International Journal of Multilingualism

ISSN: (Print) (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rmjm20

Linguistic landscape in a city of migrants: a study

of Souk Naif area in Dubai

Magdalena Karolak

To cite this article: Magdalena Karolak (2020): Linguistic landscape in a city of migrants:
a study of Souk Naif area in Dubai, International Journal of Multilingualism, DOI:
10.1080/14790718.2020.1781132

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2020.1781132

Published online: 30 Jun 2020.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rmjm20
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUALISM
https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2020.1781132

Linguistic landscape in a city of migrants: a study of Souk Naif

area in Dubai
Magdalena Karolak
College of Humanities and Social Sciences, Department of Social Sciences, Zayed University, Dubai, UAE

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

This paper presents the first in-depth analysis of linguistic landscape Received 10 February 2020
(LL) of a migrant area in Dubai. While Arabic is the official language Accepted 3 June 2020
of the country, few foreigners learn it and English has become the
KEYWORDS
lingua franca that allows migrant communities to communicate. Dubai; UAE; languages;
Nonetheless, English and Arabic are mother tongues to a minority linguistic landscape; public
of resident population. A multitude of other languages are spoken space; Souk Naif
among expatriates. Despite that variety, the visibility and salience
of particular languages in LL is a reflection of, most often, their
differing social standing. As such, this research shows how
multilingualism, language contact, social hierarchy as well as
official policies with regards to language use in UAE, have led to
the minimisation of third languages use in LL. Through a
multilingual analysis of signs in Souk Naif area, this research
provides important insights on the meaning of linguistic
landscapes in cosmopolitan cities in the Arabian Gulf, specifically,
how bottom-up sign makers negotiate the public space, why
English is the primary language used, and finally, why high levels
of multiculturalism lead to deterritorialisation and
commodification of languages in LL.

Introduction
Dubai has grabbed international attention through its extravagant urban developments.
Its megastructures have become familiar icons around the world, and the rapidity and
fantasy of their planning and execution are reasons for envy but also a magnet for visitors
and for migrant workers. After the city has risen from the debt crunch of 2009, yet again,
no project seems impossible to accomplish as it continues to expand. The urban fabric of
the city has been profoundly impacted by these changes. Dubai is populated by at least
90% of foreigners, of whom, migrants from the Indian subcontinent form a majority. In
addition, in a year, the city welcomes much more tourists than its own population of
approximately 3 million inhabitants (Agence France-Presse, 2020). The settled population
is in majority male due to the transient character of foreign workers. While in the collective
consciousness the glamorous districts of Dubai are the most salient, this paper aims at ana-
lysing the linguistic landscape of an area populated by migrant communities of lower
economic status. Such a study has not been undertaken so far. Yet, the language used

CONTACT Magdalena Karolak Magdalena.Karolak@zu.ac.ae College of Humanities and Social Sciences, Depart-
ment of Social Sciences, Zayed University, PO BOX 19282, Academic City, Dubai, UAE
© 2020 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
2 M. KAROLAK

