New Research Directions in Toponomastics and Linguistic Landscapes

New research directions in toponomastics and linguistic landscapes

Guy PUZEY

1. Defining the linguistic landscape Linguistic landscape research is focused on analysing the ways in which language is visible in public spaces, the role of language in constructing public spaces and how the display of languages mediates social or political relations. This focus has grown in popularity over the past decade among researchers working in fields such as multilingualism, sociolinguistics, language policy, cultural geography and social psychology, notably through the publication of several volumes that have sought to develop the approach. In addition to general anthologies (e.g. Gorter 2006; Shohamy and Gorter 2009; Jaworski and Thurlow 2010), works have also been published concentrating on minority languages (Gorter, Marten and Van Mensel 2012) and on urban multilingualism (Backhaus 2007; Shohamy, Ben-Rafael and Barni 2010). The first landmark use of the term ‘linguistic landscape’ (LL) in this specific sense was accompanied by the following definition, now frequently seen as a point of reference by researchers in the field: The language of public road signs, advertising billboards, street 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 and Bourhis 1997, 25) It is evident from Landry and Bourhis’ definition that names constitute an important element of the LL. Apart from the specific reference made to street names, place names are a major component of road signs, while most advertising billboards and shop signs will feature commercial names. The main public signage of government buildings will also usually include at least the names of the institutions in question. Other understandings of the extent of the LL are currently emerging, occasionally defining the object of analysis as a broader part of linguistic ecology or language visibility. Still pertaining to the arena

996190_ONOMA_46_08.indd6190_ONOMA_46_08.indd 211211 224/04/134/04/13 14:4114:41 212 GUY PUZEY

of public space, for example, graffiti is an important part of the LL (Pennycook 2009). Some studies have taken different perspectives on public space by looking at restricted indoor spaces such as the wall space of a laboratory (Hanauer 2009), or at the virtual LL of cyberspace (Ivkovic and Lotherington 2009). The vast majority of current LL studies are primarily concerned with static written signs, but there are also mobile or more transient instances of text in public spaces that warrant scrutiny, including text on vehicles or clothing (Marten, Van Mensel and Gorter 2012, 4), or the ‘detritus zone’ of discarded packaging (Kallen 2009, 282). More radical views might also seek to include the presence of non-visible ‘texts’ in public spaces such as recorded or spoken public announcements in airports, at stations and on board public transport (Diver, this volume), or even over- heard conversations in public spaces. The methods and insights of LL research could also be usefully applied to study the visibility and presentation of language(s) in other written matter not necessarily displayed in public spaces, such as in books or on maps.

2. The linguistic landscape approach One of the first considerations when approaching the LL is to determine which languages are visible in the area or sample to be studied, and where or when these languages are used. These factors alone can be an indication of the level of linguistic diversity, as in a survey that found and mapped traces of 24 languages in the LL of the Esquilino district of Rome (Bagna and Barni 2006, 24). A diachronic perspective can be introduced to determine how the current LL differs from the past, or what led to certain languages appearing or disappearing. For instance, the successful campaign in the late 1960s and early 1970s for bilingual Welsh and English road signs in Wales was an important catalyst leading towards the bilingual representation of place names in Gaelic and Eng- lish on road signs in some parts of Scotland (Puzey 2010b, 339-340). Investigating the actors or agencies behind the selection of languages used on multilingual signage can reveal much about the policy context of the language in question. By way of example, the official adoption in some parts of Lombardy of bilingual municipal boundary signs showing Lombard and Italian forms of place names is generally perceived as associated with the Lega Nord (Northern League), a right-wing regionalist political party. This is in large part due to that

996190_ONOMA_46_08.indd6190_ONOMA_46_08.indd 212212 224/04/134/04/13 14:4114:41 NEW RESEARCH DIRECTIONS IN TOPONOMASTICS 213

