Strategies for creating symbolic resources in linguistic landscapes for marketing purposes (a case study of landscapes from Moscow and St. Petersburg)

Abstract

The urban communicative space — or linguistic landscape — is composed of informational and symbolic elements. While the first type of sign aims to inform city residents, the second type is more complex to perceive and may reflect intricate social processes. Such signs are created not for the purpose of conveying information, but to enhance the appeal of a place, create a desired atmosphere, and ultimately serve marketing objectives. The article provides an analysis of the symbolic resources in the linguistic landscapes of Moscow and St. Petersburg and identifies three strategies for their creation: the use of precedent phenomena, the imitation of interpersonal communication, and the co-creation of symbolic communicative acts. The analysis employs a geosemiotic approach to enable a more comprehensive assessment of the role played by symbolic elements within their linguistic and social context. For each strategy, the means of speech expressiveness aimed at achieving a specific pragmatic effect are analyzed. The conclusion highlights how symbolic elements of the urban linguistic landscape complement contemporary advertising discourse by relying on the creation of an emotional connection with the addressee and explores their potential for the development of the creative economy in the future.

References

1. Asanov A.Yu. 2014. Urbanonymiya goroda Tambova v lingvokognitivnom aspekte [Urbanonymy of the city of Tambov in the linguocognitive aspect]. PhD diss. abstract. Tambov. (In Russ.)

2. Gal’tsova A.S. 2011. Lingvokul’turologicheskii potentsial peterburgskoi toponimii [Linguacultural potential of St. Petersburg toponymy]. PhD diss. abstract. Saint Petersburg. (In Russ.)

3. Golikova T.A. 2020. Metodologiya lingvolandshaft nykh issledovanii v Rossii: analitiko-tematicheskii obzor [Methodology of linguistic landscape research in Russia: an analytical and thematic review]. Bulletin of TvSU. Series “Philosophy”, no. 4(54), pp. 149–166. (In Russ.)

4. Golomidova M.V. 2019. Urbanonimy kak resurs upravleniya vospriyatiem gorodskogo prostranstva [Urbanonyms as a resource for managing the perception of urban space]. Communication Studies, vol. 6, no. 1, pp. 11–30. (In Russ.)

5. Gorbanevskii M.V. 1994. Russkaya gorodskaya toponimiya: problemy istorikokul’turnogo izucheniya i sovremennogo leksikograficheskogo opisaniya [Russian urban toponymy: problems of historical and cultural study and modern lexicographic description]. Dr. (habil.) diss. abstract. Moscow. (In Russ.)

6. Ivanov V.V. 2023. Razvitie teoreticheskikh printsipov issledovanii yazykovogo landshaft a v kontekste gorodskogo mnogoyazychiya [Development of theoretical principles of linguistic landscape research in the context of urban multilingualism]. Polylinguality and Transcultural Practices, vol. 20, no. 3, pp. 426–435. (In Russ.)

7. Krasnykh V.V. 2012. Sovremennyi bol’shoi gorod kak perekrestok mirov (virtual’noe vs. real’noe, verbal’noe vs. neverbal’noe, svoe vs. chuzhoe) [The modern big city as a crossroads of worlds (virtual vs. real, verbal vs. non-verbal, one’s own vs. other’s)]. Polyphony of the Big City: collection of scholarly articles. Moscow, MIL, pp. 75–83. (In Russ.)

8. Karaulov Yu.N. 2010. Russkii yazyk i yazykovaya lichnost’ [The Russian Language and Linguistic Personality]. 7th ed. Moscow, LKI. (In Russ.)

9. Krysin L.P. 2021. Ocherki po sotsiolingvistike [Essays on sociolinguistics]. Moscow, Flinta. (In Russ.)

10. Larin B.A. 1977. K lingvisticheskoi kharakteristike goroda (neskol’ko predposylok) [Towards a linguistic characterization of the city (a few premises)]. In B.A. Larin. History of the Russian Language and General Linguistics. Moscow, Prosveshchenie, pp. 189–199. (In Russ.)