in public spaces may reveal a number of characteristics of the city and its inhabitants,
otherwise covert. The visibility and salience of particular linguistic signs may be a reflection
of the complicated interplay between various languages spoken and their differing social
standings but also a mirror of the, by nature, migrant society in Dubai. Multilingualism,
language contact, social hierarchy as well as official policies with regards to public
language use have potentially created a multifaceted background for such a study.
While Arabic is the official language of the United Arab Emirates, few foreigners learn it
and English has become the lingua franca that allows various migrant communities to
communicate. The analysis of linguistic signs will be particularly interesting as a testimony
to the transient population living in a cosmopolitan city with a highly hierarchical society.
Each district of Dubai creates its own macrocosm and residents often remain
confined to their own neighbourhoods; the latter being disconnected from each
other due to lack of pedestrian pathways in between. As such, the community inhab-
iting it gives each district its own character through the establishment of shops and
services that cater to their needs. Deira is a populous neighbourhood known for a
mix of expatriate populations and a vibrant commercial centre; hence it has been
pre-selected as a district of interest for this study. It is part of the ‘old Dubai’ and
offers affordable living and trading spaces. Diversity of its population, coming in
large part from Asia, has shaped the area. Within Deira district, Souk Naif area stands
out as one of the oldest zones of trade in Dubai. Its trade tradition predates the cre-
ation of UAE when it used to be home to a livestock market. Nowadays Naif’s commer-
cial zone is populated by multiple small shops catering to the various needs of the
expatriate population such as clothing and homewares. The low-cost prices attract
crowds of residents and tourists in search of a bargain alike, especially during the eve-
nings and weekends. ElSheshtawy (2010, p. 197) points out that Naif is also home to ‘a
large low-income expatriate population and has one of the highest densities in the city’.
In addition, he also highlights the authenticity of the space where people come and
spend time on a regular basis to meet with friends and exchange news in a way to
create a ‘small microcosm of similar settings in India and Africa’ (ElSheshtawy, 2010,
p. 199). As a result, Naif area was typified for this study as an example of a living
space where the analysis of language signs may be of particular interest.
The paper is based on a mixed methods study of public signs in the area of Souk Naif.
Landry & Bourhis define the linguistic landscape as ‘the language of public road signs,
advertising, billboards, street names, place names, commercial shop signs, and public
signs on government buildings’ (1997, p. 25). Comprehensive linguistic landscape
studies of UAE are so far non-existent. This research focuses on an area populated by
lower class migrants in order to provide important insights into the linguistic landscapes
of cosmopolitan cities in the Arabian Gulf, but ultimately, also shows the uniqueness of
Dubai in the region. The researcher analysed qualitatively and quantitatively the use of
multiple languages in the area, the names of businesses, the equivalence of bilingual
signs, as well as the visual positioning of each language on the display boards in order
to see the interplay between Arabic – the official language, English – Dubai’s lingua
franca, and languages of the migrant communities. Through such an in-depth analysis,
it is possible to understand, among others, what Piller defines as ‘the inclusions
afforded by celebrations of the linguistically flexible neoliberal urbanite and the exclusions
they hide’ (n.d., p. 2). Specifically, as observed by Piller, this research reveals the marginal
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUALISM 3

presence of third languages in the linguistic landscape creating a sharp contrast with its
residents and those who frequent the area.

Literature review
Linguistic Landscape is a field of sociolinguistics that aims at analysing urban areas in order
to uncover relations between language use in public spaces and social class, as well as
other social attributes such as religion, ethnicity, nationality and race (Coulmas, 2009,
p. 14). In order to achieve these goals, Linguistic Landscape research focuses on ‘the visi-
bility and salience of languages on public and commercial signs in a given territory or
region’ (Landry & Bourhis, 1997, p. 23). Ben-Rafael et al. (2006) refer to linguistic landscape
as symbolic construction of the public space as it is the languages it speaks out and the
symbols which it evinces that serve as the landmarks. The field focuses by default on
areas that are considered urban centres, and they can be of various sizes depending on
the locality. Ben Ben-Rafael (2009, p. 41) defines the centre as a space ‘where one sees
“the crowd” when most people are not at work, where “things happen” in society’ (Ben-
Rafael, 2009). Linguistic Landscape research has grown in the last decades and begun
to encompass diverse regions from the Middle East (Spolsky & Cooper, 1991; Ben-Rafael
et al., 2006), Asia (Lee, 1979; Backhaus, 2007; Ladousa, 2002), Europe (Tulp, 1978; Griffin,
2001), Africa (Reh, 2004; Lanza & Woldemariam, 2014) and the Americas (Monnier, 1989;
Friedrich, 2002) to give a few examples. The scope of the research spans from the study
of the use of languages in officially multilingual societies as a phenomenon (Wenzel,
1996), the relations between majority and minority languages (Cenoz & Gorter, 2006)
the impact of globalisation on language (Lanza & Woldemariam, 2014), the appeal of
advertising in public spaces through linguistic choices (Ross, 1997), and more politically
oriented themes of the use of language as means of control over the territory and resist-
ance to it (Trumper-Hecht, 2009).
With the growth of the interest in Linguistic Landscape, researchers established a typol-
ogy of the subject of analysis. Spolsky and Cooper (1991) list, for instance, eight major
types of linguistic signs, namely, (1) street signs, (2) advertising signs, (3) warning
notices and prohibitions, (4) building names, (5) informative signs (directions, hours of
opening), (6) commemorative plaques, (7) objects (postbox, police call box), (8) graffiti.
In addition, they classify the motivations behind the choice of language signs as either
economic, informative or symbolic. They see a close relationship between the typology
of signs and motivations behind them with building signs and commemorative plaques
having symbolic motivations and warning notices and informative
signs having informative ones. Spolsky and Cooper looked further in detail and established
three rules behind the choice of language in signs. The first rule states that the sign-writer
must have sufficient proficiency in the language(s) he intends to use on the sign. This rule
is a necessary condition. The second rule elaborates that the sign-writer will choose the
language based on the intended readers’ abilities, and it has an economic motivation.
The third rule explains that the sign-writer may choose a language he wishes to be ident-
ified with, and the motivation behind it, is symbolic. Haarmann (1986, p. 110) illustrates this
phenomenon noting that the use of English in Japanese publications ‘serve to stimulate
the reader’s feelings and to create a pleasant mood of “cosmopolitanism”’, independently
from the readers’ real knowledge of the language. According to Spolsky (2009), the second
4 M. KAROLAK

