University of Szeged

Institute of English & American Studies

Vrfalvi Nikolett

Multilingualism in the linguistic landscape in the corridors of

the building of the Institute of English and American Studies,

Faculty of Arts, University of Szeged

Szakdolgozat/BA Thesis

Tmavezet/Supervisor

Szab-Gilinger Eszter

Szeged, 2015

Szegedi Tudomnyegyetem University of Szeged Angol-Amerikai Intzet Institute of English and American Studies SZEGED, Egyetem u. 2. Hungary, H-6722 Tel/Fax: 36.62.54.42.59.

BA SZAKDOLGOZAT BA THESIS

MSODIK CMLAP SECOND TITLE PAGE Szakdolgozatr neve (ahogy az ETR-ben szerepel)/Name of thesis writer (as registered in the ETR): Vrfalvi Nikolett Szakirny/Study track (alhzand/please underline): angol szakirny amerikanisztika szakirny BA szakdolgozat cme/Title of BA Thesis: Multilingualism in the linguistic landscape in the corridors of the building of the Institute of English and American Studies, Faculty of Arts, University of Szeged I. A szakdolgozathoz kapcsold, ktelezen vlaszthat rk / BA Thesis-related electives:

Az ra megnevezse Name of elective

Tanr neve Name of instructor

Idpont (v/flv) Time (year/semester)

1.Academic Writing Peckham, Donald, W. 2013/14/I.

2.Bilingualism Fenyvesi Anna 2012/13/II.

3.Second Language

Acquisition Peckham, Donald, W. 2011/12/II.

II Declaration on Plagiarism, Language Proficiency, and the Formal Adequacy of the Paper I declare that this BA Thesis, entitled Multilingualism in the linguistic landscape in the corridors of the building of the Institute of English and American Studies, Faculty of Arts, University of Szeged, is entirely the result of my own work, and that no material is included for which a degree has previously been conferred upon me. I have faithfully and accurately cited all my sources, including books, journals, handouts and unpublished manuscripts, as well as any other media, such as the Internet, letters or significant personal communication.

Furthermore, while I understand that it is permitted to consult another person concerning the language used in my work, I declare that the language of my work (beyond verbatim quotes) is indeed my own and faithfully represents my own level of proficiency in English.

Moreover, I declare that the length of my BA thesis is..9577.. words without the abstract, table of contents, bibliography, appendices and block quotations from the text to be analysed, thus it falls within the required range of 7,500-13,000 words. I understand that in case the paper does not meet the formal requirements of a BA thesis (does not fall within the required range of words, does not have the required number of bibliographical items, does not use the required format for citations), it automatically fails.

I also declare that the BA Thesis files uploaded on Faculty (Modulo and Institute platforms are identical and are also identical with the printed copy submitted.

Szeged, 2015.04.22. Vrfalvi Nikolett.... Szakdolgozatr alrsa / Signature of thesis writer

IV. Declaration on the Availability of the Corpus (Sign if applicable) I declare that the fieldwork materials, questionnaires, or interview-based data I have used in this paper are the results of my own data gathering, and I will make them available for inspection at the request of the opponent or supervisor. Szeged, 2015.04.22. Vrfalvi Nikolett.

Szakdolgozatr alrsa / Signature of thesis writer

i

Contents

Contents ....................................................................................................................................... i

Abstract ........................................................................................................................................

1. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 1

2. Literature review .................................................................................................................... 4

2.1 Public sign as a concept in the linguistic landscape ........................................................ 4

2.2 The notion of private sign within the field of the linguistic landscape ............................ 5

2.3 The classification of proper names in the linguistic landscape ....................................... 6

2.4 The problem of counting signs ......................................................................................... 7

2.5 The problem of the state of literacy and agency in public signage .................................. 8

3. Methodology ......................................................................................................................... 10

4. Results .................................................................................................................................. 12

4.1 Languages on signs ........................................................................................................ 12

4.2 Top-down versus bottom-up signs .................................................................................. 18

4.3 Proper names on signs ................................................................................................... 19

4.4 The font size of the ocular units ..................................................................................... 21

5. Discussion ............................................................................................................................ 23

5.1The presence and relevance of multiple languages in the linguistic landscape ............. 23

5.2 Informational and symbolic diversity on signs .............................................................. 25

5.3 The role of visuality in evaluating multilingual signs .................................................... 29

6. Conclusion and implications ................................................................................................ 31

Reference list ............................................................................................................................ 33

ABSTRACT

Linguistic landscape is a newly emerging area of sociolinguistics which studies signs in the

public space within a given territory, focusing on aspects of multilingualism. In this paper,

after summarizing the basic concepts of this scientific field, the signage is studied and

analyzed in an interior public space, the corridors of the Institute of English and American

Studies at the Faculty of Arts, University of Szeged, an internationally acclaimed university of

Hungary. The collected data is classified based on the type (public or private), function

(informative, warning, indicative), mono- or multilingual nature, and appearance (font size

and style, text positioning) of the signs. The aim of this research is to provide an overview of

the relative status of different languages in this academic setting, highlighting the

informational and symbolic aspects of sign choice and sign use.

Keywords: linguistic landscape, multilingualism, signage, interior public space, University of

Szeged, academic setting, sign choice, sign use

Absztrakt

A nyelvi tjkp a szociolingvisztika egyre dinamikusabban fejld ga, amely a kzssgi

trben lthat jeleket tanulmnyozza egy adott terlet hatrain bell, a hangslyt a

tbbnyelvsg aspektusaira helyezve. A jelen dolgozatban a tudomnyterlet alapvet

fogalmainak sszefoglalst kveten a nemzetkzi rang Szegedi Tudomnyegyetem

Blcsszettudomnyi Kar Angol-Amerikai Intzete folyosinak, azaz bels kzssgi ternek

jelei kerlnek vizsglatra s elemzsre. Az sszegyjttt adatok osztlyozsa a jelek tpusa

(kz- s magnfeliratok), szerepe (tjkoztat, figyelmeztet, jell), egy- vagy

tbbnyelvsge, valamint megjelense (betmret s -tpus, szvegelhelyezs) alapjn

trtnik. A kutats clja, hogy ttekintst nyjtson a klnbz nyelvek egymshoz

viszonytott helyzetrl az adott felsoktatsi krnyezetben, rvilgtva a jelkivlaszts s

jelalkalmazs informcis s szimbolikus szempontjaira.

Kulcsszavak: nyelvi tjkp, tbbnyelvsg, jelek sszessge, bels kzssgi tr, Szegedi

Tudomnyegyetem, felsoktatsi krnyezet, jelkivlaszts, jelalkalmazs

1

1. INTRODUCTION

As multilingualism has become unavoidably present at more and more places in our

globalised world, many communities find themselves facing the challenges generated by the

use of multiple languages. While passing along highways, roads, streets, or corridors inside

buildings, we are constantly exposed to images and signs around us written in several

languages.

The research area that deals with the languages on signs is called linguistic landscape

(abbreviated as LL). Linguistic landscape refers to the social context in which more than one

language is present (Gorter 2006:1). The study of this phenomenon began around the 1970s

but started to flourish later, when Landry and Bourhis published an article at the end of the

1990s, entitled Linguistic Landscape and ethnolinguistic Vitality: an empirical study (Landry

and Bourhis 1997). In Landry and Bourhiss classic definition, the linguistic landscape is the

visibility and salience of languages on public and commercial signs in a given territory or

region (Landry and Bourhis 1997:23). More specifically, the language of public roads signs,

advertising billboards, street names, place names, commercial shop signs, and public signs on

government buildings combines to form the linguistic landscape of a given territory, region or

urban agglomeration (Landry & Bourhis 1997:25).

