1887
Volume 3, Issue 3
  • ISSN 2214-9953
  • E-ISSN: 2214-9961
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

This article explores methodological challenges and scientific perspectives of a citizen science approach to linguistic landscapes research. Starting from the outline of a disciplinary landscape, the text first discusses development strategies and practical implementation of crowdsourcing via mobile applications as means to data collection in two participatory research projects. The comparison highlights the complex trade-off between empirical benefits and methodological drawbacks in relation to mobile app setups for crowdsourcing. In a second step, the use of crowdsourcing technology is embedded in a methodological framework for a citizen science approach to the study of social semiotics and discussed against the background of five guiding principles: participatory research, lifeworld orientation, societal engagement, computational analysis, and open research practice. The discussion points out that a citizen science approach brings about numerous opportunities as well as substantial challenges for academic practice in terms of a democratization, social embedding, and opening of research activities.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ll.17023.pur
2018-01-19
2019-09-17
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Aitkenhead, M. , Donnelly, D. , Coull, M. , & Hastings, E.
    (2014) Innovations in Environmental Monitoring Using Mobile Phone Technology – A Review. International Magazine of Interactive Mobile Technologies8(2), 42–50. doi: 10.3991/ijim.v8i2.3645
    https://doi.org/10.3991/ijim.v8i2.3645 [Google Scholar]
  2. Backhaus, P.
    (2007) Linguistic Landscapes. A Comparative Study of Urban Multilingualism in Tokyo. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Barni, M. & Bagna, C.
    (2015) The critical turn in LL: New methodologies and new items in LL. Linguistic Landscape1(1/2), 6–18. doi: 10.1075/ll.1.1‑2.01bar
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ll.1.1-2.01bar [Google Scholar]
  4. (2009) A mapping technique and the linguistic landscape. In Shohamy & Gorter (2009), 126–140.
  5. Ben-Rafael, E.
    (2009) A sociological approach to the study of linguistic landscapes. In Shohamy & Gorter (2009), 40–54.
  6. Blackwood, R.
    (2015) LL explorations and methodological challenges. Linguistic Landscape1(1/2), 38–53. doi: 10.1075/ll.1.1‑2.03bla
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ll.1.1-2.03bla [Google Scholar]
  7. Blommaert, J.
    (2013) Ethnography, Superdiversity and Linguistic Landscapes: Chronicles of Complexity. Bristol/Buffalo/Toronto: Multilingual matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Bonney, R. , Ballard, H. , Jordan, R. , McCallie, E. , Phillips, T. , Shirk, J. , & Wilderman, C.
    (2009) Public Participation in Scientific Research: Defining the Field and Assessing Its Potential for Informal Science Education. A CAISE Inquiry Group Report. Washington, D.C.: Center for Advancement of Informal Science Education (CAISE).
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Brabham, D.
    (2013) Crowdsourcing. Cambridge: MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Dicheva, D. , Dichev, C. , Agre, G. , & Angelova, G.
    (2015) Gamification in Education: A Systematic Mapping Study. Educational Technology & Society18(3), 75–88.
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Frisch, M.
    (1990) A Shared Authority: Essays on the Craft and Meaning of Oral and Public History. Albany: SUNY Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Gaiser, L. & Matras, Y.
    (2016) The spatial construction of civic identities: A study of Manchester’s linguistic landscapes. University of Manchester. mlm.humanities.manchester.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/ManchesterLinguisticLandscapes.pdf [31.10.2017]
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Garbarino, J. & Mason, C.
    (2016) The Power of Engaging Citizen Scientists for Scientific Progress. Journal of Microbiology & Biology Education17(1), 7–12. doi: 10.1128/jmbe.v17i1.1052
    https://doi.org/10.1128/jmbe.v17i1.1052 [Google Scholar]
  14. Gilles, P. & Ziegler, E.
    (2017) Exploring Google Cloud Vision API for LL research. Presentation given at the 9th International Linguistic Landscapes Workshop , University of Luxembourg, Esch/Belval, 29.–31.03.2017.