and the third rule are not necessary conditions in the sense that there may a conflict
between them. He concludes that motivations account for the order of languages dis-
played if signs are multilingual or the choice of the language, if they are monolingual.
Furthermore, Ben-Rafael (2009, p. 49) makes a distinction between top-down signs that
are ‘designed by experts appointed by functionaries and are committed to serve official
policies and the “dominant culture”’ and bottom-up items that may be designed with
more freedom on the part of the makers who are individual and anonymous. The compari-
son between the top-down and bottom-up linguistic signs will reveal if the values of the
dominant culture stand in sync or are contradictory to those originating among the indi-
vidual actors. Such an analysis shows also the relevance of power-relations as bottom-up
actors are dependent on the directives received from the top.
The question of language use and power relations is especially interesting in Dubai.
While Arabic is the official language of the UAE, English is the de facto lingua franca of
the city (Boyle, 2011). Nonetheless, none of these languages account for the largest resi-
dent population. Recent reports state the larges expatriate groups in UAE to be Indian
(27.4% of the total UAE population), Pakistani (12.69%), Bengali (7.4%), and Filipino
(5.56%) (Global Media Insights, 2020). Recent official statistics for Dubai alone are not avail-
able, but previous research suggest that the numbers of expatriates may be at much
higher levels if taking into account the city alone. ElSheshtawy (2010, p. 212) reports
51% of Dubai’s foreign inhabitants to be from India, 16% from Pakistan, while 11% to
be of Arab, non-Emirati origin, 9% from Bangladesh and 3% from Philippines. While the
statistics cited do not include Emiratis, the latter account for 11.4% of the total population
of the UAE, but their percentage may be lower in the city of Dubai. As a result, Arabic and
English as mother tongues are in practice minority languages when compared to the
overall population make up. Nonetheless, their primary status is assured through top-
down directives. On the other hand, power relations dictate the social relations in the
city. Piller (n.d., p. 2) describes Dubai as ‘ethnocratic, corporate and mobile’. She goes
on detailing the various layers of ethnic hierarchical arrangements among the Emirati
population and among the expatriate one. She observes a major change in the relation-
ships between locals and expatriates, noting that global racial tendencies have affected
the Emirati attitudes as in the last decades they began to place Westerners on top of
the expat hierarchies. This is in contrast with the 1980s when middle-class Indians were
favoured due to their similarities with Arabs. At that time, Urdu was widely used as a
lingua franca in Dubai, the reason being no doubt its Hindi base but a large vocabulary
stemming from Arabic. This pattern is said to have been drastically changed because of
the rise in racists attitudes brought about by the Westerners that were adopted in the
UAE. In addition, English has spread around the world due to globalisation and is
taught in Emirati schools. Nonetheless, low skilled migrants may come to UAE without
the knowledge of English or the English alphabet.
ElSheshtawy (2010), on the other hand, looks at the intersections of social hierarchies
and spatial relations in the city noting that wealth creates its own patterns of inclusions
and exclusions. The fact of living in one district and not another is directly linked to the
financial capacities of the person. As a result, whole districts encompass masses of
lower-class migrants with those lowest on the financial scale being placed in shared
workers’ accommodations set up on the outskirts of the city. He also notes that despite
the lack of formal patterns of exclusion, in practice, those with low incomes would not
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUALISM 5

