LANGUAGE LANDSCAPE IN TOURIST ATTRACTIONS OF CHIANG MAI MUNICIPALITY: NIMMANHAEMIN AREA

Main Article Content

Han Liu
Panadda Rerkplian

Abstract

This study aims to analyze the patterns and functions of language use in the linguistic landscape of public signs in Nimmanhaemin, Chiang Mai Municipality, employing the theoretical framework of Linguistic Landscape. The research utilizes a mixed-methods approach, integrating both quantitative and qualitative methodologies. For the quantitative component, the researcher conducted a field survey by photographing public signs within the study area, yielding a corpus of 731 signs, which served as both the population and sample for this research. The collected data were digitized and subsequently classified according to patterns of language use and analyzed for the functions of language on each type of sign. The number and percentage of each language pattern and function were calculated using descriptive statistics to illustrate the overall trends and characteristics of the linguistic landscape in the area. For the qualitative component, the researcher conducted an in-depth analysis of the textual content on each type of sign, taking into account relevant social and cultural contexts. The results indicate that, in terms of language patterns, bilingual signs accounted for the majority with 339 signs (46.83%), followed by monolingual signs with 281 signs (38.82%), and multilingual signs with 111 signs (14.35%). Regarding functional aspects, signs with an informative function were most prevalent, totaling 682 signs (93.29%), while those with symbolic functions amounted to 49 signs (6.71%). The findings of this study demonstrate that the languages used on signs play a significant role in reflecting social structure, policy, language power, and identity construction. Moreover, the results provide useful insights for language policy planning, local identity preservation, and serve as guidelines for sign design for communities and relevant agencies in the future.

Article Details

How to Cite
Liu, H., & Rerkplian, P. (2025). LANGUAGE LANDSCAPE IN TOURIST ATTRACTIONS OF CHIANG MAI MUNICIPALITY: NIMMANHAEMIN AREA. Journal of Social Science and Cultural, 9(6), 306–323. retrieved from https://so06.tci-thaijo.org/index.php/JSC/article/view/284926
Section
Research Articles

References

กระทรวงมหาดไทย. (2563). กฎกระทรวงกำหนดอัตราภาษีป้าย พ.ศ. 2563. ราชกิจจานุเบกษา เล่ม 137 ตอนที่ 45 ก หน้า 10 (15 มีนาคม 2563).

ปฏิญญา บุญมาเลิศ และปฐม หงษ์สุวรรณ. (2567). ลักษณะทางภาษาจากป้ายชื่อสถานที่ในจังหวัดเชียงใหม่ที่สัมพันธ์กับภูมิทัศน์ทางภาษา. วารสารสังคมศาสตร์และวัฒนธรรม, 8(4), 210-220.

สำนักงานจังหวัดเชียงใหม่. (2561). แผนพัฒนาจังหวัดเชียงใหม่ พ.ศ. 2561 - 2565. เรียกใช้เมื่อ 11 มีนาคม 2568 จาก https://www.chiangmai.go.th/managing/public/D2/2D05Aug2020141943.pdf

Backhaus, P. (2007). Linguistic Landscapes: A Comparative Study of Urban Multilingualism in Tokyo. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.

Blackwood, R. (2015). LL explorations and methodological challenges: Analysing France's regional languages. Linguistic Landscape, 1(1-2), 38-53.

Blumer, H. (1969). Symbolic interactionism: Perspective and method. Englewood Cliffs. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Cenoz, J. & Gorter, D. (2006). Linguistic landscape and minority languages. International Journal of Multilingualism, 3(1), 67-80.

Dewey, M. (2007). English as a lingua franca and globalization: An interconnected perspective. International Journal of Applied Linguistics, 17(3), 332-354.

Gorter, D. (2013). Linguistic landscapes in a multilingual world. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, (33), 190-212. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0267190513000020

Jaworski, A. & Thurlow, C. (2010). Semiotic landscapes: Language, image, space. London: Continuum.

Landry, R. & Bourhis, R. Y. (1997). Linguistic landscape and ethnolinguistic vitality: An empirical study. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 16(1), 23-49.

Mead, G. H. (1934). Mind, self, and society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

Phattharathanit, S. (2012). Identity maintenance in Lanna (Northern Thai). Journal of the Southeast Asian Linguistics Society, 5(2012), 67-84.

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

Spolsky, B. (2009). Prolegomena to a sociolinguistic theory of public signage. In E. Shohamy & D. Gorter (Eds.), Linguistic landscape: Expanding the scenery (pp. 25-39). New York: Routledge.

Suzuki, K. & Heo, J. (2022). A Study on the Comparison of Impressions of Tourist Information Signs Focusing on the Differences between National Languages in Japanese Regional Cities. Applied Sciences, 12(3), 1499. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12031499

Thongtong, T. (2016). A linguistic landscape study of signage on Nimmanhemin Road, a Lanna Chiang Mai chill-out street. Manusya. Journal of Humanities, 22, 72-87. https://brill.com/view/journals/mnya/19/3/article-p72_6.xml