movement’s long-standing graffiti campaign to ‘dialectise’ place names on road signs. Indeed, the highly visible nature of this dialect activism in the LL has meant that many locals have come to view any policy initiative to promote Lombard dialects as linked to the Lega Nord, whatever the actual provenance of the initiative (Puzey 2011, 310). Many LL studies make reference to at least two key ‘flows’ in the construction of the LL, with a distinction often made between ‘top- down’ and ‘bottom-up’ LL items. The former were first defined as ‘elements used and exhibited by institutional agencies which in one way or another act under the control of local or central policies’, while the latter are ‘utilised by individual, associative or corporative actors who enjoy autonomy of action within legal limits’ (Ben-Rafael et al. 2006, 10). It is important, however, not to see either of these flows as monolithic. If considering LL authorship (Malinowski 2009), it is extremely common for complex authorship processes of both ‘top- down’ and ‘bottom-up’ LL items to encompass multiple actors in roles such as regulating authorities, sign initiators, sign owners, designers and manufacturers (Puzey 2012, 142). The LL is therefore frequently subject to intense technocratic or market-driven pressures. Through processes of privatisation, ‘corporative’ actors—otherwise seen as ‘bottom-up’ agents in the definition above—have in many cases taken over formerly publicly-owned services and utilities such as railway stations or water systems. This means such bodies could arguably be seen as ‘top-down’ agents, perhaps with less direct ‘bottom-up’ account- ability than public agencies. The complexity of LL authorship is especially evident in situations involving minority language place names. In Norway, the use of Sámi place names on road signs is governed by Stadnamnlova, the Place Name Act of 1990, and is not limited to municipalities where Sámi is an official language. Sámi place names should, in fact, be used together with Norwegian names on maps, signs and certain other official documents wherever these names are in use among the resident population. Nevertheless, when municipalities request bilingual signs, Statens Vegvesen (the Public Roads Administration) occasionally takes considerable time to install them (Pedersen 2009, 42). This is a typical case in which one top-down actor appears to object to another top-down actor’s plans for the LL. A key question in determining why certain languages are used or not used in the LL concerns whom a given LL item is intended to

996190_ONOMA_46_08.indd6190_ONOMA_46_08.indd 213213 224/04/134/04/13 14:4114:41 214 GUY PUZEY

address. In their seminal study dealing with the perception of the LL among francophone school pupils in Canada, Landry and Bourhis (1997) outline two main functions of the LL. Firstly, the LL has an informational function insomuch that the presence or absence of certain languages on signs can mark linguistic boundaries and guide the expec- tations of readers of those signs as to which languages are in accepted use in the context in question. Secondly, the LL performs a symbolic function, as the relative visibility of a language in the LL contributes to that language’s ‘subjective ethnolinguistic vitality’ (Landry and Bourhis 1997, 27), usually enhancing its status. Due to this symbolic function, the LL does not only act as a reflection of lingual hierarchies, linguistic ideologies and sociolinguistic situations, but can also have an active effect on individuals’ language attitudes, potentially influencing their linguistic behaviour (Cenoz and Gorter 2006, 67-68). While the informational content delivered in a given language is primarily relevant to users of that language, the symbolic content of its presence is not necessarily lost on non-users of the language. Intriguing examples of this emerge from tourists’ views of, and participation in, the LL (Kallen 2009), and there is great potential for more in-depth research into how the LL affects tourists’ appreciation of language and place. Many LL studies combine both quantitative and qualitative methodologies. Qualitative studies observing how different languages are used in the LL often examine the matter of code preference (Scollon and Scollon 2003, 120). When displaying text in more than one language, it is almost always inevitable that one language will be given more prominence. This could be in terms of text size, positioning within a sign, positioning relative to other signs, colour or typeface. Some innovative compromises in multilingual design do exist. The most common design of bilingual Gaelic-English road signs in Scot- land shows Gaelic and English place names in the same ‘Transport’ sans serif typeface, at the same size, with the Gaelic forms of names above the English forms. This gives the Gaelic names more salience in their positioning, but the Gaelic names are displayed in a less prominent colour, achieving an effective system of language differentiation (Puzey 2012, 133). The bilingual city of Ottawa also has a simple but effective system affording its two languages, English and French, almost equal prominence on street name signs, which read for example ‘RUE WELLINGTON ST.’, with the specific element in larger type than the dual generic elements on either side of it (see Figure 1).

996190_ONOMA_46_08.indd6190_ONOMA_46_08.indd 214214 224/04/134/04/13 14:4114:41 NEW RESEARCH DIRECTIONS IN TOPONOMASTICS 215

Figure 1. A convenient and relatively effective solution to bilingual naming on an Ottawa street sign, although the presentation of the umbrella name of the capital region’s ceremonial route, Confederation Boulevard, does exhibit code preference for English. Photograph by the author, August 2008.

