The linguistic landscape as construct of the public space: a case study of post-apartheid rural South Africa
English: The linguistic landscape (LL), comprised of items displaying written language in the public space, is the product of linguistic choices that are executed by a myriad of actors who are guided by numerous pragmatic or symbolic motivations. Written language in the public space has unique semiotic properties that extend beyond its communicative function. It indexes power relations and identities, and, as such, is utilised to impose or negotiate these. The LL is thus a symbolic construct finding itself in a continuous dialectic with society. This dialectic is especially interesting in a society undergoing socio-political transformation, since revised language policies and ideologies are at play. While the changes influence choices made in the LL, the LL simultaneously serves to index change. In the South African context, the shift from apartheid to democracy in 1994 heralded a new language regime. The high level of societal multilingualism in the country is now supported on an official level. The present study asks questions about the nature of the LL constructed in post-apartheid South Africa. Since peripheral LLs are generally neglected in LL research, this investigation aims to address the gap by conducting an empirical case study of the linguistic profile of a rural area in South Africa. LL research focuses on the patterns of language choice in the public space. However, the field has not yet developed a coherent methodological and theoretical framework that allows for an extensive yet systematic exploration of LL patterns. Therefore, the present study proposes a model based on concepts from the field of language policy and planning (LPP). Based on the premise that the validity of communicative actions is determined by space (as context), a model of LPP space is developed. This LPP space is constituted by a physical and a semiotic aspect. The latter is further divided into three centres, namely the regulatory, the legitimising and the implementational. These four facets of the LPP space each adhere to an internal logic, but they are interactive and compete for dominance. The prevailing LPP facet governs the rules for valid communicative actions that require or prohibit the use of certain linguistic competencies. Based on which competencies are allowed, the multilingual capacities of actors are rendered either valid or invalid. The LPP space model is applied to the LL by determining the spatio-temporal characteristics of the research site (physical aspect), analysing official directives regarding the LL (regulatory centre), exploring language attitudes in the community (legitimising centre), and documenting the language choices executed in the LL (implementational centre). How multilingualism is evaluated by each LPP facet is also considered. The implementational centre is explored by means of a complete LL survey of the nine towns in the Kopanong Local Municipality in the southern Free State province of South Africa. The dataset, comprising 5,773 signs, was compiled between 20 May 2008 and 18 August 2010. Given the extensiveness of the data, several methodological advances are developed in order to systematically codify and analyse the dataset. The combined qualitative/quantitative approach allows thorough cross-referencing of the results, where patterns of language choice are compared to the three LL variables (locality, agency and functionality) as well as the other LPP facets. For this specific context, the study concludes that all facets of the LPP space place the onus to enact multilingual competencies on the LL actors themselves. The LL resulting from their choices is constituted by a high volume of monolingual signage. In addition, English dominates at the expense of African language visibility, and, to a lesser degree, Afrikaans. However, this outcome is considered the result of lacking critical awareness about the LL rather than a negative evaluation of a multilingual LL.