Ben-Rafael et al. stated that the linguistic landscape refers to linguistic objects that

mark the public space, and further refined the interpretation of the term as the analysis of

any sign or announcement located outside or inside a public institution or a private business

in a given geographical location (Ben-Rafael et al. 2006: 7, 14). This study is based on the

latter, more inclusive definition since it allows for the observation of signs not only in the

open public space, but in more enclosed spaces, i.e. inside buildings and parts of buildings, as

well.

All the visual signs in public space, from the small flyers posted on light poles to the

large flashing digital billboards on building tops, are regarded as linguistic objects that are

important for attracting the publics interest. Most researchers are of the same mind as Landry

and Bourhis whose definition goes further and determines that the linguistic landscape,

besides its obvious informational function, has a symbolic function as well. Thus, the

linguistic landscape acts both as an informative and as a symbolic marker, expressing in its

latter role the relative power, i.e. high or low status, of a linguistic community (Spolsky &

2

Cooper, 1991). Understandably enough, there are differences between researchers in how

much emphasis they place on the socio-symbolic feature of the linguistic landscape.

Besides studying the informational and symbolic aspects of visual signage, linguistic

landscape has focused, from the beginning of its conception, on analysing the phenomena and

consequences of the co-existence of multiple languages in a given territory. Almost all

linguists use the term in this sense, apart from a few attempts to apply it in a monolingual

manner, like Papen (2012) did in her case study of the changing graphic environment of a

part of former East Berlin. The co-existence of languages inherently offers a challenge for LL

researchers to dissect this complex issue into several answerable questions, including, among

others:

- What languages are locally present?

- Which ones of them are more relevant?

- Is their use accepted by the public or enforced by the government or an authority?

- Is the representation of the different languages on signs in harmony with the literacy

level of the population of the given area?

- Are translations or transliterations available?

An accurate determination of the given geographical area of linguistic landscape

research is crucial if one wants to gain reliable data and results. Although most studies have

been very specific indeed in this respect, the growing interest in the investigation of the

linguistic aspect of visible signage since the late 1990s has focused mainly on the visual

language in exterior urban environments, like the exemplary work done by Gorter and

Shohamy more than a decade ago. However, there has still been little emphasis on the

examination of tokens in the interior of buildings.

My aim, therefore, is to investigate the corridors of the Institute of English and

American Studies in the building of the Faculty of Arts, University of Szeged, to obtain

information about the presence and aspects of multilingualism and visual signage in general,

and examine the private and public signs in an academic setting in particular. As

multilingualism has an ever-increasing presence in everyday life, multiple languages can be

found not only in a wider urban environment, but within the walls of one building as well.

The university as a research site lent itself perfectly to the generally agreed-upon goal of

linguistic landscape research by possibly being the most vibrant of all public places. The

notion of public space is an integral part of the concept of linguistic landscape, which

indicates how important it is to precisely determine the territorial-geographic dimension of the

3

analysis. Not only do monolingual signs exist in this intellectually challenging environment,

but bilingual and multilingual ones, too, so my research questions, accordingly, are the

following:

- Which languages are present in the linguistic landscape of the selected research site,

namely the corridors of the Institute of English and American Studies, University of

Szeged?

- What kind of information do the selected signs tell us about this multilingual

environment?

- What can the appearance, the font size, and the placement of the inscriptions

(including the possible differences in size and position between the languages

represented on the tokens) tell us about the tokens themselves?

- What kind of facts influence the choice of the languages used on the displayed signs?

- What is the role of multilingualism at the selected research site?

My hypothesis is that, after analysing the pictures that I have taken of the signs at the

university, as a methodological element, I will find many more public signs than private signs,

as the aim of the tokens and posters at the university is to inform the students mainly about

university news, language learning possibilities and entertainment opportunities. These

informative public signs are usually on display only for a limited amount of time since they

lose validity relatively quickly, whereas the position of private signs, like nameplates or

names of rooms and lecture halls, is more stable due to their more permanent informative role.

Furthermore, based on my analysis of the location of the languages that are on the signs, the

font size of the letters, the language choice itself, and the characteristics of proper names on

the inscriptions, I expect to see the dominance of Hungarian and English.

4

2. LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 PUBLIC SIGN AS A CONCEPT IN THE LINGUISTIC LANDSCAPE

Before discussing the basic concepts of the linguistic landscape, it is important to

clarify the meaning of sign, the object of every linguistic landscape study. According to

philosopher Charles Sanders Peirce, signs are linguistic elements that always take the form of

letters, words, sounds or images. However, Peirce also claims that Nothing is a sign unless it

is interpreted as a sign (Peirce 1931-58, Vol. 8:172). In other words, anything can be

interpreted as a sign, or token, in case it signifies something for someone. Each sign that is

visible at the Institute of English and American Studies, University of Szeged, bears meaning

for those who take a glance at it and give it a thought.

The theory of the great Swiss linguist Saussure also includes the notion of sign,

which is composed of a signifier (signifiant) and a signified (signifi) (Saussure 1983:

67). They are in connection with each other, and do not exist without each other (Saussure

1983:101). Highlighting the meaning of these terms is essential in order to understand the

examples that will be given in this paper. The Saussurean model states that the signifier is the

physical form of a token, that is, something which can be perceived with our sense-organs

(Saussure 1983:14-15). On the basis of this statement, for instance, the word Open on a door

of a shop is a sign consisting of a signifier, the physically present door sign itself, and a

signified, namely the fact that the shop is indeed open for people to enter. A name of a

company attached to the front of a building or institution is a kind of public sign that suggests

that the business-premises or offices of the firm are located in the building. In this example,

the sign itself means the company as a whole, so it can be claimed that the public sign is a

signifier and the company is the signified. So the signified item is always the thing or idea

that is denoted by a sign.

Shohamy and Gorter (2009) proposed the terms top-down and bottom-up to

divide signs into two, easily distinguishable categories.

A public sign, regarded as a top-down sign, is a specific type of semiotic sign which

constitutes an official token provided as information for society by the government or a

similar institution, like a municipality or public agency. Public signs transmit messages of

public interest such as topographic information, street names, directions, public

5

announcements, warnings, etc. They mainly denote and emphasize existing power relations,

which sometimes includes reminding people of their obligation to abide by the law. In

mercantile contexts, however, like marketing and advertising, their purpose is to call peoples

attention to a service or product (Backhaus 2007:5). In this respect, there is an overlap

between the roles that private signs and public signs play.

Top-down signs, just like bottom-up signs, can be divided into several types according

to the type of institution they represent, for instance, governmental, municipal, cultural,

religious or educational.

In the world of top-down signs, one can also come across indexes, icons and symbols

which provide additional, non-linguistic information. In the category of indexes, there are

arrows and other direction-indicating elements that are utilized to show people the right

direction. Maps can be considered as icons because they provide geographic information. The

study of public signage started a long time ago by Masai Mara in Tokyo and Peter

Rosenbaum in Jerusalem. Researchers are unanimous in their view that every kind of

information can be expressed in signs, whether it is a series of letters or a simple visual sign.