The underlying linguistic hegemony of English is, however, visible on signs such as ‘RUE WELLINGTON ST. W.’ where the cardinal point is referred to only by its English abbreviation, or ‘RUE RAILWAY ST.’ where the specific element is clearly English. Diachronic changes in the LL can be indicative of broader changes in how the languages in question are used. For example, LL evidence from the 1960s shows major errors in the Gaelic names on bilingual street signs in Nova Scotia, photographs of which were nonetheless used to showcase the Gaelic culture of the province in promotional literature well into the 1970s, while the improved spelling on current bilingual signs, together with an expansion in the number and types of top-down bilingual signs, suggests that the language is now being taken more seriously by authorities there (Puzey 2010a, 82-83).

3. The linguistic landscape and toponomastics Place names are a major component of the LL, and as an arena in which place names are displayed for all to see, the LL presents significant research opportunities in the field of toponomastics. It is worth noting that one significant early use of the term ‘linguistic land- scaping’ was by a geographer in reference to naming, specifically the

996190_ONOMA_46_08.indd6190_ONOMA_46_08.indd 215215 224/04/134/04/13 14:4114:41 216 GUY PUZEY

practice of bestowing aesthetically pleasing names on homes (Lowen- thal 1962). This other sense of the term predated the currently popular definition of LL by three and a half decades, has had some limited currency among urban geographers (Rapoport 1977, 110) and has also featured in onomastic research (Vuolteenaho and Ainiala 2009, 227). While the new perspectives embodied in the LL approach have much to offer place name scholars, the specific focus, theoretical and empirical background of toponomastics are also of great value for LL studies. The recent expanded interest in critical approaches to toponomastics has strengthened the theoretical basis for studies of the links between power and place naming. Emphasising the effects of unequal power relations on place names and place-naming processes, these studies have shown the ‘gloomy side-effect’ of the rationalisation and standardisation of the toponymicon, which has frequently led to ‘the erasure of the inherited heteroglossia of local names’ (Vuolteenaho and Berg 2009, 4). The top-down LL is an important instrument in these technocratic-administrative processes to establish hegemonic toponymies. As practically ubiquitous objects inhabiting everyday spaces, official signs are typical linguistic manifestations of what Billig (1995) calls ‘banal nationalism’, making the LL ‘central to the understanding of individuals’ everyday experience of the politics of language’ (Puzey 2012, 141). The LL is therefore one of the most powerful means by which hegemonic toponymies are reinforced, to the point of their inter- nalisation as ‘common sense’. While popular consent for hegemony may appear ‘spontaneous’, it is the result of ‘prestige’ derived histori- cally from the ruling classes’ position and ownership of the means of production (Gramsci 2007, 1519). The consent-building function of the LL can have a considerable impact on what Kostanski (2009; this volume) has termed ‘toponymic attachment’. Common to many LL studies is the notion that the LL ‘serves as a mechanism to affect, manipulate and impose de facto language practices’, while also acting ‘as an arena for protest and negotiations’ (Shohamy 2006, 111). As a result, in addition to providing empirical evidence of the consent-building processes in the construction of hegemonic toponymies, a focus on names in the LL can also shed light on counter-hegemonic naming struggles. [I]n cases where socio-cultural tensions are paramount, toponymic struggles may surface in a variety of everyday forms: From orga- nized re-naming campaigns to the spontaneous use of alternative

996190_ONOMA_46_08.indd6190_ONOMA_46_08.indd 216216 224/04/134/04/13 14:4114:41 NEW RESEARCH DIRECTIONS IN TOPONOMASTICS 217

names and pronunciations, grouses against the renditions of history in official toponymies, refusals to unlearn marginalized names, and so on. (Vuolteenaho and Berg 2009, 11) The LL is most often the main arena in which these struggles can be seen, or in which the first steps might be made towards the greater recognition of minority toponyms. As an example of a particularly contentious name debate, the aforementioned case of missing Sámi place names on road signs in Norway continues the historic silencing of Sámi names in official use (Rautio Helander 2009). While road authorities there have sometimes been slow to act, other LL actors are beginning to use bilingual signage and corporate identities to a greater extent as an apparent part of strengthening regional identity. What appear to be positive steps for the greater representation of Sámi in the LL may have been influenced by an earlier heated debate concerning the installation of bilingual municipal boundary signs in Gáivuotna- Kåfjord, which were subjected to repeated acts of vandalism (Puzey 2012, 129-132; see Figure 2). Indeed, the analysis of discourse in debates about the LL can be a fruitful approach to collect qualitative data regarding societal attitudes towards almost any modern process of place naming or commercial naming. Another example of a toponymic debate that reached significant prominence through the LL concerns the official abolition

Figure 2. A bilingual municipal boundary sign from Gáivuotna-Kåfjord with the Sámi text erased by vandals. This sign is now on display at Tromsø Uni- versity Museum. Photograph by the author, April 2007.

