(POST) SEMIOTIC LANDSCAPES of the diver[city]
OVERVIEW
Sensing beyond the human and non-human social-temporal-spatial realms.
The concept of "Post-semiotic landscapes of the Diver[city]" is rooted in the approach for collecting, documenting, analyzing, and disseminating multimodal semiotic artifacts from (Post) conflict, (Post) Brexit, and (Post) Pandemic Belfast (Northern Ireland) and the idea of post-semiotics as a suggested shift in the way we think about and make meaning through semiotic objects in contemporary society as these relate to post-modernity, multimodalities, pluriversal knowledges, hybridities and non-temporal or spatial sensing (emotions, feelings, smells, sounds, memories etc).
A Post-Semiotic Transversal Axis as a Conceptual Framework
This ever-evolving framework of post-semiotics suggests a complex transversality of several concepts and implies moving beyond or transcending traditional semiotic research approaches in the study of linguistic landscapes (Charisse Carr, 2019; Shohamy & Gorter, 2009). Our work seeks to spark curiosity for unconventional forms of engaging with signs, symbols, and their meanings to explore new dimensions or considerations in the field of linguistic landscapes from different but not limited to the following intersecting dimensions (figure 1):
Multimodality: It could emphasize the importance of considering various modes of communication beyond written language and symbols. This might include analyzing the use of images, sounds, digital media, and other non-linguistic elements in urban or public spaces (Bateman et al., 2017; Samuels et al., 2010).
Digital and Virtual Landscapes: The "post-semiotic" aspect might address the role of digital technologies and virtual spaces in shaping linguistic landscapes. This involves studying how online communication, social media, and augmented reality impact language display and communication in the virtual realm in connection with the real realm (Gill, 2009; Ivkovic & Lotherington, 2009).
Globalization and Hybridity: Post-semiotic linguistic landscapes observe how globalization and cultural hybridity influence the ways languages and symbols are used and blended in diverse urban settings (Archer et al., 2013; Hutnyk, 2005). This involves studying the coexistence of multiple languages and scripts in a globalized world.
Pluriversal Politics: Understanding symbols and languages in the public domain implies understanding the multiple possibilities of languages and cultures represented in multiple worlds/universes (Escobar, 2018). This means that as humans, we need to acknowledge our relationships with other humans, non-humans, and beyond human beings.
Non/Temporal Dimensions: A post-semiotic perspective explores how semiotic landscapes interrelate and weave with the sensory dimensions (Pink, 2015) and intersubjectivity temporality on how beings change over time, including historical shifts, digital temporalities, and the evolving nature of public space communication (Ingold, 1993; Rodemeyer, 2006; Steedman, 1997).
Postmodern and Post-structuralist Perspectives: This lens attempts to challenge traditional notions of linguistic stability, meaning, and representation as well as the fluid and dynamic nature of language in contemporary contexts such as translanguaging, trans[cultura]linguación and plurilingualism (García & Wei, 2014; Ortega, 2022; Piccardo, 2017; Popoviciu et al., 2006).
Figure 1. A work-in-progress post-semiotics framework.
Our methodological approach
Multimodal Semiotic Paseo (MSP)
We utilize a multi-method and multimodal approach to capture the multiplicity of experiences making sure to permeate our subjectivities by challenging rigid forms of data collection, analysis, and dissemination. Paseo is the word in Spanish for walking, however, in our context, it means to embrace a more intentional form of walking in which conversations, relations, senses (sounds, smells, tactile/touch, hearing/listening, memories, etc.) are experienced and shared with our team, the communities we engage and the artifacts and materials we collect and document. Through our MSP, we utilize some or most of the following approaches.
Walking/ Listening / Sensing / Feeling (Pink, 2015; Pink et al., 2015; Springgay & Truman, 2017)
Sound Listening/Recording (Faudree, 2012; Sémidor, 2006)
Photo capturing and video recording (Cleland & MacLeod, 2021; Pink, 2006)
Note-taking and reflecting (Emerson et al., 2011)
Research Questions
This research project engages the following overarching questions:
To what extent do linguistic and cultural identities manifest within the post-conflict and post-Brexit context of Belfast, specifically in the surrounding area of the Peace Walls?
How are the experiential narratives of linguistic and cultural identities portrayed through audiovisual data and other symbolic elements within the diverse contexts surrounding the Peace Walls?
