Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-g7gxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-18T07:17:49.816Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

English as the language of marketspeak

Reflections from the Linguistic Landscape of Turkey

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 June 2016

Ali Fuad Selvi
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The ubiquitous spread of English is vividly observed in local linguistic landscapes and urban spaces around the world, and Turkey is no exception. Emerging as a bona fide line of inquiry at the nexus of sociolinguistics, sociology, social psychology, geography and media studies (Sebba, 2010), linguistic landscaping examines the dynamic relationship of English vis-à-vis the local languages, and documents, analyzes and interprets the attributes, patterns, characteristics, meanings and the creative uses of English in such domains as advertising (Kelly-Holmes, 2005; Vettorel, 2013) and shop signs (MacGregor, 2003; Ong, Ghesquière & Serwe, 2013; Schlick, 2002). These studies provide contextualized accounts of language contact situated in local sociolinguistic contexts and contribute to the representation of reflections from various parts of the world (e.g. see Backhaus (2007) and MacGregor (2003) for Japan; McArthur (2000) for Switzerland and Sweden; Griffin (2004) and Ross (1997) for Italy; Schlick (2002) for Austria, Italy and Slovenia; Dimova (2007) for Macedonia; Hasanova (2010) for Uzbekistan; Ong, Ghesquière & Serwe (2013) for Singapore; El-Yasin & Mahadin (1996) for Jordan; Wang (2013) for China; Ben Said (2010) for Tunisia; Schlick (2003) for Slovenia, Austria, Italy, and the UK; Stewart & Fawcett (2004) for Portugal; Thonus (1991) for Brazil; and Baumgardner (2006) for Mexico).