2.2 THE NOTION OF PRIVATE SIGN WITHIN THE FIELD OF THE LINGUISTIC LANDSCAPE

A private sign or bottom-up sign is a non-official semiotic sign that is placed by

individual social actors, like private organizations or persons, and is addressed to other private

citizens. Names of shops, street posters, tokens on businesses and personal announcements

can be considered as common forms of private signs. For the sake of giving an example, a

sign on a local shopkeepers window is absolutely bottom-up, since it does not have any

intention to communicate upwards to any municipal institutions or governmental agencies, its

core objective is to attract customers.

Bottom-up signs can be subdivided into different classes according to fields of

category and activity, for instance, food, clothing or jewelry. As multilingualism is present

everywhere nowadays and multiple languages are used within many communities and around

the globe, there is a great diversity of languages in private signs as well. One can find

numerous examples for monolingual as well as bilingual and multilingual private signs at

various locations, not just in an academic setting which is the object of my investigation.

6

2.3 THE CLASSIFICATION OF PROPER NAMES IN THE LINGUISTIC LANDSCAPE

There are many multilingual situations within the linguistic landscape that are

investigated and analysed by virtue of the languages utilized. Tokens often contain proper

names or nouns that claim serious attention and demand to be investigated and classified

(Edelman 2009:4). Proper names belong to the field of semantics and frequently refer to

nameplates, geographical areas, buildings, institutions or organizations (Haeseryn et al. 1997

in Edelman 2009:23); furthermore, proper names can reflect those languages that are used, to

some extent, by the whole community or parts thereof.

As many proper names can belong to two or more languages, it is not easy to

determine the language they are written in (Edelman 2009:71), so the context in which they

occur is very important (Edelman 2009:73). The classification of proper names can be

ambiguous and can cause difficulty in the analysis and methodology within the linguistic

landscape. The major problem is that a proper name can either be considered to be in a

specific foreign language or it is not coded as a foreign language (Edelman 2009, 80). If a

researcher does not regard proper names to be in a foreign language, he or she may come to a

misleading or confusing conclusion concerning the characteristics of the linguistic landscape.

Multiple solutions exist in this problematic field. Loulou Edelman, for instance,

approaches the problem of classification of proper names in several ways. Firstly, she

suggests that proper names could be excluded from analysis but then we would get an

inadequate picture of the linguistic landscape. Secondly, the language of the text surrounding

the name could be taken into account as the original language of the name. Thirdly, like the

majority of researchers, she comes to the conclusion that it is necessary to trace proper

names back to their origins (Smits 2013:13).

In most cases, advertisers or sign-owners in general (Spolsky 2009 in Dgi 2012:

344) use different languages in order to meet the language knowledge of a given social group

or the language traditionalism of an institution. For instance, the inscription Universitas-

Szeged on a board at the Institution of English & American Studies, Faculty of Arts,

University of Szeged, contains a Latin word Universitas for University, signalling that the

word university is derived from the ancient Latin syntagm universitas magistorum et

scholarium. This one-sentence analysis demonstrates that the origin of the proper name has

been indicated. Nevertheless, the aim of the proper name is not necessarily to transmit

7

particular information or to make the community understand the languages thereof in each

case but to have influence on peoples emotions. Haarmann refers to this phenomenon as

impersonal multilingualism (Haarmann 1986 in Edelman 2009:71). In our example, the use

of the Latin name for the University of Szeged, definitely suggests that it is a prestigious

institution with a long history of high academic standards and quality. The common

perception about Latin being a highly literary and scholarly language evokes the feeling of

respect from everyone who looks up at the inscription.

While numerous studies seem to indicate that it is important to determine the origin, or

the context, of the proper names on signs in the linguistic landscape to show people a clear

lingual picture around them, some researchers, like Gorter or Ldi, claim that the

classification of the proper names within the area of linguistic landscape has not caused any

difficulty up to the present time (Cenoz & Gorter 2005 in Edelman 2009). As an example,

Ldi did not take into consideration the original language of proper names in his landscape

study in Basel, Switzerland, so he regarded Vgele shoes as English, and he excluded the

German proper name Vgele from his analysis (Ldi 2007 in Edelman 2009:73). We can

hypothesize from the former consideration that the study of Ldi has remained open to doubt

and disagreement.

2.4 THE PROBLEM OF COUNTING SIGNS

Backhaus (2007) delineates in his famous study entitled A Comparative Study of

Urban Multilingualism in Tokyo that counting signs can cause difficulty, as there are

multilingual areas, like shop windows, where it is hard to determine what counts as a sign. In

order to avoid misleading results, it is important to restrict our field of research to a well-

defined area. Like Backhaus in his survey a few years ago when he chose only those streets

for analysis that were near subway stations in Tokyo (Backhaus 2007 in Spolsky in Gorter

2009:32), I also restricted my research area to a well-defined location, namely, to the

corridors of the Institute of English and American Studies at the Faculty of Arts, University of

Szeged. Backhaus (2006) also revealed that there are researchers who count only those signs

that are composed of more than one language, but in my study I count monolingual signs as

well. Besides aiming to avoid ambiguity, I have narrowed down my research location to the

corridors of the Institute of English and American Studies and decided not to include the

8

classrooms and offices, because the paintings hanging on the walls of these rooms belong to

the artistic landscape and not to the linguistic landscape.

2.5 THE PROBLEM OF THE STATE OF LITERACY AND AGENCY IN PUBLIC SIGNAGE A sociolinguistic approach should definitely include and apply considerations of

semiotics. Being different from traditional linguistics by studying non-linguistic signs as well,

semiotics, i.e. the general study of tokens, puts an emphasis on the state of literacy, which is a

problematic field also within the linguistic landscape. The study of literacy includes different

kinds of items that can serve as objects for analysis, like letters, tickets, signs or even warning

symbols (Spolsky in Gorter 2009:29). In all these cases, the choice of language is really

determining, because if the target audience does not understand the language they are written

in, they can get mixed up concerning the real meaning of the units (Spolsky in Gorter 2009:

30) and, as a consequence, the signs do not achieve the purpose of transmitting the desired

message. Spolsky says that the distinction of private and public signs is a post-hoc guess

(Spolsky in Gorter 2009:31). He is of the opinion that a sign is an end-product of a process in

which there are many agents, namely the sign-owner, the sign-maker, the reader and

the language management authority. Their choice of language always carries a symbolic

value.

Spolsky defines three conditions that are significant parts of the language choice on

public signage. As many spelling and grammatical mistakes can occur in case of tokens

produced in foreign languages, the first condition is that it is necessary to compose a sign in a

language that the individual is familiar with. The second one is the presumed readers

condition. This rule means that one should produce a sign in a language that is supposed to

be understood by the individuals who are expected to read it. Finally, the third rule gives an

explanation for the claim why the language of a token has to be your own (Spolsky 2009:33).

English, being the currently most international language, is often the first choice on

public signage, despite the fact that in many cases it does not fulfill the three conditions

defined by Spolsky. Its use, however, is justified because this is the language that not only

has largely symbolic value, but also carries distinctive connotations. First and foremost it

conveys notions of internationality, success, and Western orientation (Muth 2010)

(Singhasiri 2013:8). In other words, even if it is not fully understood or owned by the target

audience, using English can be perceived as more prestigious and modern than using the

local languages (see also Piller 2001, 2003) (Dgi 2012:354).