Afrikaans: Die linguistiese landskap (LL), bestaande uit items wat geskrewe taal in die openbare ruimte vertoon, is die produk van linguistiese keuses wat gemaak word deur ŉ groot aantal rolspelers, dié gelei deur verskeie pragmatiese of simboliese motiverings. Geskrewe taal in die openbare ruimte het unieke semiotiese eienskappe wat ver verby die kommunikatiewe funksie daarvan strek. Dit indekseer magsverhoudinge en identiteite en word, as sodanig, aangewend om hierdie af te dwing of te onderhandel. Die LL is gevolglik ŉ simboliese konstruk wat sigself in ŉ voortdurende dialektiek met die samelewing verkeer. Hierdie dialektiek is veral interessant in ŉ samelewing wat besig is om sosio-politiese transformasie te ondergaan, aangesien hersiene taalbeleide en -ideologieë aan die bod is. Terwyl hierdie veranderinge keuses in die LL beïnvloed, dien die LL terselfdertyd as medium om verandering te indekseer. In die Suid-Afrikaanse konteks het die verandering in 1994 van apartheid na demokrasie ŉ nuwe taalregime ingelui. Die hoë vlak van veeltaligheid in hierdie samelewing geniet nou amptelike ondersteuning. Die huidige studie doen ondersoek oor die aard van die LL wat in postapartheid Suid-Afrika gekonstrueer word. Aangesien daar gewoonlik nie aandag geskenk word aan periferale LL’s in LL-navorsing nie, poog hierdie ondersoek om die gaping aan te spreek deur die uitvoer van ŉ empiriese gevallestudie van die linguistiese profiel van ŉ landelike gebied in Suid-Afrika. LL-navorsing fokus op die tendense rondom taalkeuses in die openbare ruimte. Die veld het egter nog nie ŉ koherente metodologiese en teoretiese raamwerk ontwikkel wat ŉ omvattende, dog sistematiese ondersoek van LL-tendense toelaat nie. Gevolglik stel die huidige studie ŉ model voor, gebaseer op konsepte uit die veld van taalbeleid en taalbeplanning (LPP). Gebaseer op die veronderstelling dat die geldigheid van kommunikatiewe handelinge deur ruimte (as konteks) bepaal word, is ŉ model vir LPP-ruimte ontwikkel. Hierdie LPP-ruimte bestaan uit ŉ fisiese en ŉ semiotiese aspek. Laasgenoemde word verder onderverdeel in drie kerne, naamlik die regulatoriese, die legitimiserende en die implementerende. Hierdie vier fasette van die LPP-ruimte is elk onderworpe aan ŉ interne logika, maar hulle is interaktief en ding mee om dominansie. Die heersende LPP-faset bepaal die reëls vir geldige kommunikatiewe aksies, wat die gebruik van sekere linguistiese vaardighede vereis of verbied. Gebaseer op welke vaardighede toegelaat word, word die veeltalige vermoëns van rolspelers geldig of ongeldig verklaar. Die LPP-ruimtemodel word op die LL toegepas deur die ruimtelik-temporale eienskappe van die navorsingsterrein (fisiese aspek) te bepaal, amptelike riglyne rakende die LL te analiseer (regulatoriese kern), taalhoudinge in die gemeenskap te ondersoek (legitimiserende kern), en die dokumentering van die taalkeuses wat in die LL toegepas word (implementerende kern). Oorweging word ook geskenk aan hoe veeltaligheid deur elke LPP-faset geëvalueer word. Die implementerende kern is ondersoek by wyse van ŉ omvattende opname van die LL van die nege dorpe in die Kopanong Plaaslike Munisipaliteit in die suidelike Vrystaat-provinsie in Suid-Afrika. Die datastel, bestaande uit 5,773 tekens, is tussen 20 Mei 2008 en 18 Augustus 2010 ingesamel. Gegewe die omvattende aard van die data is verskeie metodologiese tegnieke ontwikkel ten einde die datastel sistematies te kodifiseer en te ontleed. Die gekombineerde kwalitatiewe/kwantitatiewe benadering laat ruimte vir die kruis-verwysing van die resultate, waar tendense van taalkeuse vergelyk word met die drie LL-veranderlikes (ligging, agentskap en funksionaliteit), asook die ander LPP-fasette. Vir hierdie spesifieke konteks kom die studie tot die gevolgtrekking dat alle fasette van die LPP-ruimte die onus om veeltalige vaardighede uit te voer, op die LL-rolspelers self plaas. Die LL wat voortspruit uit hulle keuses bestaan uit ŉ hoë volume eentalige tekens. Verder oorheers Engels ten koste van die sigbaarheid van Afrikatale en, tot ŉ mindere mate, Afrikaans. Hierdie uitkoms word egter beskou as die resultaat van ŉ gebrek aan kritiese bewustheid omtrent die LL, eerder as ŉ negatiewe evaluering van ŉ veeltalige LL.