Beliefs of EFL Learners towards Pedagogical Values of Linguistic Landscape in China: A Case Study Carried Out in Three Schools

Main Article Content

Zhang Ying


Numerous research in linguistic landscape (LL) have shown that the languages exhibited on signage in city space can offer an abundant resource enabling language learning in “real-life” situations. However, there are rare studies investigate the pedagogical value from the perspective of the learners. Taking English as a Foreign Language (EFL) learners in China as research subjects, a qualitative and quantitative combined method was adopted in this study to survey three groups of students’ beliefs about the pedagogical value of LL (classified as senior high school students, undergraduate students, and postgraduate students). The findings show that almost students hold a positive attitude toward English in LL, but with the different knowledge base, learning methods and ideology of “standard” English usage, the learners show different perceptions towards the specific issues on to what extent the English in LL can help them to learn English.

EFL learners, linguistic landscape, pedagogical value, learners’ perception, learners’ attitude.

Article Details

How to Cite
Ying, Z. (2019). Beliefs of EFL Learners towards Pedagogical Values of Linguistic Landscape in China: A Case Study Carried Out in Three Schools. Journal of Education, Society and Behavioural Science, 31(3), 1-11.
Original Research Article


Landry R, R Bourhis. Linguistic landscape and ethnolinguistic vitality: An empirical study [J]. Journal of Language and Social Psychology. 1997;16:23-49.

Gorter D. Further possibilities for linguistic landscape research [J]. International Journal of Multilingualism. 2006;81-89.

Shohamy E, Gorter D. (Eds.). Linguistic landscape: Expanding the scenery. New York, NY: Routledge; 2009.

Gorter D, Marten HF, Mensel V. (Eds.). Minority languages in the linguistic landscape. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan; 2012.

Van Mensel L, Vandenbroucke M, Blackwood R. Linguistic landscapes. In Garcia O, Flores N, Spotti M. (Eds.), Oxford handbook of language and society. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 2016;423–449.

Gorter D. Introduction: The study of the linguistic landscape as a new approach to multilingualism [J]. International Journal of Multilingualism. 2006;3(1):1-6.

Cenoz J, Gorter D. Linguistic landscape and minority languages [J]. International Journal of Multilingualism. 2006;3:67-80.

Huebner T. A framework for the linguistic analysis of linguistic landscapes [A]. In Shohamy E, Gorter D. (Eds.). Linguistic Landscape: Expanding the Scenery London: Routledge. 2009;70-87[C].

Plessis TD. Bloemfontein / Mangaung, ‗city on the move‘. Language management and transformation of a non-representative linguistic landscape [A]. In Shohamy E, Ben-Rafael E, Barni M. (Eds). Linguistic Landscape in the City Bristol: Multilingual Matters. 2010;74-95 [C].

Shang GW, Zhao SH. Perspectives, theory, and methodology in linguistic landscape research [J]. Foreign Language Teaching and Research. 2014;2:214-223.

Shang GW, Zhao SH. Analytical dimensions and theoretical construction in Linguistic landscape [J]. Journal of Foreign Languages. 2015;6:81-89.

Cenoz J, Gorter D. The linguistic landscape as an additional source of input in second language acquisition [J]. International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching. 2008;46(3):267-287.

Rowland L. The pedagogical benefits of a linguistic landscape project in Japan. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. 2013;16(4):494–505.

Shohamy E, Waksman S. Linguistic landscape as an ecological arena: Modalities, meanings, negotiations, education. In Shohamy E, Gorter D. (Eds.), Linguistic landscape: Expanding the scenery. New York: Routledge. 2009;313–331.

Dagenais D, Moore D, Sabatier C, Lamarre P, Armand F. Linguistic landscape and language awareness. In E. Shohamy, Gorter D. (Eds.), Linguistic landscape: Expanding the scenery. New York, NY: Routledge. 2009;253–269.

Clemente M, Andrade AI, MartinsF. Learning to read the world, learning to look at the linguistic landscape: A primary school study. In Hélot C, Barni M, Janssens R, Bagna C. (Eds.), Linguistic landscapes, multilingualism and social change. Frankfurt: Peter Lang. 2012; 267–285.

Sayer P. Using the linguistic landscape as a pedagogical resource. ELT Journal. 2010;64(2):143–154.

Malinowski D. Opening spaces of learning in the linguistic landscape. Linguistic Landscape. 2015;1(1/2):95–113.

Hancock A. Capturing the linguistic landscape of Edinburgh: A pedagogical tool to investigate student teachers’ understandings of cultural and linguistic diversity. In Hélot C, Barni M, Janssens R, Bagna C. (Eds.), Linguistic landscapes, multilingualism and social change. Frankfurt, Germany: Peter Lang. 2012;249–266.

Brown KD. Estonian schoolscapes and the marginalization of regional identity in education. European Education. 2005;37(3): 78–89.

Brown, KD. The linguistic landscape of educational spaces: Language revitalization and schools in southeastern Estonia. In Gorter D, Marten HF, Van Mensel L. (Eds.). Minority languages in the linguistic landscape. Basingstoke, United Kingdom: Palgrave Macmillan. 2012;281–298.

Dressler R. Signgeist: Promoting bilingualism through the linguistic landscape of school signage. International Journal of Multilingualism. 2015;12(1):128–145.

Hanauer DI. Laboratory identity: A linguistic landscape analysis of personalized space within a microbiology laboratory. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies. 2010;7(2–3): 152–172.

Laihonen, P, Tódor E. The changing schoolscape in a Szekler village in Romania: Signs of diversity in regularization. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism. 2017;20(3):362–379.

Linkola I. (The linguistic landscape of a Sámi school −An ethnographic study of Sami language in a secondary school) Saamelaisen koulun kielimaisema− Etnografinen tutkimus saamen kielestä toisen asteen oppilaitoksessa. Koutokeino, Finland: Sámi University College; 2014.

Szabó TP. The management of diversity in schoolscapes: An analysis of Hungarian practices. Apples −Journal of Applied Language Studies. 2015;9(1):23–51.

Garvin RT, Eisenhower K. A comparative study of linguistic landscapes in middle schools in Korea and Texas: Contrasting signs of learning and identity construction. In Blackwood RJ, Lanza E, Woldemariam H. (Eds.). Negotiating and Contesting Identities in Linguistic Landscapes London, United Kingdom: Bloomsbury Publishing. 2016;215–232.

Gorter D, Cenoz J. Translanguaging and linguistic landscapes. Linguistic Landscape. 2015;1(1/2):54–74.

Li S. English, advertising and positioning: The impact of English on Chinese people's daily lives. Journal of World Languages. 2016;2(2–3):77–93.

Zhao RH. Shanghaishi gonggong Changsuo Waiwen Shiyong Qingkuaing Diaoyan Baogao [technical report on the survey of the foreign language uses in Shanghai's public signs]. Shanghai: Research Center for Foreign Language Strategies, Shanghai Foreign Studies University; 2012.

Zhang HJ, Lv MJ. Research on medium and small-sized towns’ linguistic landscape: from the perspective of language planning [J]. Social Science Front 6: 2019:1-5.

Boldon K, Graddol D. English in China today. English Today, 2012;28(3):3–9.