A Geosemiotic Analysis of Signs in the Linguistic Cityscape of Little Tokyo Blok M, Jakarta
Keywords:
Geosemiotics, Linguistic Landscape, Little Tokyo Blok M, MultilingualismAbstract
This study aims to analyze the geosemiotic features of the linguistic landscape in Little Tokyo, Blok M, Jakarta, and to examine how these features function in representing real-world activities and sociocultural meanings. A qualitative research approach was employed using the geosemiotic framework proposed by Scollon and Scollon (2003) to categorize and interpret 402 signs displayed in the area. The signs were classified into three categories: official signs, private signs, and mixed signs, with private signs emerging as the most dominant. These included 50 restaurant signs, 82 shop signs, and 44 private advertisements. A closer geosemiotic analysis was conducted on the 50 restaurant signs by examining key components such as code preference, inscription, and emplacement. The findings reveal a strong presence of multilingualism, with Indonesian, Japanese, and English frequently used across the signage. The signs perform both informational and symbolic functions: they facilitate navigation and communication for visitors while simultaneously expressing the area’s distinctive cultural identity. Overall, the study demonstrates that the signage in Little Tokyo, Blok M plays a significant role in constructing and reinforcing a unique socio-cultural and spatial landscape.
References
Backhaus, P. (2006). Linguistic landscapes: A comparative study of urban multilingualism in Tokyo. Multilingual Matters.
Banks, M. (2007). Using visual data in qualitative research. Sociological Research Online, 12(6), 1–16.
Ben-Rafael, E., Baron, I., & Ariav, T. (2006). The role of language in the construction of the public space: An analysis of language and signage in the public spaces of Jerusalem. Language in Society, 35(4), 505–520. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404506060246
Ben-Rafael, E., Shohamy, E., Amara, M. H., & Trumper-Hecht, N. (2006). Linguistic landscape as a symbolic construction of the public space: The case of Israel. In D. Gorter (Ed.), Linguistic landscape: A new approach to multilingualism (pp. 7–27). Multilingual Matters.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). SAGE Publications.
Da Silva, A. M., Tjung, Y. N., Wijayanti, S. H., & Suwartono, C. (2021). Language use and tourism in Yogyakarta: The linguistic landscape of Malioboro. Wacana, 22(2), 295–318. http://wacana.ui.ac.id/index.php/wjhi/article/view/721
Ennichisai Committee. (2019). ENNICHISAI 2019: The biggest Japanese culture event in Indonesia. ENNICHISAI Blok M. https://www.ennichisaiblokm.com/
Garraffa, M., & Fyndanis, V. (2020). Linguistic theory and aphasia: An overview. Aphasiology, 34(8), 905–926. https://doi.org/10.1080/02687038.2020.1770196
Goffman, E. (1983). The interaction order: American Sociological Association, 1982 presidential address. American Sociological Review, 48(1), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.2307/2095141
Google. (n.d.). Little Tokyo Blok M, Jakarta [Online map]. https://www.google.com/maps/@-6.2446044,106.8010162,18.5z
Gorter, D. (2018). Methods and techniques for linguistic landscape research: About definitions, core issues, and technological innovations. In Expanding the linguistic landscape. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781788922166-005
Gudivada, A., Rao, D. L., & Gudivada, V. N. (2018). Linguistics: Core concepts and principles. In Handbook of statistics (Vol. 38). Elsevier.
Guo, Y., & Zhao, B. (2021). The discourse communication function of urban linguistic landscape. In Proceedings of the 2020 International Conference on Language, Communication and Culture Studies (pp. 86–89). Atlantis Press. https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.210313.016
Harsanto, D. (2008). Shining Japan: From mercenaries and sex workers to entrepreneurs. The Jakarta Post. https://web.archive.org/web/20080413223548/http://old.thejakartapost.com/community/japan1.asp
Jing, J. W. (2021). Geosemiotic analysis of signs in the linguistic cityscape of China. International Journal of Language and Linguistics, 9(4), 226–232. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ijll.20210904.23
Jonathan, C., Marion, E. C., & Dewi, P. A. (2020). Development of the Japanese community in the Blok M area seen from aspects of business and industry. IOP Conference Series: Earth and Environmental Science, 452(1), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1088/1755-1315/452/1/012068
Kurniawati, A. E., & Rohmah, Z. (2023). Signage function in the culinary business: A linguistic landscape of youngsters' language. ICON LATERALS. EAI. https://doi.org/10.4108/eai.11-7-2023.2340600
Landry, R., & Bourhis, R. Y. (1997). Linguistic landscape and ethnolinguistic vitality: An empirical study. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 16(1), 23–49. https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X970161002
Lou, J. J. (2015). Locating the power of place in space: A geosemiotic approach to context. De Gruyter.
Lu, X., Sudipa, I. N., Artawa, I. K., & Suastra, I. M. (2021). The linguistic landscape of Dali Ancient City, China: A geosemiotics approach. The International Journal of Language and Cultural World (TIJOLAC), 3(1), 46–55. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4707337
Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass.
Nasution, H. S. (2023). The differences of traditional grammar (formal grammar) and structural grammar (notional grammar) in language development. English Teaching and Linguistics Journal (ETLiJ), 4(2), 90–101.
Pramusita, S. M., Kustanti, E., & Sianturi, B. (2018). The contribution of linguistics knowledge to the field of English language teaching. Issues in Applied Linguistics and Language Teaching, 1(2), 31–39.
Rucitra, A., & Permanasari, F. (2017). Karakteristik gaya interior Jepang pada ruang publik restoran Jepang di Surabaya. Dimensi Interior, 15(2), 117–126. https://dimensiinterior.petra.ac.id/index.php/int/article/view/21558/19605
Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. W. (2003). Discourse in place: Language in the material world. Routledge.
Sebba, M. (2013). Multilingualism in written discourse: An approach to the analysis of multilingual texts. International Journal of Bilingualism, 17(1), 97–118. https://doi.org/10.1177/1367006912438301
Sheng, R., & Buchanan, J. (2022). Traditional visual language: A geographical semiotic analysis of indigenous linguistic landscape of ancient waterfront towns in China. SAGE Open, 12(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211068503
Statista Research Department. (2024). Number of Japanese residents in South Jakarta 2015–2023. Statista. https://www.statista.com/statistics/1089873/japan-number-japanese-residents-south-jakarta/
Syiariel, T. (2022). Jelajah “Little Tokyo” di Blok M, Jakarta Selatan. Kompasiana. https://www.kompasiana.com/tonnysy/622734f031794951887bc472/jelajah-little-tokyo-di-blok-m-jakarta?page=all#sectionall
VanderStoep, S. W., & Johnston, D. D. (2009). Research methods for everyday life: Blending qualitative and quantitative approaches. John Wiley & Sons.
Wallace, D. (2015). How multilingual is your country? Infographic Journal. https://infographicjournal.com/how-multilingual-is-your-country/
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Paradigma Lingua have CC-BY-SA or an equivalent license as the optimal license for the publication, distribution, use, and reuse of scholarly work.
In developing strategy and setting priorities, Paradigma Lingua recognize that free access is better than priced access, libre access is better than free access, and libre under CC-BY-SA or the equivalent is better than libre under more restrictive open licenses. We should achieve what we can when we can. We should not delay achieving free in order to achieve libre, and we should not stop with free when we can achieve libre.