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Gorter, D.
    (2006) Further Possibilities for Linguistic Landscape Research. In D. Gorter (Ed.), Linguistic Landscape: A New Approach to Multilingualism (pp.81–89). Clevedon/Buffalo/Toronto: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Gorter, D. & Cenoz, J.
    (2015) Linguistic landscapes inside multilingual schools. In B. Spolsky , O. Inbar-Lourie , & M. Tannenbaum (Eds.), Challenges for Language Education and Policy (pp.151–169). New York: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Hartson, R. & Pyla, P.
    (2012) The UX Book: Process and Guidelines for Ensuring a Quality User Experience. Waltham MA: Morgan Kaufmann.
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Howe, J.
    (2006) Crowdsourcing. A definiton. Crowdsourcing blog, 02June 2006, retrieved on30 September, fromcrowdsourcing.typepad.com/cs/2006/06/crowdsourcing_a.html [30.09.2017]
  19. Irwin, A.
    (1995) Citizen Science: A Study of People, Expertise and Sustainable Development. London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Järlehed, J. & Jaworski, A.
    (Eds.) (2015) Typographic landscaping: Creativity, ideology, movement. Social Semiotics25(2), 117–125. doi: 10.1080/10350330.2015.1010318
    https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2015.1010318 [Google Scholar]
  21. Jaworski, A. & Thurlow, C.
    (Eds.) (2010) Semiotic Landscapes: Language, Image, Space. London: Continuum.
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Kraker, P. , Leony, D. , Reinhardt, W. , & Beham, G.
    (2011) The case for an open science in technology enhanced learning. International Journal of Technology Enhanced Learning3(6), 643–654. doi: 10.1504/IJTEL.2011.045454
    https://doi.org/10.1504/IJTEL.2011.045454 [Google Scholar]
  23. Leemann, A. , Kolly, M.-J. , Purves, R. , Britain, D. , & Glaser, E.
    (2016) Crowdsourcing language change with smartphone applications. PLOS ONE. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0143060
    https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0143060 [Google Scholar]
  24. Leemann, A. , Kolly, M.-J. , Schmid, S. , & Dellwo, V.
    (Eds.) (2015) Trends in Phonetics and Phonology. Studies from German-speaking Europe. Frankfurt a. M.: Peter Lang. doi: 10.3726/978‑3‑0351‑0869‑9
    https://doi.org/10.3726/978-3-0351-0869-9 [Google Scholar]
  25. Lyons, K.
    (forthcoming). The Quality of Quantity. In D. Malinowski & S. Tufi Eds. Questioning Boundaries, Opening Spaces: Reterritorializing Linguistic Landscapes.
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Malinowski, D.
    (2015) Opening spaces of learning in the linguistic landscape. Linguistic Landscape (1/2), 95–113. doi: 10.1075/ll.1.1‑2.06mal
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ll.1.1-2.06mal [Google Scholar]
  27. McCullough, M.
    (2013) Ambient Commons. Attention in the Age of Embodied Information. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Moriarty, M.
    (2014) Languages in motion: Multilingualism and mobility in the linguistic landscape. International Journal of Bilingualism18(5), 457–463. doi: 10.1177/1367006913484208
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006913484208 [Google Scholar]
  29. Ngyuen, D. , Doğruöz, S. , Rosé, C. , & de Jong, F.
    (2016) Computational Sociolinguistics: A Survey. Computational Linguistics42(3), 537–593. doi: 10.1162/COLI_a_00258
    https://doi.org/10.1162/COLI_a_00258 [Google Scholar]
  30. Nielsen, M.
    (2011) Reinventing Discovery: The New Era of Networked Science. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press.
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Nouri, J. , Cerratto-Pargman, T. , Rossitto, C. , & Ramberg, R.
    (2014) Learning with or without mobile devices? A comparison of traditional schoolfield trips and inquiry-based mobile learning activities. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning9(2), 241–262.