be visiting certain areas anyway simply because there is nothing attractive for them to do
there. The high prices and the type of commodities constitute a barrier sufficient enough
to limit their access. As a result, the visibility of those migrant workers is very low in the
posh areas of Dubai. It is interesting to analyse how these power relations shape the pres-
ence of linguistic signs in other, more down-to-earth, areas of the city where individual
actors have more freedom of making their own linguistic and aesthetic choices.
Other Gulf Cooperation Council [GCC] countries also record a large presence of migrant
workers. The only study of linguistic landscape conducted in the GCC focused on the souk
in Manama, Bahrain. Gomaa (2017) observed there that the priority is given to bilingual
Arabic-English signs and noted that the presence of English is a result of globalisation.
He concluded that English is a second space language endowed with power and
influence, especially playing a role in commodification. Nonetheless, he also found out
that bottom-up signs involved a fair share of other languages spoken by migrant
workers, such as Bengali, Malayalam, Tamil, Kannada, Hindi, Tagalog, and Chinese. This
study will thus be able to compare the latter findings with the data collected in a place
of similar function but located in Dubai. The similarities or the differences will be illustra-
tive of the power relations and overall social trends in the most cosmopolitan city of the
Gulf region.

Methodology
ElSheshtawy (2010, pp. 220–221) describes the area of the Souk Naif as populated with
low-income users from the Indian sub-continent (Afghanistan, India, Pakistan, Bangladesh)
as well as the Philippines and China, and he qualifies it as a ‘poor’ neighbourhood. He
further characterises the neighbourhood as dominated by male population, reflecting
the city’s demographics, devoid of Emirati inhabitants, but accessible and well connected
to the wealthier areas of the city through public transport such as metro and bus service.
The latter also helps explain its popularity with residents from other areas who flock here
in search of bargains or to socialise with their compatriots (Figure 1).
Souk Naif is the central focus of the zone. The modern souk was established in 1970 to
cover an informal collection of stores. The building was almost completely burnt in a fire in
2008 and re-opened after two years of renovations with a new building offering a double
capacity commercial space. While the new remodelled souk building has a traditional look,
it has also predefined the types of linguistic signs allowed within its premises rendering
same fonts, shapes and colours as well as exact bilingual translations of names for each
shop. The surrounding area does not have such strict regulations. Apart from the
Arabic-English bilingualism as per the UAE regulations, shop owners outside the souk
building are free to choose their own designs. As a result, the streets adjacent to the
Souk Naif building were deemed more interesting to conduct a study on linguistic land-
scape. While home to individual small stores, the area also contains another souk building,
Al Wasl. The latter, however, is not regulated in terms of consistency in shop displays.
ElSheshtawy (2010, p. 198) also stresses that the area surrounding the souk is ‘of
greater interest’ than the souk itself thanks to its informal and hence, more authentic
setting.
As mentioned before, the area of the Souk Naif has undergone substantial changes in
the last decades and its main commercial focus nowadays are well-priced fabrics, ready-
6 M. KAROLAK

Figure 1. Location of Naif area within Deira district. Source: Google Maps.

made clothes, home goods, toys, gifts, and perfumes. In order to select a sample for this
study from the souk’s surroundings, the researcher visited the area and based on the
survey decided to include in the study the full length of 6A Street, Deira Street as well
as two streets directly adjacent to the Souk Naif building between 6A Street and Deira
Street as well the façade shops of the Souk Al Wasl and opposite side of the streets adja-
cent to Al Wasl (Figure 2).
These streets were found to have a variety of shopping establishments. The researcher
spent one full morning in May 2019 documenting the existing linguistic signs by taking

Figure 2. Area of the study. Source: Google Maps.