11. Larin B.A. 1977. O lingvisticheskom izuchenii goroda [On the linguistic study of the city]. In B.A. Larin. History of the Russian Language and General Linguistics. Moscow, Prosveshchenie, pp. 175–189. (In Russ.)

12. Liu Jingpeng. 2019. Lingvisticheskii landshaft : issledovanie i analiz perevoda s russkogo na kitaiskii yazyk v krupnykh gorodakh Rossii [Linguistic landscape: research and analysis of translation from Russian into Chinese in large cities of Russia]. Moscow University Bulletin. Series 22. Translation Theory, no. 2, pp. 121–129. (In Russ.)

13. Malenova E.A. 2021. Perevod yazykovykh sredstv konstruirovaniya gorodskogo lingvisticheskogo landshaft a kak faktor formirovaniya imidzha territorii [Translation of linguistic means of constructing urban linguistic landscape as a factor in shaping the image of a territory]. Cross-Cultural Studies: Education and Science, vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 94–102. (In Russ.)

14. Medvedeva E.V. 2022. Ot goroda-sada k gorodu-parku: o funktsionirovanii urbanisticheskoi metafory v tekste goroda [From the garden city to the park city: on the functioning of the urban metaphor in the city text]. Moscow University Bulletin. Series 19. Linguistics and Intercultural Communication, no. 1, pp. 68–78. (In Russ.)

15. Medvedeva E.V. 2020. Semiotika dostoprimechatel’nostei i ee rol’ v for mirovanii teksta goroda [Semiotics of landmarks and its role in the formation of the city text]. Moscow University Bulletin. Series 19. Linguistics and Intercultural Communication, no. 4, pp. 134–142. (In Russ.)

16. Peshkova N.P. 2017. Lingvisticheskii landshaft polietnicheskogo goroda. Osobennosti verbal’nogo vozdeistviya [Linguistic landscape of a multi-ethnic city. Features of verbal influence]. Issues of Psycholinguistics, no. 4, pp. 108–118. (In Russ.)

17. Proshina Z.G., Rivlina A.A. 2020. Angliiskii yazyk v Rossii kak variant i kak dopolnitel’nyi yazykovoi resurs [English in Russia as a variety and as an additional language resource]. In M.B. Rarenko (ed.). English in the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and Beyond. Moscow, INION, pp. 73–89. (In Russ.)

18. Fedosyuk M.Yu. 2022. O prichinakh rosta analitizma i produktivnosti neidio matichnykh nominatsii v russkom yazyke nashikh dnei [On the reasons for the growth of analytism and productivity of non-idiomatic nominations in the modern Russian language]. Moscow University Bulletin. Series 19. Linguistics and Intercultural Communication, no. 4, pp. 9–19. (In Russ.)

19. Chugaeva V.S., Voskresenskaya I.V. 2023. Lingvisticheskii landshaft Novorossiiska i Belgoroda che rez prizmu reklamy, urbanonimov, ergonimov [Linguistic landscape of Novorossiysk and Belgorod through the prism of advertising, urbanonyms, ergonyms]. Theory of Language and Intercultural Communication, no. 2(49), pp. 381–398. (In Russ.)

20. Kelly-Holmes H. 2020. The Linguistic Business of Marketing. In C. Thurlow (ed.). The Business of Words: Wordsmiths, Linguists, and Other Language Workers. London and New York: Routledge, pp. 36–50.

21. Landry R., Bourhis R. 1997. Linguistics Landscapes and Ethnolinguistic Vitality: An Empirical Study. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, vol. 16, pp. 23–49.

22. Shohamy E. 2019. Linguistic landscape after a decade: An overview of themes, debates and future directions. In Putz M, Mundt N. (eds.). Expanding the Linguistic Landscape: Linguistic Diversity, Multimodality and the Use of Space as a Semiotic Resource. Bristol: Multilingual Matters, pp. 25–37.