9

In his Foreword to the above mentioned Tokyo study by Backhaus, Spolsky

summerizes the dilemma of literacy as follows, [] in much of the world, vernacular

literacy lags behind standard language literacy. Thus, what is sometimes interpreted as

differences in language choice may well be the result of a difference in literacy development.

(Spolsky in Backhaus 2007:x)

As for the present study, I can state that the academic setting I chose as site for my

investigation was indeed ideal because the gap between vernacular literacy and standard

language literacy was much narrower than it would have been in other social settings.

10

3. METHODOLOGY

The analysis of the utility or, to use the semiotic term, salience of signs with the

methods of the linguistic landscape has provoked many new thoughts and ideas related to

multilingualism (Shohamy 2006:110). Nevertheless, because the linguistic landscape is a

relatively new and currently emerging branch within linguistics, "the methodologies

employed in the collection and categorisation of written signs is still controversial" (Tufi & Blackwood 2010:197). Differing opinions result in a highly flexible concept and a wide

variety of methodologies (Shohamy and Gorter 2009). It is very important for the clarity and

unambiguity of any research project to decide which of the many approaches we adopt and

determine the specifics of the methodology we intend to follow.

What everybody accepts and agrees on is that, in a methodological sense, linguistic

landscape analysis has to rely mainly on photography, complemented occasionally by other

means of data collection, like interviews with sign-owners or readers. Accordingly, the

present linguistic landscape study is also based on the use of digital photography. The

photographs of the selected signs have been taken only in the corridors of the Institute of

English and American Studies at the Faculty of Arts, University of Szeged, and do not include

any pictures from the classrooms and offices at the same institution since the tokens in the

latter places could not be analysed linguistically, only artistically. Thirty pictures were taken

in total with a camera at the same time on 9th October, 2013 and twenty-six (26) of them were

chosen to be categorized and analyzed to warrant the relevant concepts that were selected in

the literature review. However, only eighteen (18) of them were selected to analysed in

greater detail.

Each piece was regarded as one unit, or token. The tokens were classified on the basis of

- the type and number of languages used (monolingual, bilingual or multilingual

tokens),

- whether they depicted top-down or bottom-up signs,

- the proper names on the signs and, ultimately,

- the font size of the ocular units.

Beside the above categorization, the tokens were also divided into three groups, based on their

function:

11

- The first group consists of posters which in most cases include both textual and

graphic elements and are displayed for university students with the purpose to

advertise and inform about future learning, work or entertainment opportunities, like

study trips, programs seeking multilingual talents, or services provided by local

businesses.

- The second group takes into account warning signs that are on display not only for the

students of the institute but for everyone who enters the building; these signs may also

include both textual and graphic elements.

- The third group contains nameplates, well-visible signs that indicate names of

professors, offices, and institutional units. Nameplates are formal tokens, often made

of metal, that can be found outside or on the doors of offices and classrooms.

It is important to emphasize at this point that the present research was conducted not

only within a confined space, but also within a limited period of time, so the results thereof

reflect only a snapshot of the changing linguistic landscape of an academic setting. Thus,

because the general conclusions were drawn from results that arise from a limited number of

data, this thesis is based on inductive reasoning.

12

4. RESULTS

4.1 LANGUAGES ON SIGNS

The first aspect of my analysis was concerned with how the different languages appear

on the tokens. I started the processing of the collected data with the investigation of the first

group, namely the photographs of textual posters. Based on the figures, the following results

have occurred:

Table 1. Types and number of languages on posters and advertisements (own source).

Number of languages Types of languages Pieces of items

Monolingual English; Hungarian; German 7

Bilingual English-Hungarian; French- Hungarian 6

Multilingual (including tri- and quadrilingual) Hungarian-English-Catalan 1

As can be seen in Table 1, the use of two or more languages, appearing simultaneously

on posters, is as common as the use of one language on its own in the corridors of the Institute

of English and American Studies, Faculty of Arts, University of Szeged. We can state that the

type of languages used in monolingual and bilingual settings are national languages, namely

English, Hungarian, German and French. It can also be ascertained that the presence of

English is, understandably, high.

13

PICTURE 2. Bilingual poster of a foreign language certificate program

The following pictures well depict the occurring monolingualism and bilingualism on

posters in the corridors at the Institute of English and American Studies, Faculty of Arts,

University of Szeged:

The one trilingual example was a poster of the Department of Hispanic Studies,

announcing a briefing about their Catalan Minor program (see Picture 10). This poster is an

obvious blend of signage originating from two sign-owners: the Hungarian university

department used the pictures and logo of the Catalan Ramon Llull Institute, whose mission is

the promotion of Catalan language and culture abroad

(http://www.llull.cat/english/home/index.cfm). The message itself is in Hungarian, the name

of the Catalan supporter of the program is in Catalan, and the slogan in the middle written in

capital letters and probably used in every partner country is in English.

As opposed to the above mentioned national languages, Catalan is a co-official

language of the autonomous provinces of Catalonia within Spain. Even though it is the only

national and official language of the microstate of Andorra, it has not won an independent,

national status in Spain or, for that matter, in international public perception. The presence of

Catalan demonstrates that the language on a sign, besides its primary informative role, may

also bear a symbolic value through which the public's attention can be drawn to the status of

the given linguistic community. At the same time, the fact that the marketing of this minority

language in a non-Anglo-Saxon target country is unimaginable without the help of the worlds

PICTURE 1. Monolingual advertisement for a teaching practice program abroad

14

number one international language proves the overwhelming dominance of English in the

global linguistic landscape.

Table 2. Types and number of languages on warning signs (own source).

Number of languages Types of languages Pieces of items

Monolingual Hungarian 2

Bilingual English-Hungarian 2

Multilingual (including tri- and quadrilingual) - -

From the warning signs that were photographed on the research site, two were

bilingual and one was monolingual. Making it clear to everybody what procedure is to be

followed in case of fire or emergency is absolutely crucial. Thus, the logical prediction at the

beginning of the data-collection process in this category was that each warning sign would be

(and should be) translated into English. The textual sign on a high voltage transformer box,

however, warns of electric shock hazard only in Hungarian. The message is made

unambiguous for non-speakers of Hungarian by the internationally used graphic sign and the

voltage value next to the text.

15

PICTURE 3. Monolingual warning sign

Table 3. Types and number of languages on name signage (own source).

Number of languages Types of languages Pieces of items

Monolingual English; Hungarian 2

Bilingual English-Hungarian; Latin-Hungarian 6

Multilingual (including tri- and quadrilingual) - -

The higher percentage of occurrence of bilingual name signs is due to the fact that the

exact identification of services, organizational units, and individuals who belong to and fill

different positions within these units is indispensable to providing guidance, thus ensuring the

chaos-free movement and communication of people in the corridors of the English

Department. On metal nameplates, the Hungarian name is always above the English

translation, and the occasional difference between the two languages in the length of the texts

or the size of the letters is a consequence of the general characteristics of Hungarian and

English, not necessarily indicative of the dominance of one over the other.

A unique phenomenon, which does not occur in many languages other than

Hungarian, is that in Hungarian personal names the last name comes before the first name,

PICTURE 4. Bilingual warning sign

16

therefore it is possible, and necessary, to translate these types of proper names on English-

language signs by changing the order of their components. This is well-exemplified by the

name of the Head of the English Department, in which the original Hungarian word order

Kiss Attila changes in accordance with the rules of the English language to Attila Kiss (see

Picture 11.