 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUALISM 7

photos with a camera proceeding along each street on one side, and then on the other.
This is the standard method for conducting linguistic landscape research (Huebner,
2006; Muth, 2008). In accordance with Backhaus (2007, p. 55), a sign was considered to
be ‘any piece of written text within a spatially definable frame […] including anything
from handwritten stickers to huge commercial billboards’. The research was conducted
on a Friday morning to avoid crowds. The photos were subsequently uploaded on the
computer and each linguistic sign was analysed.
The researcher devised categories for analysis only after the corpus has been fully pro-
cessed and previous classification systems have served as inspiration for the categories of
analysis. The types of linguistic signs are a primary feature analysed (Huebner, 2006; Back-
haus, 2007). Secondly, in multilingual situations, sings are analysed based on the language
used in order to establish distribution patterns (Edelman, 2009, p. 141). In addition, Reh
(2004, p. 14) analysed multilingual signs and suggested four types of relations between
the content and languages used, namely, (1) duplication of the same content in multiple
languages, (2) fragmentary multilingualism, when the full information is given in one
language but parts of its translated to another language, (3) overlapping multilingual
writing, when parts of the message are in multiple languages but none of them gives it
in full, (4) complementary multilingualism, in which different parts of the overall infor-
mation are each rendered in a different language. The diversity of languages encountered
in the sample was much lower than expected as only few examples (15) of languages
other than Arabic and English placed as additional notices either on the wall of a building
or shop windows were found.
Thirdly, researchers (Nikolaou, 2017) distinguish also between primary and secondary
text, with the main shop display board considered primary, and any additional texts on
the shop windows such as opening timings considered secondary. Furthermore, Kress
and Vand Leuven (2006) provided the foundations for the analysis of spatial arrangements
of signs. The first aspect relates to salience that can be achieved in many ways such as
colour, contrast, fonts, etc. The second aspect is framing, i.e. line frames that connect
and disconnect the elements and can make some elements more salient than others.
The third aspect relates to the placement of elements along the horizontal and vertical
axes on the sign board. The researchers specify that the vertical-left part of the display
board constitutes ‘given elements’, i.e. ‘something the viewer already knows, as a familiar
and agreed-upon point of departure for the message’ (2006, p. 181). This is in contrast with
the vertical-right part of the displays that are ‘new elements’, i.e. ‘something that is not
known yet’ (2006). The horizontal-upper part is devoted to the generalised essence of
the information, while the horizontal-bottom offers more specific information. Finally,
the intersection of the vertical and horizontal axes forms the nucleus, while elements
outside of it are margins, hence given less importance. Scollon and Scollon (2003) build
on this idea stating that the preferred languages appear on top, on the left or in the
centre. Yet, these spatial positioning frameworks were developed based on left-to-right
script, while Arabic is written from right to left and such pre-definitions do not exactly
fit the local context. An Arabic-speaker will expect the inscription on the right-hand side
corner rather than left; the upper and central positioning remaining the most important.
Finally, the author consulted other studies that analysed similar material, i.e. shop signs.
Nikolaou (2017) classified the sample he collected according to the type of linguistic sign,
business type, primary sign composition, language used in other text in shop name, and
8 M. KAROLAK

visual prominence of secondary signs. He also analysed the visual semiotics of selected
signs following the framework by Kress and van Leeuwen. Given the differences in the
data collected in Dubai, these same categories could not always be applied.

