1887
image of Does the Linguistic Landscape influence happiness?
USD
Buy:$35.00 + Taxes

Abstract

Abstract

This paper investigates the potential relationship between multilingual landscapes and minority speech community members’ sense of subjective well-being. It focuses on three speech communities located in Germany: Chinese, Japanese, and Turkish. Drawing on interviews with members of these speech communities, it analyzes how individuals perceive their engagement with public displays of their language in terms of happiness and in the context of the host society. Integration, which is prominent in both Happiness studies and Linguistic Landscape research, is identified as a key theme influencing the emotional interaction between signs and sign readers. The paper’s aim is to integrate a subject-focused approach into the study of Linguistic Landscapes that can better address how individuals perceive and interact with language signs in multilingual and multi-ethnic settings.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1075/ll.21013.mal
2022-02-15
2022-05-23
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

References

  1. Amadasi, S.
    (2014) Beyond belonging. How migrant children actively construct their cultural identities in the interaction. Interdisciplinary Journal of Family Studies, 19(1).
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Amos, H. W.
    (2016) Chinatown by numbers: Defining an ethnic space by empirical linguistic landscape. Linguistic Landscape, 2(2), 127–156.
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Amponsem, G.
    (1996) Global trading and business networks among Ghanaians: An interface of the local and the global (Doctoral dissertation).
  4. Backhaus, P.
    (2007) Linguistic Landscapes. A comparative study of urban multilingualism in Tokyo. Clevedon, Buffalo, Toronto: Multilingual Matters.
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Baranova, V., & Fedorova, K.
    (2019) ‘Invisible minorities’ and ‘hidden diversity’in Saint-Petersburg’s linguistic landscape. Language & Communication, 68, 17–27. 10.1016/j.langcom.2018.10.013
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2018.10.013 [Google Scholar]
  6. Barni, M., & Bagna, C.
    (2015) The critical turn in LL: New methodologies and new items in LL. Linguistic Landscape, 1(1–2), 6–18. 10.1075/ll.1.1‑2.01bar
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ll.1.1-2.01bar [Google Scholar]
  7. Ben-Rafael, E.
    (2009) A sociological approach to the study of linguistic landscapes. Shohamy, E. & Gorter, D. (eds.) 2009 Linguistic Landscape. Expanding the scenery. New York and London: Routledge, 40–54.
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Ben-Rafael, E., & Ben-Rafael, M.
    (2016) Berlin’s linguistic landscapes: two faces of globalization. Blackwood, R., Lanza, E., & Woldemariam, H. (eds.). Negotiating and contesting identities in linguistic landscapes, London: Bloomsbury, 197–213.
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Ben-Rafael, E., Shohamy, E., Amara, M. H., & Trumper-Hecht, N.
    (2006) Linguistic landscape as symbolic construction of the public space: The case of Israel. International journal of multilingualism, 3(1), 7–30. 10.1080/14790710608668383
    https://doi.org/10.1080/14790710608668383 [Google Scholar]
  10. Bilkic, M.
    (2018) Emplacing hate: Turbulent graffscape and Linguistic violence in post-war Bosnia-Herzegovina. Linguistic Landscape4(1), 1–28. 10.1075/ll.17011.bil
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ll.17011.bil [Google Scholar]
  11. Blackwood, R.
    (2015) LL explorations and methodological challenges: Analysing France’s regional languages. Linguistic Landscape, 1(1–2), 38–53. 10.1075/ll.1.1‑2.03bla
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ll.1.1-2.03bla [Google Scholar]
  12. Blommaert, J.
    (2017) Society through the lens of language: A new look at social groups and integration. Tilburg Papers in Culture Studies, No. 178.
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Blommaert, J., Collins, J., & Slembrouck, S.
    (2005) Spaces of multilingualism. Language & Communication, 25(3), 197–216. 10.1016/j.langcom.2005.05.002
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2005.05.002 [Google Scholar]
  14. Bucholtz, M., & Hall, K.
    (2005) Identity and interaction: A sociocultural linguistic approach. Discourse studies, 7(4–5), 585–614. 10.1177/1461445605054407
    https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605054407 [Google Scholar]
  15. Dailey-O’Cain, J., & Liebscher, G.
    (2011) Language attitudes, migrant identities and space. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 212, 91–134.
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Extra, G., & Yağmur, K.
    (2011) Urban multilingualism in Europe: Mapping linguistic diversity in multicultural cities. Journal of Pragmatics, 43(5), 1173–1184. 10.1016/j.pragma.2010.10.007
    https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pragma.2010.10.007 [Google Scholar]
  17. Gaiser, L., & Matras, Y.
    (2020) Defining the position of ‘community’in the study of linguistic landscapes. Linguistic Landscape, 6(2), 109–127. 10.1075/ll.19028.gai
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ll.19028.gai [Google Scholar]
  18. Garvin, R. T.
    (2010) Responses to the Linguistic Landscape in Memphis, Tennessee: and Urban Space in Transition. Shohamy, E., Barni, M. & Ben-Rafael, E. (eds.). Linguistic Landscape in the City. Bristol, Buffalo and Toronto: Multilingual Matters, 252–272. 10.21832/9781847692993‑016
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781847692993-016 [Google Scholar]
  19. Georgakopoulou, A.
    (2015) Small stories research. De Fina, A. & Georgakopoulou, A. (eds.). The Handbook of Narrative Analysis. Chichester: Wiley Blackwell, 255–271. 10.1002/9781118458204.ch13
    https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118458204.ch13 [Google Scholar]
  20. Gorter, D.
    (2013) Linguistic landscapes in a multilingual world. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 33, 190–212. 10.1017/S0267190513000020
    https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190513000020 [Google Scholar]