996190_ONOMA_46_08.indd6190_ONOMA_46_08.indd 217217 224/04/134/04/13 14:4114:41 218 GUY PUZEY

and removal from road signs of the English place name Dingle of the town in Ireland known, in Irish, as Daingean Uí Chúis, and the replacement of both these names with a different Irish name, An Daingean (Puzey 2009, 825). Máiréad Moriarty (2012) examined this debate through the ‘nexus’ of the Dingle Wall, a building façade in the town festooned with bottom-up written comments and laminated articles objecting to the top-down naming policy and its implications for the LL. Other discourse-based approaches to LL studies have revealed how language policy actors can function in formal or infor- mal advocacy coalitions to promote their causes. For example, an advocacy coalition favouring greater presence of the Welsh language in the LL can be outlined including activists from Cymdeithas yr Iaith Gymraeg (the Welsh Language Society) and the political party Plaid Cymru in addition to top-down institutions such as the National Assembly for Wales, the Welsh Assembly Government, the Welsh Language Board, local councils, public sector organisations and tour- ism agencies (Sloboda et al. 2010, 99). Such an approach focusing specifically on naming processes would make a valuable contribution to exploring the links between power and naming. Prior to the current general wave of interest in the LL, toponomasticians already frequently made reference to place names as they appear on signs in order to illustrate descriptive studies, although researchers have paid considerably more attention to maps or historical records as evidence of the written usage of place names, due to the traditionally prevalent historical-culturalist orientation in name studies. A growing realisation that ‘it does matter in what form a name appears on a sign at the entrance to a village’ (Nicolaisen 2011 [1990], 226) began to emerge based on experiences of language conflict in minority language contexts. When toponomasticians later started devoting specific attention to place names as part of the LL, it was also largely in relation to the situation of minority, minoritised or indigenous languages. Studies on Sámi in Norway, Gaelic in Scotland and Nova Scotia, Lombard dialects in Italy and Switzerland (Puzey 2009; 2010a; 2010b), and indigenous languages in Australia (Kostan- ski 2009) detailed policy concerning the use of minority place names in the LL and attitudes towards such practices. In another minority language context, noting the power of both toponyms and the LL in shaping perceptions of place, Carol Léonard (2009) has outlined how greater knowledge of the French toponymicon of Saskatchewan among

996190_ONOMA_46_08.indd6190_ONOMA_46_08.indd 218218 224/04/134/04/13 14:4214:42 NEW RESEARCH DIRECTIONS IN TOPONOMASTICS 219

the province’s minority French speakers could act to mitigate perceptions derived from the LL of the dominance of English. This suggests that, just as there is a bidirectional relationship between the LL and its sociolinguistic context (Cenoz and Gorter 2006, 67-68), the relationship between the LL and socio-onomastic behaviour is also bidirectional. Place-naming practices often play a significant role in the broader language policy context of majority-minority language contact or language conflict situations. In her examination of the LL of germano- phone communities in northern Italy, Silvia Dal Negro (2009, 208-209) discusses the lasting impact of historical official place-naming policies in South Tyrol on the composition of the LL and local perceptions of the Italian and German languages. The changes in language policy in South Tyrol were closely linked to wider political changes in the wake of the region’s annexation to Italy after the First World War and the subsequent advent of fascism, and then the region’s new autonomy after the Second World War. Other noteworthy recent examples of regime change affecting toponymy and the LL can be found in Central and Eastern Europe. Marián Sloboda (2009, 182-184) cites cases such as the renaming of streets in what was Czechoslovakia and the introduction of Hungarian minority place names on road signs in parts of southern Slovakia. In Minsk, new Belarusian street name signs—some in the colours of the national flag—have replaced the former signs in Rus- sian. The nationalist ideology represented by this change exists in the LL alongside the communist ideology symbolised by enduring com- memorative names such as vulåca Lenåna (Lenin Street). Consumer capitalism is also represented in this simultaneous layering of ideological symbolism in the city’s public spaces, with a prominent branch of McDonald’s to be found on that same street (Sloboda 2009, 183). The LL can be a useful primary source for the collection of written forms of names, including names that may not appear in maps or gazetteers, perhaps due to their limited range of use or to their relative transience. For example, in exploring the Norf’k language toponymy of Norfolk Island, Joshua Nash (2011, 100) utilised photographic evidence from the LL for the collection of house names and road names. A recent socio-onomastic investigation of attitudes towards urban names in Oslo also notes the special value of the LL for research into less established urban names, such as those of shops, cafés and res- taurants (Berezkina 2011, 4-5). Indeed, the LL approach offers considerable scope for the study of commercial and urban names.