Data analysis
The researcher collected a total of 329 linguistic signs in the sampled area. As the study
was inductive, the researcher proceeded to classify data only after compiling all the
signs when some patterns became visible. The types of linguistic signs are as follows.
The vast majority, 284, included linguistic signs pertaining to shop display boards
(primary text). The remaining ones were official signs such as names of the streets (19),
building names (8), informative notices and advertisements on the walls or more or less
informal notices on shop display windows (the latter being secondary text in the terminol-
ogy of Nikolaou) (18).
Based on these considerations, the researcher proceeded then to analyse the collected
material in an inductive manner focusing on the categories pertinent to the data gathered.
The analysis focused primarily on the displays of business establishments, their approach
to the implementation of bilingual translation of names as required by the Dubai Econ-
omic Department regulations, as well as the visual preponderance of one language
over another. A variety of patterns were revealed through this quantitative analysis. Sec-
ondly, the researcher analysed both English and Arabic equivalents, if available on the
display boards. The following overview summarises the most important features encoun-
tered as a result of the analysis.

What is in the name?

As commercial display boards constitute the largest proportion of linguistic signs in the
area, it is necessary to analyse ‘the values they set forward, the ways potential clients
are perceived by LL designers, patterns of presentation-of-self used by actors’ (Ben-
Rafael, 2009, p. 52). In a commercial zone even though there may be no direct competition
between the products put forward on advertisement signs, there is still competition for the
public’s attention. As a result, such advertising signs aim, on the one hand side, at inform-
ing the public but most importantly at persuading the passerby to enter the shop (EI-Yasin
& Mahadin, 1996). Ultimately, the signs should not be considered as separate units but as a
landscape as each one relates to another.
Dubai Economic Department specifies the regulations for display boards of private
shops for trade name or trademark identification, which regulate the use of languages
in the following manner: (1) Arabic should be the medium for the advertising, (2) An
English translation may be used alongside, (3) Ads should be free from grammatical
errors, use correct spelling and proper and clear language, (4) The Arabic text should
occupy not less than 50% space of the total allocated area and should be placed at the
top of the advertisement or on the right-hand side.1 Looking back at Kress and van Leeu-
wen’s spatial positioning framework, top position of Arabic would indeed signify its pre-
ponderance, constituting the ‘essence of information’. Nonetheless, its position on the
right does not have any meaning of novelty of information, but simply is an aspect of
the script starting from the right-hand side. Writing Arabic on the left half of the display
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUALISM 9

board, would look odd and disconnected. The regulations specify also that the operating
company name on sign boards must be bilingual as per the trade licence. That leaves the
option of choosing the language of the additional information to be displayed. Further-
more, newer requirements for operating company names mention phonetical transliterat-
ing as per the trade licence rather than translating the name. The latter, however, is not the
case among some businesses in Naif area that translated their names. Overall, within the
legal framework in Dubai, Reh’s concepts of duplicating multilingual writing, and fragmen-
tary multilingualism are permissible. Transliteration of the message content is another
element, even though it does not guarantee the transliterated content will be understood
by everyone.
The sample studied shows that the spatial language proportions are strictly observed
on official, i.e. top-down signs and on building names. In addition, 110 (38.7%) display
boards follow this regulation placing Arabic on top, while additional 53 (18.6%) kept the
50–50 language space ratios dividing the boards vertically into the left side for English
and the right side for Arabic. There was only one trilingual board fashioned this way
and included Arabic, English and Chinese. The remaining 121 (42.6%) prioritised the
space for English inscriptions from the point of view of the size of the font and general
visibility such as the emphasis in terms of colour (Figures 3 and 4). This situation may
be due to the boards being put up before the regulations were enforced.2 In addition, if
a business has created its own logo, it is almost always made up of English letters or
words and does not feature Arabic (Café Rizal Group logo in Figure 4). Overall, it seems
that despite the regulations set in place, shop goers in this area may relate to English
more than Arabic, and many of those who own the shops may be non-Arabic speakers.
Focusing on Arabic may decrease the visibility of the shop sign, hence limiting the com-
petitivity of the commercial board. The bottom-up choices of signs are thus negotiating
their way to become more visible, hence succeed in persuading the customers, in spite
of the official regulations. Figures 3 and 4 offer good examples of how the space has
been prioritised for English, and the Arabic inscriptions of the operating company name
is reduced to the readable minimum.

Figure 3. Examples of the emphasis on English. Arabic inscription: jud dayz l-tijra almnsujat w alaqmsha
sh.z .m.m.
10 M. KAROLAK

Figure 4. Examples of the emphasis on English. Arabic inscription: mt ’m mrfa al-jadid.