In some cases, translations were either inconsistent (i.e. one part was in English, the

other part was in Hungarian), or they were missing altogether, like in the case of Radnti

Kvz. A one-time, non-native visitor would have a hard time locating and identifying this

place based on the name sign on the door, because the Hungarian word kvz may not

necessarily suggest, especially for non-linguists with limited interest in etymology, that it is in

fact the Hungarian equivalent of caf and that both names originate from the same root

meaning coffee. The vertically written Latin name Universitas (discussed in detail in

Section 2.3.) does not require translation, but its obvious meaning and the large size of the

letters, at least in relation to the name and logo of the caf, makes the recognition of what is

behind the door even more difficult.

PICTURE 5. Inconsistency of translation on a bilingual sign: part of the name of the organizational unit is in Hungarian, part of it is in English

PICTURE 6. Missing translation: the name of the catering business unit is in Hungarian only

Even though name signs are more permanent than posters and advertisements, the

photos still depict examples where the names were not engraved on a metal plaque but rather

printed on a piece of paper and pinned up on a notice-board, or stenciled on the surface of a

door. This may be the result of several factors, e.g. an unexpected change in staff or the

expression of the sign-owners taste. The type of material used is, however, usually not the

reflection of negligence or of the level of importance of a certain academic unit or member of

17

staff, but rather the proof that funds at institutions of higher education are often limited,

especially for pure aesthetic purposes.

The aggregate result for the languages on the twenty-six selected signs including

informative, warning and name signage was the following:

Table 4. Types and number of languages on all signage (own source).

Number of languages Types of languages Pieces of items

Monolingual Hungarian (5); English (4); German (2) 11

Bilingual English-Hungarian (11); French-Hungarian (2); Latin-Hungarian (1)

14

Multilingual (including tri- and quadrilingual)

Hungarian-English-Catalan 1

Based on the above data, it can be stated that the total number of monolingual signs

was lower than that of bilingual signs. The languages that were present on the site at the time

of my research were Hungarian, English, German, French, Latin and Catalan. The majority of

the monolingual signs were in Hungarian or English, and two were in German. Most of the

bilingual signs were in Hungarian and English, two were in Hungarian and French, and one

was in Hungarian and Latin. This confirms that my prediction concerning the dominance of

Hungarian and English was correct.

The use of English in this academic environment is not simply accepted, but rather

expected. Displaying the names of the departments and teachers of the university, preferably

in a uniform and organized manner, is probably an official requirement, which is also dictated

by common sense. The more unregulated nature of posters and advertisements explains the

inconsistencies detected in translations, or the lack thereof, as well as in the physical

appearance of the languages on signs.

The co-existence of languages on the signage on the corridors of the Institute of

English or American Studies reflects the multilingualism that prevails among the walls of this

internationally acclaimed university, presumably at other departments as well. If data

collection was conducted at a different time, we would probably see other languages

represented as well, but the official language of the home country of the institution

(Hungarian) and the number one international language (English) would unquestionably be

18

the two most relevant languages. It is all the more so because the research site for this study

was that part of the university which functions as the headquarters of English and American

culture and knowledge.

4.2 TOP-DOWN VERSUS BOTTOM-UP SIGNS

The second step of my analysis was to make a different classification of the tokens,

based this time on whether they belong to the top-down (public) or bottom-up (private)

category of signs. After regrouping the collected data (photographs), I have made the

following findings:

Table 5.Category and class of all signage (own source).

Category Class Total No.

Top-down signs

8 signs offering/informing about official learning and scholarship opportunities, both mandatory and optional

19 1 psychological counseling for students 6 name signs 4 warning signs

Bottom-up signs 5 entertainment and catering services

7 1 private teaching 1 employment agency

Similarly to the language-based classification of the tokens, my hypothesis has proved

to be correct: the number of public signs well exceeded that of private signs.

The public signs were put on display mainly by the University of Szeged, or certain

departments and institutes there are. Other institutions and foundations affiliated with the

University of Szeged also chose to spread their message by appearing in the on-campus

signage, including the Hungarian Academy of Sciences and, last but not least, the Hungarian

representatives of foreign organizations, like Alliance Franaise (a France-based international

network whose aim is to promote French culture and language learning) or ECL (the

European Consortium for the Certificate of Attainment in Modern Languages). The

information transmitted by these public signs included foreign-language training and

certification, teaching practice abroad, mandatory and extracurricular courses, and

scholarships as well as psychological counseling.

19

The private signs were posted both by businesses and by private individuals with the

purpose of advertising services related, on the one hand, to the studies conducted by the

students of the Faculty of Arts, like foreign-language tutoring or foreign-language job

opportunities, and, on the other hand, to everyday needs and entertainment, like restaurant or

caf services, physical or virtual free-time activities (self-defence training, Facebook groups).

The choice of language was clearly influenced by who the target audience was: for

Hungarian students, public and private sign-makers alike created Hungarian-language

messages, while for foreign and Hungarian students together, they designed posters either in

English or in the language of the course or service concerned.

4.3 PROPER NAMES ON SIGNS

Among the twenty-six (26) tokens analysed within the present study, eighteen (18)

contained proper names. These proper names were either the names of persons or of

organizations and institutions. The following table shows the distribution of personal and

organizational names in the signage on display at the time of the present linguistic landscape

analysis. Some tokens contained personal and organizational names as well, which I counted

separately, as one example for personal, one example for organizational names. When a token

contained a list of several personal names of the same type, I counted it as one example within

the category:

PICTURE 7. Public sign offering psychological counselling in Hungarian

PICTURE 8. Private sign from a recruitment company offering multilingual job opportunities in English

PICTURE 9. Public sign advertising a four-day interdisciplinary event in German

20

Table 6.Distribution of proper names by type (own source).

Personal names: 5 Organizational names: 16

Displayed alone: 1 On posters: 12

With organizational name: 4 On nameplates: 4

Total number of proper names: 21

The first token from the following two examples for the appearance of personal and

organizational names focuses on the advertised event, not on the name of the department or

the name of the professor who holds the event. These proper names themselves, therefore, do

not constitute the most conspicuous part of the token. On the second public sign, however, the

personal name itself is in the center, which suggests that this proper name and the title

attached to it is the message itself that passers-by are supposed to receive, even though this

nameplate is made of paper, not metal, which is more customary and occurs more

frequently.

As was mentioned above, in Section 4.1 on the characteristics of languages on signs,

the translation, that is, the bilingual representation of names, showed some inconsistencies

(Picture 5). All in all, however, it sufficiently served the purpose of identifying and showing

the whereabouts of the organizational units and their staff to regular and random visitors alike.

PICTURE 10. Personal and organizational names in one poster in an unemphasized position on the sign

PICTURE 11. Personal name in an unorthodox nameplate in an emphasized position on the sign

21

One dilemma I faced in the course of the categorization of proper names was the name

of a catering unit called Don Quijote Pizzria (Picture 18). Like Ldi (2007), I decided not

to take into consideration the foreign (Spanish) origin of the proper name Don Quijote

because it is well-known and widely used among Hungarian native speakers, and Pizzria,

the head (or stem) of the name of the business unit, although it is an Italian loan word, has

already become part of the Hungarian vocabulary as well, which is also indicated by the acute

accent mark on the original e. Consequently, despite the fact that it consisted of two foreign

elements, in my analysis this proper name was considered to be Hungarian.