How do community members understand and interpret the significance of sounds and symbols in relation to their lived experiences within the urban landscape of Belfast, particularly in the context of the post-conflict and post-Brexit milieu?
Key references
Archer, K., Bosman, M. M., Amen, M. M., & Schmidt, E. (2013). Cultures of globalization: Coherence, hybridity, contestation. Routledge.
Bateman, J., Wildfeuer, J., & Hiippala, T. (2017). Multimodality: Foundations, research and analysis – a problem-oriented introduction. Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co KG.
Charisse Carr, J. R. (2019). Linguistic Landscapes. Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/obo/9780199772810-0251
Cleland, J., & MacLeod, A. (2021). The visual vernacular: Embracing photographs in research. Perspectives on Medical Education, 10(4), 230–237. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40037-021-00672-x
Emerson, R. M., Fretz, R. I., & Shaw, L. L. (2011). Writing ethnographic fieldnotes (Second). University of Chicago Press.
Escobar, A. (2018). Designs for the pluriverse: Radical interdependence, autonomy, and the making of worlds. Duke University Press.
Faudree, P. (2012). Music, Language, and Texts: Sound and Semiotic Ethnography. Annual Review of Anthropology, 41(1), 519–536. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-092611-145851
García, O., & Wei, L. (2014). Translanguaging. Palgrave Macmillan UK.
Gill, A. A. (2009). Digitizing the Past: Charting New Courses in the Modeling of Virtual Landscapes. Visual Resources, 25(4), 313–332. https://doi.org/10.1080/01973760903331809
Hutnyk, J. (2005). Hybridity. Ethnic and Racial Studies, 28(1), 79–102. https://doi.org/10.1080/0141987042000280021
Ingold, T. (1993). The temporality of the landscape. World Archaeology, 25(2), 152–174. https://doi.org/10.1080/00438243.1993.9980235
Ivkovic, D., & Lotherington, H. (2009). Multilingualism in cyberspace: Conceptualising the virtual linguistic landscape. International Journal of Multilingualism, 6(1), 17–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790710802582436
Ortega, Y. (2022). Trans[cultura]linguación: An intercultural approach to the revitalization of Indigenous languages. In A. Salmon & A. Clavijo-Olarte (Eds.), Handbook of research on socio-cultural and linguistic perspectives on language and literacy development (pp. 216–238).
Piccardo, E. (2017). Plurilingualism: Vision, conceptualization, and practices. In Springer International Handbooks of Education. Handbook of Research and Practice in Heritage Language Education (pp. 207–225). Springer International Publishing.
Pink, S. (2006). Doing visual ethnography. SAGE.
Pink, S. (2015). Doing sensory ethnography. SAGE.
Pink, S., Horst, H., Postill, J., Hjorth, L., Lewis, T., & Tacchi, J. (2015). Digital ethnography: Principles and practice. SAGE.
Popoviciu, L., Haywood, C., & Ghaill, M. M. (2006). The promise of post-structuralist methodology: Ethnographic representation of education and masculinity. Ethnography and Education, 1(3), 393–412. https://doi.org/10.1080/17457820600836871
Rodemeyer, L. M. (2006). Intersubjective temporality. In L. M. Rodemeyer (Ed.), Intersubjective Temporality: It’s About Time (pp. 181–198). Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/1-4020-4214-0_8
Samuels, D. W., Meintjes, L., Ochoa, A. M., & Porcello, T. (2010). Soundscapes: Toward a Sounded Anthropology. Annual Review of Anthropology, 39(1), 329–345. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-anthro-022510-132230
Sémidor, C. (2006). Listening to a city with the soundwalk method. Acta Acustica United With Acustica. https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/Listening-to-a-City-with-the-soundwalk-method-S%C3%A9midor/dab7c71ffbfea8f6bf23b290524f9559585b2050
Shohamy, E. G., & Gorter, D. (Eds.). (2009). Linguistic landscape: Expanding the scenery (1st ed). Routledge.
Springgay, S., & Truman, S. E. (2017). Walking methodologies in a more-than-human world: WalkingLab. Routledge.
Steedman, M. (1997). Chapter 16—Temporality. In J. van Benthem & A. ter Meulen (Eds.), Handbook of Logic and Language (pp. 895–938). North-Holland. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-044481714-3/50021-7
This research project is supported by the AHRC/ESRC Impact Acceleration Account from Queen's University Belfast.