Acceso usuarios
This article argues that an expanded view of linguistic landscapes provides a useful metaphor for exploring language policies. Following this view, “language policy” is defined as “linguistic landscaping” (i.e., placing language policy mechanisms which, together with already placed mechanisms, construct a metaphorical landscape). The application of this landscaping metaphor has several advantages, as it provides a way to imagine language policy as a continuously ongoing construction process, and as it provides a way to imagine the historical layers of a landscape, the overlap and connections between different landscapes, and the complex hierarchical positions within a landscape. The article is based on linguistic-ethnographic fieldwork in a metal foundry in the Dutch province of Limburg, within walking distance from the Dutch–German border. Specifically, it discusses why a group of senior production workers from Limburg were dissatisfied with the linguistically diverse landscape that had emerged in the foundry over time, even though the foundry’s management tried to place Dutch-speaking workers in the company’s sociolinguistic norm centre. Confirming the usefulness of the landscaping metaphor, the article shows that a full consideration of diverse historical and contemporary acts of both linguistic and semiotic landscaping helps explain why these workers experienced that their position in the foundry had become peripheralised over time. In conclusion, the article calls for more attention to the complex human experience, rather than just the detection, of sociolinguistic inequalities.
Dit artikel beargumenteert det ‘n breijer begrip van linguïstische langksjappe (linguistic landscapes) ‘ne broekbare metafoor versjaf veur ‘t explorere van taalpolitiek. Dit perspectief volgend, wuuerdt “taalpolitiek” gedefinieerd es “linguïstisch langksjuppe” (linguistic landscaping), det wul zegke, ‘t plaatse van taalpolitieke mechanismes die, same met reids geplaatste mechanismes, ‘n metaforisch langksjap construere. De toepassing van deze “langksjuppe”-metafoor haet versjillende veurdeile, umdet ‘t veurzeet in ‘ne menier um taalpolitiek es ‘n continu doorgaond constructieproces veur te sjtelle, en umdet ‘t veurzeet in ‘ne menier um de versjillende historische lage van ‘n langksjap, de euverlap en verbinginge tusse versjillende langksjappe, en de complexe hiërarchische posities in ‘n langksjap veur te sjtelle. ‘t Artikel is gebaseerd op taalkundig-etnografisch veldwerk in ‘ne metaalgeeterie in de Nederlandse provincie Limburg, op laupaafsjtand van de Nederlands-Duitse grens. Mier specifiek bediscussieert ‘t artikel de vraog weurum ‘ne groep senior-productiemedewerkers oet Limburg ontevraeje waar met ‘t talig diverse langksjap det in de laup van d’n tied in de geeterie ontsjtaon waar, zelfs al probeerde ‘t management Nederlands-sjpraekende werknimmers in ‘t sociolinguïstische normcentrum van ‘t bedrief te plaatse. Es bevestiging van de broekbaarheid van de “langksjuppe”-metafoor, luuet ‘t artikel zeen det ‘ne volledige besjouwing van diverse historische en contemporaine, talige en semiotische langksjup-handelinge help um te begriepe weurum dees werknimmers ervaarde det eure positie in de geeterie door d’n tied haer waar geperiferaliseerd. Es conclusie rup ‘t artikel op um mier aandach aan de complexe minselikke ervaring, in plaats van allein de detectie, van sociolinguïstische ongeliekhede te besjtaeje.