4.4 THE FONT SIZE OF THE OCULAR UNITS

The font size of texts on signage and the ocular units thereof is of utmost importance

because it may determine whether a given sign and the message it carries will receive the

expected attention and, as a consequence, get across to the target audience. Font size,

therefore, is perhaps the most essential among the visual characteristics of signage. While the

previous sections were concerned first and foremost with the content of signs, the study of

font size sheds light on the form in which signs manifest themselves in the linguistic

landscape andcomplement the final meaning of the intended message.

The most obvious observation that can be made at first sight is that posters showed a

much wider variety in font size than warnings or name signs. In posters and advertisements,

the differences in font size within one token were a result of the decisions that sign-owners or

sign-makers had made concerning the focal point of their message and, in case of bilingual or

multilingual messages, the relevance of the languages in relation to each other in the given

context. On nameplates and warning signs, similarity or uniformity were more prevalent.

Nevertheless, English was given a slight priority over Hungarian on metal plaques not by

increased font size but simply by the use of uppercase instead of lowercase.

22

Based on the above, the diversification of the linguistic landscape can be easily

demonstrated even from one single aspect, like font size or capitalization. Within the typically

multilingual environment of the selected research site, among the multitude of signs along the

corridors, it is very easy to be in sight and still remain unnoticed. That is why the proper use

and alteration of font size itself can make a big difference in the impact a sign has on its

environment and the target audience.

PICTURE 13. Despite the identical font size, the priority of English is indicated by capitalized letters.

PICTURE 12. A poster advertising a scholarship program. The focal point of its message is of larger font size.

23

5. DISCUSSION

5.1THE PRESENCE AND RELEVANCE OF MULTIPLE LANGUAGES IN THE LINGUISTIC LANDSCAPE

Lingusitic landscape studies can be used to identify the linguistic boundaries of a certain

area (Ben-Rafael & Shohamy 2006 in Ryan 2011) as well as to assess the impact and

penetration of multilingualism in a community (Huebner 2006 and Cenoz & Gorter 2006 in Ryan

2011).

The reason for the strong impact of multilingualism i.e. the simultaneous presence of

multiple languages and the outstanding relevance of English in the linguistic landscape of

the selected segment of Szeged University is straightforward: this is that part of the Faculty of

Arts where teachers and students of the Institute of English or American Studies who, of

course, understand and speak English by default frequent on a daily basis. Furthermore,

the messages displayed in more than one language are usually meant not only for Hungarian

students of English but for foreign students as well.

Students, who are the primary targets of the originators of signs in this setting, are

often participants in scholarship programs, like Erasmus, which is a European Union student

exchange program that makes it possible for foreign students to spend a term in Szeged to

pursue English or American Studies, among others. (The program is not only named after the

Dutch philosopher, Erasmus; it is also an acronym which means EuRopean Community Action

Scheme for the Mobility of University Students.) Almost a twin to the Erasmus Program is the

Campus Hungary program (see Picture 12) which, according to its online definition, aims to

enhance international student mobility in higher education, both in terms of having more

incoming foreign students to Hungary and also having more Hungarian students studying

abroad. [] The main goal of the program is to support and facilitate the internationalisation

of Hungarian higher education by initiating and deepening cooperation with foreign higher

education institutions and achieving knowledge exchange. (http://campushungary.org)

It is worth quoting from the mission statement of the program, whose advertisement

had a central position among the posters included in my study, because it grasps perfectly the

essence of multiculturalism and multilingualism that is imprinted on and reflected by the

linguistic landscape. The above statements contain the most frequently used terms of our

24

globalised environment: mobility, internationalisation, cooperation, knowledge exchange.

These concepts are unimaginable and unfeasible without the use of multiple languages.

It was conspicuous, though, that the main message on bilingual posters advertising

learning, knowledge exchange, and certification opportunities for Hungarian undergraduate

students in the spirit of the above concepts was consistently in Hungarian, and the only

parts in the signs that were in English were the names of the programs or institutions

concerned (see Pictures 1, 2, 12). This sign-making strategy, classified on the basis of

musicology-inspired part writing types (Backhaus 2007), places our examples in the mixed

category, or, based on Rehs multilingual writing types, in the category of fragmentary or

overlapping multilingualism (Reh 2004 in Backhaus 2007:91).

Moreover, there were three posters among the selected tokens whose makers chose to

omit any Hungarian translation or explanation altogether and transferred their message only in

one foreign language, thus creating monolingual, or monophonic, signs (English and German,

respectively). This suggests that the sign-makers had a specific target group in mind, namely

advanced learners, graduate or postgraduate students, professors and, presumably, native

speakers of the given languages (see Pictures 8, 9, 14).

The more disciplined and uniform nameplates and warning signs were the perfect

manifestations of homophonic bilingual signs or, in Rehs terminology, of duplicated

multilingalism, in which mutual translation was completely available(see Pictures 4, 13).

PICTURE 13. A monolingual (or monophonic) sign advertising a Facebook-activity in English.

PICTURE 14. A bilingual (or polyphonic) sign advertising private language tutoring.

25

Among the bottom-up signs, in an advertisement offering private language tutoring, I

came across a perfect polyphonic example which, according to Reh, could also be called an

example for complementary multilingualism (see Picture 15).The purpose of not making the

translation of the foreign-language part of the inscription available was to increase the

curiosity and interest of a specific segment of the sign readers: Hungarian students who have

already studied a little French but aspire to be more proficient in it, perhaps pass an exam.

The latent observations above, namely that sign-makers choose the language on their

signs carefully for a targeted group of sign-readers, seems to contradict what, in reference to

Wienolds view on inscriptions, Backhaus calls the basic characteristic of language on signs:

the lack of a recognisable emitter and lack of a specified target group.(Backhaus 2007:8)

Keeping in mind that, in Backhauss definition, language means written language as opposed

to spoken language and it refers to the wording of a message rather than to the choice between

native and foreign languages, we still have to argue with his statement that the originators of

messages deal with a completely unknown readership. (Backhaus 2007:9) It is probably

true in a big-city setting, like Tokyo, whose signs served as the object for Backhauss case

study, but does not really apply to the smaller, interior, academic setting in which I conducted

my study.

Nevertheless, what applies to the use of multiple languages in the linguistic landscape

that I investigated, and what is an undeniably valid approach from Backhauss milestone

book, is that the sign-maker is usually an indistinct larger entity a private or official

organisation rather than an individual person. [] The sign reader has no immediate means

of responding to the transmitted message,and last but not least, languages on signs also

differ from various other forms of written language use in that they require to be read at a

certain point in space in order to make sense. (Backhaus 2007: 9)

5.2 INFORMATIONAL AND SYMBOLIC DIVERSITY ON SIGNS

My research site was a relatively small point in space where a wide variety of

messages are on display either permanently or on a rotational basis, with a higher ratio of

textual elements than what other studies include that cover a more extended geographical

area, like a district in a big city, with signs that address a larger segment of the population.

This increased role of textuality in the public space examined in my study comes from the fact

that the given linguistic landscape actors (Ben-Rafael 2006) represent a relatively narrow

26

layer of society with an above-average level of literacy. Moreover, both the originators and

the readers/translators of the signs may come from different societies of different countries,

hence the diversity of the messages and languages. It follows from the above that, in such a

multilingual environment, deciphering the meaning of signs naturally involves informational

and symbolic components as well.