996190_ONOMA_46_08.indd6190_ONOMA_46_08.indd 219219 224/04/134/04/13 14:4214:42 220 GUY PUZEY

Commercial names are a major part of the urban LL. As shown by Paula Sjöblom in her research (2008) into business names in the landscape of Turku, the linguistic elements of a commercial name provide only part of the name’s meaning. Company names are multimodal, drawing upon a variety of semiotic resources, with visual, aural and kinaesthetic modes as well as a linguistic mode. The same is true of all features in the LL, but businesses are now more con- scious of how to make use of these resources (Sjöblom 2008, 351). While the visual approach of most LL studies in examining the role of language in public spaces allows for all these modes to be explored, it is unsurprising that most focus to date has been on the linguistic mode, and in particular on the choice of languages. When classifying the choice of languages in the LL, the characteristics of proper names—not least commercial names—present a special problem, as discussed by Loulou Edelman (2009), in that they cannot always be easily classified as belonging to any single language, their language of origin may not be obvious, and classification can be subjective. This highlights the potential for onomastic perspectives to inform empirical LL research.

4. Moving forward The first paper to follow in this section, by Peter Tan, discusses the varying treatment of different categories of names in Singapore’s multilingual LL; for instance, while school names are transliterated and translated, street names are not. These variations in practice reflect differences in application of national language policy in officially qua- drilingual Singapore. In the naming trends that emerge from the Sin- gaporean LL, there are indicators of the commodification of language, which can occasionally be observed in the use of minority languages as well as with ‘global’ languages. The vast majority of LL studies to date have analysed data from urban areas, where the density of human habitation, the more concen- trated nature of text in public spaces and the very form of those public spaces lend themselves especially well to this kind of research. Some studies have also explored the LL of rural communities or of the coun- tryside, for instance looking at road signs on main roads in isolated areas. Following this alternative approach, and based on the highly innovative theoretical framework employed in her doctoral thesis,

996190_ONOMA_46_08.indd6190_ONOMA_46_08.indd 220220 224/04/134/04/13 14:4214:42 NEW RESEARCH DIRECTIONS IN TOPONOMASTICS 221

Laura Kostanski explores how a debate over the process of name restoration in the Australian state of Victoria, which included making changes to the LL, can be seen as a contestation of toponymic identity revealing a deep-seated individual and societal attachment to place names. Objects in the LL came to occupy a special place in the debate both by virtue of their nature as key wayfinding devices and as potent symbols of wider cultural change in Australia. There are an increasing number of initiatives in Europe seeking to use regional or minority languages in the official LL. France has traditionally been characterised by a centralising, largely monolingual approach to language policy, but official bilingual signs can be found in parts of the country, featuring place names in languages such as Basque, Breton, Corsican and Occitan in addition to French. In the final paper in this special section of Onoma, Laura Diver presents case studies of Occitan in the LL of Toulouse and in the town of Villeneuve- lès-Maguelone. Toulouse, as a major settlement, is an important centre for the Occitan language, and as well as being represented on bilingual street signs, Occitan also features in the ‘auditory LL’ through bilingual announcements on the Metro. These announcements are a key resource for learners who can also hear the pronunciation of Occitan names. Meanwhile, the legal case about bilingual signs in Villeneuve-lès- Maguelone raised issues for regional languages across France. Together, the papers in this section represent a step towards greater use of this new methodology in onomastic research, and towards the expansion of an onomastic dimension in LL studies. The opportunities in this field continue to grow, with tools such as Google Street View allowing researchers first to reconnoitre distant or poorly accessible locations. With the current profusion of digital cameras, a systematic approach and an attentive eye, LL fieldwork is a valuable addition to onomastic methodology.