  21. Hadjar, A., & Backes, S.
    (2013) Migration background and subjective well-being a multilevel analysis based on the European social survey. Comparative Sociology, 12(5), 645–676. 10.1163/15691330‑12341279
    https://doi.org/10.1163/15691330-12341279 [Google Scholar]
  22. Haybron, D. M.
    (2003) What do we want from a theory of happiness?. Metaphilosophy, 34(3), 305–329. 10.1111/1467‑9973.00275
    https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9973.00275 [Google Scholar]
  23. Hendriks, M.
    (2015) The happiness of international migrants: A review of research findings. Migration Studies, 3(3), 343–369. 10.1093/migration/mnu053
    https://doi.org/10.1093/migration/mnu053 [Google Scholar]
  24. Hendriks, M., & Bartram, D.
    (2019) Bringing Happiness Into the Study of Migration and Its Consequences: What, Why, and How?. Journal of Immigrant & Refugee Studies, 17(3), 279–298. 10.1080/15562948.2018.1458169
    https://doi.org/10.1080/15562948.2018.1458169 [Google Scholar]
  25. Joppke, C.
    (2007) Beyond national models: Civic integration policies for immigrants in Western Europe. West European Politics, 30(1), 1–22. 10.1080/01402380601019613
    https://doi.org/10.1080/01402380601019613 [Google Scholar]
  26. Kogan, I., Shen, J., & Siegert, M.
    (2018) What makes a satisfied immigrant? Host-country characteristics and immigrants’ life satisfaction in eighteen European countries. Journal of Happiness Studies, 19(6), 1783–1809. 10.1007/s10902‑017‑9896‑4
    https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-017-9896-4 [Google Scholar]
  27. Landry, R. & R. Y. Bourhis
    (1997) Linguistic landscape and ethnolinguistic vitality. An empirical study. Journal of Language and Social Psychology16: 24–49. 10.1177/0261927X970161002
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X970161002 [Google Scholar]
  28. Leeman, J., & Modan, G.
    (2009) Commodified language in Chinatown: A contextualized approach to linguistic landscape 1. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 13(3), 332–362. 10.1111/j.1467‑9841.2009.00409.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9841.2009.00409.x [Google Scholar]
  29. Pappenhagen, R., Scarvaglieri, C., & Redder, A.
    (2016) Expanding the linguistic landscape scenery? Action theory and ‘Linguistic Soundscaping’. Blackwood, R., Lanza, E., & Woldemariam, H. (eds.). Negotiating and contesting identities in linguistic landscapes. London: Bloomsbury, 147–162.
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Schneider, J. & Crul, M.
    (2012) Comparative integration context theory: Participation and belonging in diverse European cities. Crul, M., & Schneider, J. & Lelie, F. (eds.). The European second generation compared: Does the integration context matter?Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press, 19–37. 10.1515/9789048516926‑003
    https://doi.org/10.1515/9789048516926-003 [Google Scholar]
  31. Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. W.
    (2003) Discourses in place: Language in the material world. Routledge. 10.4324/9780203422724
    https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203422724 [Google Scholar]
  32. Silverstein, M.
    (2003) Indexical order and the dialectics of sociolinguistic life. InLanguage and Communication, 23, 193–229. 10.1016/S0271‑5309(03)00013‑2
    https://doi.org/10.1016/S0271-5309(03)00013-2 [Google Scholar]
  33. Stroud, C., & Mpendukana, S.
    (2009) Towards a material ethnography of linguistic landscape: Multilingualism, mobility and space in a South African township 1. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 13(3), 363–386. 10.1111/j.1467‑9841.2009.00410.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9841.2009.00410.x [Google Scholar]
  34. Szabó, T. P., & Troyer, R. A.
    (2017) Inclusive ethnographies: Beyond the binaries of observer and observed in linguistic landscape studies. Linguistic Landscape, 3(3), 306–326. 10.1075/ll.17008.sza
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ll.17008.sza [Google Scholar]
  35. Van Leeuwen, B.
    (2010) Dealing with urban diversity: Promises and challenges of city life for intercultural citizenship. Political theory, 38(5), 631–657. 10.1177/0090591710372869
    https://doi.org/10.1177/0090591710372869 [Google Scholar]
  36. Veenhoven, R.
    (2013) Conditions of happiness. Springer Science & Business Media.
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Vertovec, S.
    (2006) The emergence of super-diversity in Britain. ESRC Centre on Migration, Policy and Society Working Paper, 25.
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Virta, E., Sam, D. L., & Westin, C.
    (2004) Adolescents with Turkish background in Norway and Sweden: A comparative study of their psychological adaptation. Scandinavian journal of psychology, 45(1), 15–25. 10.1111/j.1467‑9450.2004.00374.x
    https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9450.2004.00374.x [Google Scholar]
  39. Wee, L., & Goh, R. B.
    (2019) Language, space and cultural play: Theorising affect in the semiotic landscape. Cambridge University Press. 10.1017/9781108559515
    https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108559515 [Google Scholar]
  40. Ziegler, E., Schmitz, U., & Uslucan, H. H.
    (2020) Community Ma(r)king in the linguistic landscape of the Ruhr Metropolis. Linguistic Landscape, 6(2), 183–212. 10.1075/ll.19031.zie
    https://doi.org/10.1075/ll.19031.zie [Google Scholar]
  41. (2018) Attitudes toward visual multilingualism in the linguistic landscape of the Ruhr Areas. Pütz, M. & Mundt, N. (eds.). Expanding the linguistic landscape: Linguistic diversity, multimodality and the use of space as a semiotic resource. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, 264–299. 10.21832/9781788922166‑015
    https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788922166-015 [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1075/ll.21013.mal
Loading
  • Article Type: Research Article
Keywords: ethnic minorities ; life satisfaction ; urban ; Linguistic Landscape ; integration
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