2. ed., reprinted. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press. • Curtin, M. 2009. Language on Display. IndexicalSigns, Identities andtheLinguisticLandscape. In: Shohamy, E. andGorter, D., eds. LinguisticLandscape : ExpandingtheScenery, New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 221-237. • Duszak, A. 2004. Globalisation as Interdiscursivity: On the Spread of Global Intertexts. In: Duszak, A. and Okulska, U., eds. Speaking from the Margin: Global English from a European Perspective, Frankfurt am Main: Lang, pp.117-132. • Fishman, J. 1992. Sociologyof English as an Additional Language. In: B. Kachru (ed.) The othertongue : English acrosscultures ,Urbana, Ill.: Univ. of Illinois Press, pp. 19–26. • Gorter, D., ed. 2006. Linguistic Landscape: A New Approach to Multilingualism, Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. • Gorter, D. 2006. Introduction. In: Linguistic Landscape: A New Approach to Multilingualism, Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, pp. 1-6. • Hanauer, D. 2009. Science andtheLinguisticLandscape. A Genre Analysis ofRepresentational Wall Space in a Microbiology Laboratory. In: Shohamy, E. andGorter, D., eds. LinguisticLandscape : ExpandingtheScenery, New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 287-301. • Huebner, T. 2009. A Framework fortheLinguistic Analysis ofLinguisticLandscapes. In: Shohamy, E. andGorter, D., eds. LinguisticLandscape : ExpandingtheScenery, New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 70-88. • Kachru, B., ed. 1990 (1986). The Alchemyof English : The Spread, Functions, and Models of Non-native Englishes, Editiom: Illini Books ed. Published: Urbana: Univ. of Illinois Press. Laura Zieseler, B.A.

  21. Kelly-Holmes, H. 2000. Bier, parfum, kaas: Language fetish in European advertising, European Journal of Cultural Studies 3(1): 67-82. • Landry, R. and Bourhis R. Y. 1997. Linguistic landscape and ethnolinguistic vitality: An empirical study, Journal of Language and Social Psychology 16(1): 23–49. • Pennycook, A. 2009. LinguisticLandscapesandtheTransgressiveSemioticsof Graffiti. In: Shohamy, E. andGorter, D., eds. LinguisticLandscape : ExpandingtheScenery, New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 302-312. • Phillipson, R. 1992. Linguistic Imperialism, Oxford: Oxford University Press. • ___________. 2001. English or ‘no’ to English in Scandinavia?, English Today 66: 22-28. • Preisler, B. 1999. Functionsand Forms of English in a European EFL country. In: Bex, T. and Watts, R., eds. Standard English : The WideningDebate, London: Routledge, pp. 239-268. • Reh, M. 2004. Multilingual writing: a reader-oriented typology—with examples from Lira Municipality (Uganda), International Journal of the Sociology of Language 170: 1–41. • Reichelt, M. 2005. English in Poland, World Englishes 24(2): 217-225. • Scollon, R. and Scollon S. W. 2003. Discourses in Place: Language in the Material World, London: Routledge. • Shohamy, E. andGorter, D., eds. 2009. LinguisticLandscape : ExpandingtheScenery, New York, NY: Routledge. • Spolsky, B. 2009. Prolegomena to a SociolinguisticTheoryof Public Signage. In: Shohamy, E. andGorter, D., eds. LinguisticLandscape : ExpandingtheScenery, New York, NY: Routledge, pp. 25-39. Laura Zieseler, B.A.

  22. “paid advertisement” “Examination periods kill, got it?” Laura Zieseler, B.A.

More Related