This complexity is well described in the groundbreaking work by Scollon & Scollon

(1996) entitled Intercultural Communication:the language we use must always be borrowed

from some discourse which is located in time, history, and society, and our listeners hear not

only meaning but also the time, history, and society from which we have borrowed our

language. (Scollon 1996 in Castillo-Ayometzi 2009) This definition, of course, can be

applied not only to listeners but to readers of signs as well.

Besides warnings and the identification of organizational units and staff, the signs in

the corridors of the Institute of English and American Studies cover three major subject areas:

study, work and entertainment. What differentiates them from signs in other public spaces is

the timeliness and specificity of their messages. What is significant and meaningful for the

readers here would be inessential and meaningless for the general public outside the building.

The opportunities for teaching practice, language certification, foreign scholarship, scientific

symposia and specialization (see Pictures 1, 2, 9, 10, 12) would not be of any interest for

casual passers-by.

These posters, however, do not only carry the literal meaning of their textual

components but also reflect the time, history, and society (Scollon 1996) in which they

were created. A lot of these programs would have been unimaginable before the change of the

political system in Hungary at the beginning of the 1990s. The education system itself was

different, too; graduate certificates were not called Bachelors or Masters degrees, so the

abbreviations BA and MA would have looked unfamiliar to most students, even though

students of English would have recognised them as titles used in English-speaking countries.

At the same time, western products advertised in the language of their country of origin would

have appeared just as unfamiliar in this academic setting:

27

It is no coincidence, therefore, that linguistic landscape as an interdisciplinary branch

of linguistics started to rise to prominence from the 1990s when so many former Communist

countries became democratic and opened their borders towards the West, thus allowing the

bidirectional flow of people, goods, and ideas to become the norm instead of the exception, in

parallel with economic globalisation and the more or less successful democratisation of many

parts of the world.

Taking the historical background into account, one cannot help noticing that Russian,

which used to be the only foreign language mandatorily taught in the Hungarian education

system in the not-too-distant past, was missing completely from the surveyed area of the

university. This proves that multilingualism, if not complemented by public acceptance, can

be enforced by governments or authorities only temporarily.

A linguistic landscape study conducted in Chiinu, the capital city of the Republic of

Moldova, also reinforces the above statement in its chapter entitled Language and politics

by highlighting that Russian dominated in all public domains and was essential to know in

higher education until the declaration of independence from the Soviet Union when the

status of Russian was devalued as well, as it lost its distinguished status as a language on

equal footing with Romanian and became a language of interethnic communication

(Dumbrava, 2003:54) (Muth 2009:3). Nevertheless, the study does not intend to simplify the

situation and paints a more sophisticated picture of the continuously changing power relations

between Romanian and Russian, the two native languages of the country, and the increasingly

important English language when it states that it remains to be seen if the claim that English

PICTURE 15. A bilingual, top-down poster that not all readers would have understood back in the 1980s.

PICTURE 16. A monolingual, bottom-up advertisement displayed on a vending machine. It would have looked out-of-place and in the 1980s.

28

is entrenched firmly as the globally dominant language (Mair, 2006:10) can be applied to

Moldova as well or if Russian can uphold its status as a lingua franca in the country(Muth

2009:5). This could be an interesting question for future LL studies in Hungary whether

English will maintain its overwhelming dominance or other foreign languages can also gain

(or regain) ground in the multilingual arena with time.

As for the present analysis, the above-mentioned timeliness and specificity are also

manifested in posters advertising work, entertainment, or services that have emerged and

become popular during the past few years and decades. The examples I found included

- a job offer requiring advanced language skills (Picture 8),

- entertainment offers that were either virtual or real, like spending time on Facebook

(Picture 13) or with friends at a pizzeria (Picture 18), and

- a service offer aimed at improving quality of life (Picture 7).

All three areas were developing and growing simultaneously with the political and economic

transformation of the country: jobs requiring multilingual skills or restaurants offering

foreign food were rare previously (the word pizzeria Italian restaurant itself is a relative

newcomer in Hungarian). Psychological counseling has recently become more acknowledged

as its wide international acceptance became evident. Facebook, the online social networking

service, did not even exist a few years ago.

The internet, which plays a central role in connecting people from all over the world

and fostering globalisation and multilingualism, has an overall presence and impact on the

linguistic landscape as well. We can find website addresses in every category of the tokens

examined in this study, the only exception being the warning signs.

The examples above prove that each token can be analysed on the basis of its literal

meaning and the information it intends to transfer to the target audience within a delineated

area. Nevertheless, each token can be analysed with its history and symbolism in mind as

well. Linguistic landscape research, therefore, should be concerned not only with the spatial

determination of the survey areas (Backhaus 2007:65), but also with the temporal

determination thereof. The interpretation of both the informational and the symbolic aspect of

signage may change with time.

29

5.3 THE ROLE OF VISUALITY IN EVALUATING MULTILINGUAL SIGNS

As was pointed out in Section 4.4., font size and style are probably the most essential

among the visual characteristics of signs, but it is not the only criterion that determines how

efficient sign makers are at addressing their readers and making them zoom in on the focal

element of their message. In the case of bi- or multilingual signs, it is especially interesting

which words and languages are given positions of prominence or indeed positions of

obscurity. (Smits2013:3) A language on a sign is considered to be more prominent if it is

larger, in a more eye-catching font or in a position which makes it superior to another. (Ryan

2011:10)

In my selected research site, the representation of two or more languages on one sign was

usually quite balanced, especially in the case of warning signs and nameplates, the difference

being mainly in the use of lowercase and capitalization, not in the positioning of the languages

(see Sections 4.3. and 4.4.). Besides the conspicuous contrast between lowercase and uppercase

fonts, one more tool that sign makers applied to achieve the desired result was underlining the

central part of their message (Picture 15).

The posters, in general, show more variability, but they do not create the impression that

they would give prominence or preference to one language over the other. Even if no word-for-

word translations were available, the different parts of the texts complemented each other,

occasionally supported by non-textual images as well.

In Picture 2, for example, in a bilingual poster of a foreign language certificate

program, the name of the host institution is on the top in English, accentuated with a striking

red background colour, but because the Hungarian slogan in the lower part of the poster is of

the same size, and the Hungarian-language description of the program is much longer than the

two English-language title lines, the reader does not have the feeling that one language would

be superior to another. The international significance of gaining the advertised certification is

further emphasized by the outline map of Europe in the background.

A similar balance of letter size and positioning can be seen on the poster of Alliance

Franaiseas well, in which the upper half of the sign is occupied by photos and images and

lower half is shared evenly by French and Hungarian textual elements (Picture 17).

30

On the poster of the pizzeria (Picture 18) mentioned in Section 5.2., text effects were

also applied: the informal questions that are supposed to address potential customers directly

are not only larger than the answers but all the letters are outlined and shadowed as well. The

name of the catering unit is sticking out of the text block with its yellow colouration, and the

message is accentuated by a non-textual component, the recurring photographic clich of the

face of a smiling customer.

Smiling faces and text effects were applied on other signs as well, sometimes not too

successfully: in Picture 8, for example, the chaotic mix of visual tools, like font alternation,

shadowing, italicizing, colouring, and capitalizing resulted in a rather confusing end product.

This token demonstrated perfectly how important it is to present a message in a harmonious

overall appearance; it does not matter how well-worded the text is on a sign if the improper

use of visual tools makes the message fall apart.