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Peck, A. & Stroud, C.
    (2015) Skinscapes. Linguistic Landscape1(1/2), 133–151. doi: 10.1075/ll.1.1‑2.08pec
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ll.1.1-2.08pec [Google Scholar]
  33. Purschke, C.
    (2017): Crowdsourcing the linguistic landscape of a multilingual country. Introducing Lingscape in Luxembourg. In M. Hundt , C. Purschke , & E. Ziegler (Eds.), Sprachräume: Konstellationen, Interaktionen, Perzeptionen. (pp.191–202) Linguistik Online 85.
    [Google Scholar]
  34. (2015) REACT – A constructivist theoretic framework for attitudes. In D. Preston & A. Prikhodkine (Eds.), Responses to Language Varieties: Variability, processes and outcomes (pp.37–54). Amsterdam: John Benjamins (IMPACT: Studies in Language and Society 39). doi: 10.1075/impact.39.02pur
    https://doi.org/10.1075/impact.39.02pur [Google Scholar]
  35. Rabanus, S. , Kehrein, R. , & Lameli, A.
    (2011) Creating digital editions of historical maps. In A. Lameli , R. Kehrein , & S. Rabanus (Eds.), Language and space. Vol. 2: Language mapping (pp.375–385). Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton (Handbooks of linguistics and communication science 30.2).
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Riesch, H. & Potter, C.
    (2014) Citizen science as seen by scientists: Methodological, epistemological and ethical dimensions. Public Understanding of Science23(1), 107–120. doi: 10.1177/0963662513497324
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0963662513497324 [Google Scholar]
  37. Scollon, R. & Scollon, S.
    (2003) Discourses in place: language in the material world. London: Routledge. doi: 10.4324/9780203422724
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203422724 [Google Scholar]
  38. Shohamy, E. & Gorter, D.
    (Eds.) (2009) Linguistic Landscape: Expanding the Scenery. New York and London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Sun, J.
    (2016) Tool choice in innovation diffusion. A human activity readiness theory. Computers in Human Behavior59, 283–294. doi: 10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.014
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2016.02.014 [Google Scholar]
  40. Szabó, T. & Leihonen, P.
    (2017) Investigating visual practices in educational settings: schoolscapes, language ideologies and organizational cultures. In M. Martin-Jones , & D. Martin (Eds.), Researching multilingualism: Critical and ethnographic approaches (pp.121–138). London: Routledge.
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Troyer, R. & Szabó, T.
    (2017) Representation and videography in linguistic landscape studies. Linguistic Landscape3(1), 56–77. doi: 10.1075/ll.3.1.03tro
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ll.3.1.03tro [Google Scholar]
  42. Van Leeuwen, D. & Orr, R.
    (2016) The “Sprekend Nederland” project and its application to accent location. Odyssey 2016, June21–24 2016, Bilbao, Spain, 101–108. doi: 10.21437/Odyssey.2016‑15
    https://doi.org/10.21437/Odyssey.2016-15 [Google Scholar]
  43. Wolfram, W.
    (2013) Community commitment and social responsibility. In J. Chambers & N. Schilling (Eds.), Handbook of Language Variation and Change (pp.557-576). 2nd edn.Malden/Cambridge: Wiley/Blackwell. doi: 10.1002/9781118335598.ch26
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118335598.ch26 [Google Scholar]
  44. Woolley, P. , McGowan, M. , Teare, H. , Coathup, V. , Fishman, J. , Settersten, R. , Sterckx, S. , Kaye, J. , & Juengst, E.
    (2016) Citizen science or scientific citizenship? Disentangling the uses of public engagement rhetoric in national research initiatives. BMC Medical Ethics17(33).
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Zabrodskaja, A. & Milani, T.
    (2014) Signs in context: Multilingual and multimodal texts in semiotic space. International Journal of the Sociology of Language228.
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ll.17023.pur
Loading
/content/journals/10.1075/ll.17023.pur
Loading

Data & Media loading...

This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was successful
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error