5. References Backhaus, Peter. 2007. Linguistic landscapes: a comparative study of urban multilingualism in Tokyo. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Ben-Rafael, Eliezer et al. 2006. Linguistic landscape as symbolic construction of the public space: the case of Israel. In: Durk Gorter (ed.), Linguistic landscape: a new approach to multilingualism, 7–30. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.

996190_ONOMA_46_08.indd6190_ONOMA_46_08.indd 221221 224/04/134/04/13 14:4214:42 222 GUY PUZEY

Berezkina, Maimu. 2011. Holdninger til stedsnavn i Oslo: En studie basert på opplysninger fra tre ulike etniske grupper [Attitudes to place names in Oslo: a study based on data from three different ethnic groups]. Master’s dissertation, University of Oslo. Bagna, Carla and Barni, Monica. 2006. Per una mappatura dei repertori linguistici urbani: nuovi strumenti e metodologie [Towards map- ping urban linguistic repertoires: new tools and methodologies]. In: Nicola De Blasi and Carla Marcato (eds), La città e le sue lingue: repertori linguistici urbani, 1–43. Naples: Liguori. Billig, Michael. 1995. Banal nationalism. London: Sage. Cenoz, Jasone and Gorter, Durk. 2006. Linguistic landscape and minority languages. In: Durk Gorter (ed.), Linguistic landscape: a new approach to multilingualism, 67–80. Clevedon: Multilin- gual Matters. Dal Negro, Silvia. 2009. Local policy modeling the linguistic landscape. In: Elana Shohamy and Durk Gorter (eds), Linguistic landscape: expanding the scenery, 206–218. Abingdon: Routledge. Edelman, Loulou. 2009. What’s in a name? Classification of proper names by language. In: Elana Shohamy and Durk Gorter (eds), Linguistic landscape: expanding the scenery, 141–154. Abingdon: Routledge. Gorter, Durk (ed.). 2006. Linguistic landscape: a new approach to multilingualism. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Gorter, Durk, Marten, Heiko F. and Van Mensel, Luk (eds). 2012. Minority languages in the linguistic landscape. Basingstoke: Pal- grave Macmillan. Gramsci, Antonio. 2007. Quaderni del carcere [Prison notebooks]. Turin: Einaudi. Hanauer, David I. 2009. Science and the linguistic landscape: a genre analysis of representational wall space in a microbiology laboratory. In: Elana Shohamy and Durk Gorter (eds), Linguistic landscape: expanding the scenery, 287–301. Abingdon: Routledge. Ivkovic, Dejan and Lotherington, Heather. 2009. Multilingualism in cyberspace: conceptualising the virtual linguistic landscape. International Journal of Multilingualism 6, 17–36. Jaworski, Adam and Thurlow, Crispin (eds). 2010. Semiotic landscapes: language, image, space. London: Continuum. Kostanski, Laura. 2009. ‘What’s in a name?’ Place and toponymic attachment, identity and dependence. A case study of the Grampians

996190_ONOMA_46_08.indd6190_ONOMA_46_08.indd 222222 224/04/134/04/13 14:4214:42 NEW RESEARCH DIRECTIONS IN TOPONOMASTICS 223