PICTURE 17. A bilingual poster with a balanced French-to-Hungarian and text-to-image ratio

PICTURE 18. A monolingual poster using text effects

31

6. CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS

The purpose of the present paper was to provide a brief but comprehensive picture of

the linguistic landscape of a high-traffic area, namely the interior of the Institute of the

English and American studies at the University of Szeged, and, on the basis of the collected

visual data, draw conclusions concerning the status and role of the different languages on

signs in an increasingly multilingual environment.

Following the review of the founding ideas and concepts of the linguistic landscape,

which is an emerging branch of linguistics with strong interdisciplinary features, the focus of

my research was to take stock of the co-existing languages in this academic setting, determine

their relevance and ratio of representation with regard to the higher-than-average literacy level

of the majority of the actors in this academic setting, sign makers and sign readers alike. The

methodology I applied, despite its limitations, was suitable for the intended purpose of this

study, and the results I obtained confirmed the validity of my hypothesis about the prominent

status of the Hungarian and English languages and the dominance of public signs over private

signs.

Since the visual features of communication are in the center of linguistic landscape

studies, the present paper put the emphasis not only on listing the available languages and

classifying the tokens, but also on examining of the appearance, size, and position thereof.

The main finding of my work was that, despite the inconsistencies in providing or

omitting to provide translations, there is a natural and balanced coexistence between

languages in this academic environment, maybe even more so than in other public spaces. It

comes from the multilingual nature of the selected signage that the message it transfers carries

informational and symbolic elements as well, packed with political-cultural-sociological

allusions.

These findings could be well complemented with data from future studies. It would be

a challenging task to contrast an updated and expanded set of data from my survey area with

results originating from non-language-oriented departments or faculties of the university. Due

to the constant flow of students, guest lecturers, and visiting professors and also to the

international language requirements in the area of research and higher education further

studies would probably prove that multilingualism is becoming more and more prevalent,

which does not only have an impact on the development of linguistics in general, and

32

landscape studies in particular, but also on other branches of science and aspects of social,

economic, political, and everyday life.

33

REFERENCE LIST

Backhaus, Peter. 2007. Linguistic Landscapes: A Comparative Study of Urban

Multilingualism in Tokyo. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters Ltd (Multilingual Matters 136),

Foreword by Bernard Spolsky.

Ben-Rafael, Eliezer;Shohamy, Elana; Hasan Amara, Muhammad; Trumper-Hecht

Nira.2006. Linguistic landscape as symbolic construction of public space: The case of

Israel.In Durk Gorter ed. Linguistic Landscape: A New Approach to Multilingualism.

Clevedon: Multilingual Matters, 7-30.

Castillo-Ayometzi, Cecilia. 2009. Some Issues of Intercultural Communication and

the Work of Ron and Suzanne Scollon.eVox. Washington, DC: Georgetown University. Vol.

4: 41.Available: http://evox.georgetown.edu/evox04/13ayometzi.pdf. Access: 12 April 2014.

Cenoz, Jasone and Gorter, Durk. 2005. Linguistic landscape and minority languages

2006. International Journal of Multilingualism. 3.1: 67-80.

Dgi, Zsuzsanna. 2012. The Linguistic Landscape of Miercurea (Cskszereda). Acta

Universitatis Sapientiae, Philologica 4.2. Available: http://www.acta.sapientia.ro/acta-

philo/C4-2/Philo42-8.pdf. Access: 11 February 2014.

Edelman, Loulou. 2010. Linguistic Landscapes in the Netherlands: A Study of

Multiligualism in Amsterdam and Friesland. Utrecht: LOT.

Edelman, Loulou. 2009. Whats in a name? Classification of proper names by

language. In Shohamy,Elana and Gorter, Durk. Linguistic landscape: Expanding the

scenery.New York & London: Routledge. 141-154.

Haarmann, Harald. 1986. Verbal strategies in Japanese fashion magazines: A study in

impersonal bilingualism and ethnosymbolism, International Journal of the Sociology of

Language 58: 107-121.

34

Landry, Rodrigue and Bourhis, Richard. 1997. Linguistic landscape and

ethnolinguistic vitality: an empirical study. Journal of Language and Social Psychology: 23-

49.

Landry, Rodrigue and Bourhis, Richard. 1997. Linguistic landscape and

ethnolinguistic vitality: an empirical study. In Gorter, Durk. 2006. Linguistic Landscape: A

New Approach to Multilingualism. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

Ldi, Georges. 2007. Basel: einsprachig und heteroglossisch. Zeitschrift fr

Literaturwissenschaft und Linguistik: 132-157.

Muth, Sebastian and Wolf, Frederik. 2009. The linguistic landscapes of Chiinu:

Forms and functions of urban public verbal signs in a postSoviet setting.Papers from the Lancaster University Postgraduate Conference in Linguistics & Language Teaching

4.Available:http://www.ling.lancs.ac.uk/pgconference/v04/8-

Sebastian%20Muth%28done%29.pdf Access: 8 April 2014.

Papen, Uta. 2012. Commercial discourses, gentrification and citizens' protest: the

linguistic landscape of Prenzlauer Berg, Berlin. Journal of Sociolinguistics 16.1: 56-80.

Peirce, Charles Sanders. 1931-58.Collected Writings. Vol. 8. Eds. Hartshorne, Charles

Weiss, Paul and Burks, Arthur W. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 172.

Ryan, David. 2011. A Comparison of the Linguistic Landscapes of

Manchester.Manchester: University of Manchester. Available:

www.http://languagecontact.humanities.manchester.ac.uk/McrLC/casestudies/DR/DR.pdf

Access: 10 April 2014.

Saussure, Ferdinand de. 1983. Course in General Linguistics (trans. Roy Harris).

London: Duckworth.

Singhasiri, Wareesiri. 2013. Linguistic Landscape in the State Railway Station of

Thailand: The Analysis of the Use of Language. The European Conference on Language

Learning, Official Conference Proceedings 2013.Thailand: King Mongkut's University of

Technology Thonburi. The International Academic Forum. Available:

http://www.iafor.org/offprints/ecll2013-offprints/ECLL2013_Offprint_0127.pdf Access: 5

April 2014.

35

Smits, Melanie. 2013. The Effect of Ethnicity on the Linguistic Landscape of Utrecht.

Published MA thesis. Utrecht: Faculty of Humanities. Available:

http://dspace.library.uu.nl/handle/1874/282068 Access: 2 April 2014.

Spolsky, Bernard and Cooper, Robert L. 1991. The Languages of Jerusalem. Oxford:

Clarendon Press.

Tufi, Stefania and Blackwood, Robert. 2010.Trademarks in the linguistic landscape:

methodological and theoretical challenges in qualifying brand names in the public

space.International Journal of Multilingualism 7.3: 197-210.

Abstract1. Introduction2. Literature review2.1 Public sign as a concept in the linguistic landscape2.2 The notion of private sign within the field of the linguistic landscape2.3 The classification of proper names in the linguistic landscape2.4 The problem of counting signs2.5 The problem of the state of literacy and agency in public signage

3. Methodology4. Results4.1 Languages on signs4.2 Top-down versus bottom-up signs4.3 Proper names on signs4.4 The font size of the ocular units

5. Discussion5.1The presence and relevance of multiple languages in the linguistic landscape5.2 Informational and symbolic diversity on signs5.3 The role of visuality in evaluating multilingual signs

6. Conclusion and implicationsReference list