Type
Research Article
Information
English Today , Volume 32 , Issue 4 , December 2016 , pp. 33 - 39
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2016 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Aydoğan, B. 2001. ‘Türkçeye giren yabancı sözcükler ve otel adları [Foreign loanwords in Turkish and hotel names].’ Türk Dili, 596, 144–54.Google Scholar
Backhaus, P. 2007. Linguistic Landscapes: A Comparative Study of Urban Multilingualism in Tokyo. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Blommaert, J. 2013., Ethnography, Superdiversity and Linguistic Landscapes: Chronicles of Complexity. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.Google Scholar
Blommaert, J. & Maly, I. 2014. Ethnographic Linguistic Landscape Analysis and social change: A case study. Tilburg Papers in Culture Studies. Paper 100. Online at < https://www.tilburguniversity.edu/upload/6b650494-3bf9-4dd9-904a-5331a0bcf35b_TPCS_100_Blommaert-Maly.pdf> (accessed April 17, 2016).+(accessed+April+17,+2016).>Google Scholar
Baumgardner, R. J. 2006. ‘The appeal of English in Mexican commerce.’ World Englishes, 25(2), 251–66.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ben Said, S. 2010. ‘Urban street signs in the linguistic landscape of Tunisia: Tensions in policy, representation, and attitudes.’ Unpublished doctoral dissertation. State College, PA: Pennsylvania State University.Google Scholar
Boyraz, Ş. 2003. ‘İletişim açısından Sivas'ta ticari işletme adları [Business names in Sivas from the perspective of communication].’ Milli Folklor, 60, 141–60.Google Scholar
Danacı, G. 2005. ‘The foreign language influence in the process of shop naming.’ Ankara Üniversitesi Dil Dergisi (TÖMER), 129, 23–33.Google Scholar
Demircan, Ö. 2001. İşyeri adlarında yabancılaşma [Foreignization in business names]. 14. Dilbilim Kurultayı Bildirileri, Adana: Çukurova Üniversitesi Basımevi.Google Scholar
Dimova, S. 2007. ‘English, the Internet and computer terminology in Macedonia.’ World Englishes, 26(3), 373–87.Google Scholar
Doğan, İ. 1999. Sokaktaki Yabancı İşyeri İsimlerine Yansıyan Kültürel Eğilimler [Cultural inclinations reflected in foreign named business names on the streets]. İstanbul: Sistem Yayınları.Google Scholar
EL-Yasin, M. & Mahadin, R. 1996. ‘On the pragmatics of shop signs in Jordan.’ Journal of Pragmatics, 26, 407–16.Google Scholar
Government Code of the Republic of Turkey. 1926. ‘İktisadi Müesseselerde Mecburi Türkçe Kullanılması Hakkında Kanun [The Law on the Mandatory Use of Turkish in Commercial Enterprises].’ Online at <http://www.mevzuat.gov.tr/MevzuatMetin/1.3.805.pdf> (accessed September 21, 2015).+(accessed+September+21,+2015).>Google Scholar
Gözaydın, N. 2000. ‘Türkçe bilinci ve Karum [Awareness of Turkish and Karum].’ Türk Dili, 585, 227–31.Google Scholar
Griffin, J. L. 2004. ‘The presence of written English on the streets of Rome.’ English Today, 20(2), 3–8.Google Scholar
Hasanova, D. 2010. ‘English as a trademark of modernity and elitism.’ English Today, 26(1), 3–8.Google Scholar
Hult, F. M. 2010. ‘Scales of multilingualism: Towards multi-layered analysis of linguistic diversity.’ International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 202, 1–130.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kelly-Holmes, H. 2005. Advertising as Multilingual Communication. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
MacGregor, L. 2003. ‘The language of shop signs in Tokyo.’ English Today, 19(1), 18–23.Google Scholar
McArthur, T. 2000. ‘Interanto: The global language of signs.’ English Today, 16(1), 33–43.Google Scholar
Mengi, Z. 2010. ‘Business Turkish.’ Hurriyet IK Weekly, April 5. Online at <http://www.zeynepmengi.com/2010/04/business-turkish/> (accessed September 21, 2015).+(accessed+September+21,+2015).>Google Scholar
Ong, K. K. W., Ghesquière, J. F. & Serwe, S. K. 2013. ‘Frenglish shop signs in Singapore.’ English Today, 29(3), 19–25.Google Scholar
Özyıldırım, I. 2001. ‘İş yeri levhaları: İşlevsel bir yaklaşım [Shop signs: A functional approach].’ Dil Dergisi, 103, 10–19.Google Scholar
Ross, N. J. 1997. ‘Signs of international English.’ English Today, 13(2), 29–33.Google Scholar
Said, E. 1993. Culture and Imperialism. London: Chatto & Windus.Google Scholar
Sebba, M. (2010). ‘Review of linguistic landscapes: A comparative study of urban multilingualism in Tokyo.’ Writing System Research, 2(1), 73.Google Scholar
Selvi, A. F. 2007. ‘A multifactorial sociolinguistic analysis of business naming practices in Turkey.’ Unpublished Master's thesis. Ankara, Turkey: Middle East Technical University.Google Scholar
Selvi, A. F. 2011. ‘World Englishes in the Turkish sociolinguistic context.’ World Englishes, 30(2), 182–99.Google Scholar
Şeyda, A. 2010. ‘Dil açısından Kars'taki iş yeri isimleri [Business names in Kars from a linguistic perspective].’ Atatürk Üniversitesi Kâzım Karabekir Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 12, 77–88.Google Scholar
Schlick, M. 2002. ‘The English of shop signs in Europe.’ English Today, 18(2), 3–7.Google Scholar
Schlick, M. 2003. ‘The English of shop signs in Europe: A case study of the language in the store fronts of eight town centers.’ English Today, 19(1), 3–17.Google Scholar
Scollon, R. & Scollon, S. W. (2003). Discourses in Place: Language in the Material World. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Stewart, P. & Fawcett, R. 2004. ‘Shop signs in some small towns in northern Portugal.’ English Today, 20(1), 56–58.Google Scholar
Thonus, T. 1991. ‘Englishization of business names in Brazil.’ World Englishes, 10(1), 65–74.Google Scholar
Üstünova, M., Aydın, H., Çetinoğlu Berberoğlu, G., Üstünova, K., Akkök, M. & Akgün, N. 2010. ‘İş yeri adlarında Türkçenin kullanımı [The use of Turkish in business naming].’ In Turkish Studies, 5(1), 1390–419.Google Scholar
Vettorel, P. 2013. ‘English in Italian advertising.’ World Englishes, 32(2), 261–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, J. 2013. ‘Linguistic landscape of China: A case study of shop signs in Beijing.’ Studies in Literature and Language, 6(1), 40–7.Google Scholar