(Gariwerd) National Park name restoration process. PhD thesis, University of Ballarat. Landry, Rodrigue and Bourhis, Richard Y. 1997. Linguistic landscape and ethnolinguistic vitality: an empirical study. Journal of Lan- guage and Social Psychology 16, 23–49. Léonard, Carol. 2009. Toponymie et contrepoids aux effets du paysage linguistique en situation de contact des langues. In: Wolfgang Ahrens, Sheila Embleton and André Lapierre (eds), Names in multi-lingual, multi-cultural and multi-ethnic contact, 677–687. Toronto: York University. Lowenthal, David. 1962. Not every prospect pleases: what is our cri- terion for scenic beauty? Landscape 12.2, 19–23. Malinowski, David. 2009. Authorship in the linguistic landscape: a multimodal-performative view. In: Elana Shohamy and Durk Gorter (eds), Linguistic landscape: expanding the scenery, 107– 125. Abingdon: Routledge. Marten, Heiko F., Van Mensel, Luk and Gorter, Durk. 2012. Studying minority languages in the linguistic landscape. In: Durk Gorter, Heiko F. Marten and Luk Van Mensel (eds), Minority languages in the linguistic landscape, 1–15. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmil- lan. Moriarty, Máiréad. 2012. Language ideological debates in the linguistic landscape of an Irish tourist town. In: Durk Gorter, Heiko F. Marten and Luk Van Mensel (eds), Minority languages in the linguistic landscape, 74–88. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Nash, Joshua. 2011. Insular toponymies: pristine place-naming on Norfolk Island, South Pacific and Dudley Peninsula, Kangaroo Island, South Australia. PhD thesis, University of Adelaide. Nicolaisen, W. F. H. 1990. Placenames and politics. Names, 38, 193– 207. Reprinted (2011) in In the beginning was the name: selected essays by Professor W.F.H. Nicolaisen, 218–227. [Edinburgh]: Scottish Place-Name Society. Pedersen, Aud-Kirsti. 2009. Haldningar til offentleg bruk av mino- ritetsspråklege stadnamn i Noreg [Attitudes to official use of minority language place names in Norway]. In: Lars-Erik Edlund and Susanne Haugen (eds), Namn i flerspråkiga och mångkul- turella miljöer: Handlingar från NORNA:s 36:e symposium i Umeå, 16–18 november 2006, 37–56. Umeå: Institutionen för språkstudier, Umeå universitet.

996190_ONOMA_46_08.indd6190_ONOMA_46_08.indd 223223 224/04/134/04/13 14:4214:42 224 GUY PUZEY

Pennycook, Alastair. 2009. Linguistic landscapes and the transgressive semiotics of graffiti. In: Elana Shohamy and Durk Gorter (eds), Linguistic landscape: expanding the scenery, 302–312. Abing- don: Routledge. Puzey, Guy. 2009. Opportunity or threat? The role of minority toponyms in the linguistic landscape. In: Wolfgang Ahrens, Sheila Embleton and André Lapierre (eds), Names in multi-lingual, multi-cultural and multi-ethnic contact, 821–827. Toronto: York University. Puzey, Guy. 2010a. Inbhir Nis no more? Linguistic landscapes and language attitudes in Scotland and Nova Scotia. In: Moray Wat- son and Lindsay Milligan (eds), From vestiges to the very day: new voices in Celtic Studies, 77–89. Aberdeen: AHRC Centre for Irish and Scottish Studies. Puzey, Guy, 2010b. Place-names and language revitalization in Gaelic Scotland. In: Kenneth E. Nilsen (ed.), Rannsachadh na Gàidhlig 5, 339–348. Sydney, NS: Cape Breton University Press. Puzey, Guy. 2011. Wars of position: language policy, counter-hege- monies and cultural cleavages in Italy and Norway. PhD thesis, University of Edinburgh. Puzey, Guy. 2012. Two-way traffic: how linguistic landscapes reflect and influence the politics of language. In: Durk Gorter, Heiko F. Marten and Luk Van Mensel (eds), Minority languages in the linguistic landscape, 127–147. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. Rapoport, Amos. 1977. Human aspects of urban form. Oxford: Perga- mon Press. Rautio Helander, Kaisa. 2009. Toponymic silence and Sámi place names during the growth of the Norwegian nation state. In: Law- rence D. Berg and Jani Vuolteenaho (eds), Critical toponymies: the contested politics of place naming, 253–266. Farnham: Ash- gate. Scollon, Ron and Scollon, Suzie Wong. 2003. Discourses in place: language in the material world. London: Routledge. Shohamy, Elana. 2006. Language policy: hidden agendas and new approaches. Abingdon: Routledge. Shohamy, Elana and Gorter, Durk (eds). 2009. Linguistic landscape: expanding the scenery. Abingdon: Routledge. Shohamy, Elana, Ben-Rafael, Eliezer and Barni, Monica (eds). 2010. Linguistic landscape in the city. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

996190_ONOMA_46_08.indd6190_ONOMA_46_08.indd 224224 224/04/134/04/13 14:4214:42 NEW RESEARCH DIRECTIONS IN TOPONOMASTICS 225

Sjöblom, Paula. 2008. Multimodality of company names. Onoma 43, 351–380. Sloboda, Marián. 2009. State ideology and linguistic landscape: a comparative analysis of (post)communist Belarus, Czech Repub- lic and Slovakia. In: Elana Shohamy and Durk Gorter (eds), Lin- guistic landscape: expanding the scenery, 173–188. Abingdon: Routledge. Sloboda, Marián et al. 2010. Carrying out a language policy change: advocacy coalitions and the management of linguistic landscape. Current Issues in Language Planning 11, 95–113. Vuolteenaho, Jani and Terhi Ainiala. 2009. Planning and revamping urban toponymy: ideological alterations in the linguistic land- scaping of Vuosaari suburb, eastern Helsinki. In: Lawrence D. Berg and Jani Vuolteenaho (eds), Critical toponymies: the contested politics of place naming, 227–251. Farnham: Ashgate. Vuolteenaho, Jani and Berg, Lawrence D. 2009. Towards critical toponymies. In: Lawrence D. Berg and Jani Vuolteenaho (eds), Critical toponymies: the contested politics of place naming, 1–18. Farnham: Ashgate.

Guy Puzey DELC Scandinavian Studies The University of Edinburgh David Hume Tower George Square Edinburgh EH8 9JX Scotland [email protected]

Summary: New research directions in toponomastics and linguistic landscapes The emerging interdisciplinary field of linguistic landscape studies concen- trates specifically on the use of language in public spaces, for example on road/street signs, on shop signs, building signs or advertisements. It is through the linguistic landscape that place names are displayed for all to see, and analysis of how those names are displayed can provide new insights into attitudes towards almost any modern place-naming process. Examination of the linguistic landscape can often reveal the most contentious place-name debates,

996190_ONOMA_46_08.indd6190_ONOMA_46_08.indd 225225 224/04/134/04/13 14:4214:42 226 GUY PUZEY

with the public discourse about these issues also exposing deep-seated societal attitudes towards place names. Setting the following papers in context, this introduction explains the theoretical background to linguistic landscape studies and outlines the possibilities for the use of linguistic landscape methodology in onomastics.

Résumé: Les nouvelles orientations de recherche entre la toponymie et les paysages linguistiques Les enquêtes des paysages linguistiques sont un domaine de recherche émer- gent qui se concentre sur l’emploi des langues dans les lieux publics, par exemple sur des panneaux de signalisation routière, des plaques de rues, des enseignes des magasins et des édifices ou des affiches publicitaires. Le paysage linguistique expose les noms de lieux à la vue de tous, et l’analyse de comment ces noms sont affichés peut fournir des nouveaux aperçus de presque tous les processus modernes de nomination des lieux. Souvent l’examen du paysage linguistique peut révéler des débats les plus contestés concernant les noms de lieux, et le discours public sur ces problèmes peut aussi exposer des attitudes profondes envers les noms de lieux. En présentant les articles suivants, cette introduction explique la contexte théorétique de la recherche des paysages linguistiques et donne un aperçu des possibilités à utiliser cette méthodologie dans l’onomastique.

Zusammenfassung: Neue Forschungsanknüpfungspunkte zwischen Topo- nomastik und sprachlichen Landschaften Das sich neu abzeichnende interdisziplinäre Forschungsgebiet der Sprachland- schaft konzentriert sich speziell auf den Gebrauch der Sprache in der Öffent- lichkeit, wie zum Beispiel auf Verkehrszeichen und Straßenschildern, Schil- dern an Geschäften und anderen Gebäuden oder in Werbeanzeigen. Es ist die sprachliche Landschaft, durch die Ortsnamen für alle verfügbar und sichtbar werden, und die Analyse der Art und Weise, wie diese Namen verfügbar gemacht werden, ermöglicht neue Erkenntnisse über die Einstellung gegen- über fast allen modernen Ortsnamensgebungsprozessen. Die Untersuchung sprachlicher Landschaften können dabei oft höchst umstrittene Ortsnamens- debatten zum Vorschein bringen, wobei der öffentliche Diskurs eventuell auch tief verwurzelte gesellschaftliche Attitüden gegenüber Ortsnamen offenlegt. In Hinblick auf eine zusammenhängende Betrachtung der folgenden Aufsätze erklärt die vorliegende Einführung den theoretischen Hintergrund für eine Erforschung der Sprachlandschaft und umreißt die Möglichkeiten, wie eine entsprechende spezifische Methodik für die Onomastik genutzt werden kann.

996190_ONOMA_46_08.indd6190_ONOMA_46_08.indd 226226 224/04/134/04/13 14:4214:42