The content of commercial establishment display boards (primary text) varies. The
operating company name alone may serve as the name of the store, and it must be
always bilingual (Figure 5). It may be also accompanied by a name of the shop (Figure
4: Golden Tea and Figure 6: Pardha Land). The latter does not require a translation, as in
Figure 6, Pardha Land is featured solely in English, and in Figure 4, Golden Tea has no
Arabic equivalent either. Fifty-two shops had an individual name, i.e. different than the
operating company name, at times using for that purpose a shortened name of the oper-
ating company. Furthermore, the display board may feature additional information such as
the types of items sold (Figure 13 discussed later).
The analysis of the primary text data revealed a typology of shops: 30% mention in their
name the specific type of trade or product they engage in, 21% include a name of a
person, and the later as per the regulations must be a proprietor or a stakeholder, while
11% refer to a specific geographic location. The remaining 38% cannot be assigned a
specific category as they mention general trade as specialisation or include a variety of
vocabulary that will be further analysed. The first category reveals the types of trade
most popular in the Naif area: textile, and readymade clothes (41), perfumes (8), shoes
(7), electronics including phones (6), beauty products including hair extensions (4), food
outlet (4), saffron (3), pharmacy (2), cycles (4), and varied: carpets, smoking equipment,
glasses, toys, etc. (8). This typology is indicative of the type of trade migrant communities
engage in and provides the background for the study of how language relates to the type
of establishment (Nikolaou, 2017, p. 167). At times, the trade name of the company and the
specialisation of the shop do not match, as the company may have expanded its offerings

Figure 5. Name of the operating company as the name of the shop. Arabic inscription: qs r alrim l-
alah dhya sh.z .m.m.
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUALISM 11

Figure 6. Commercial board figuring an individual shop name; accompanied by the bilingual name of
the company. Arabic inscription: futujyt l-ltjara.

using the same licence beyond its initial scope. The shop below (Figure 7) specialises in
hair extensions; but the trade licence mentions shoes.
The second type of company names features a name of the proprietor or shareholder
(example in Figure 8). The analysis of their full names reveals that they are of South Asian
(Indian, Pakistani, Bengali), Arab or Afghani origins. There may be a significant overlap
between names encountered in those countries, hence creating an exact breakdown is
not possible. There were few examples suggesting a Filipino or a Chinese owner. The
market is thus dominated by South Asian influences. There was not a single owner’s
name suggesting a Western or an African origin. Two shops used Italian names, which
are brands, and such an arrangement requires permission in Dubai. This breakdown is
in line with the population statistics of UAE and Dubai in particular.
Geographical names used as shop or company names (34 total) are divided among the
names of Dubai city and its districts3 (11), references to other cities (4), China and its

Figure 7. Example of trade licence extension. Arabic inscription: ah dhya alqrn alh dith.
12 M. KAROLAK

Figure 8. Name of the proprietor as business name. Arabic inscription: shrka mh md mir zman l-ltjara
z .m.m.

derivatives (4), specific locations such as Wadi Oman (6), as well as general geographic fea-
tures such as ocean, beach, mountain, oasis, island, desert (7). A reference to Afghanistan
occurred twice in the sample.
Finally, the researcher paid attention to the business names that could not be easily
categorised (106 total). The analysis revealed certain patterns of positive connotations
among those varied names. The noun gold and its derivative golden in English or in
Arabic appear 10 times in different shop names from Gold hair to Golden tiger or
Golden boat. Star is also of popular use, appearing nine times in such expressions as
Queen star or Desert star. Other recurring features were rose (six times) and palace (five
times). The reference to beauty or its derivative beautiful appeared six times. Ultimately,
some adjectives with positive connotations that were used once: elite, top, smart, glory,
royal, good, happy (2), dream (2), grand and distinguished. Two of the more creative
names using positive connotations are Egoless Fashion, a shop selling women’s clothing;
and Optimistic General Trading company. Some shop owners resorted to the use of
famous names in order to create their shop image. Beethoven International Trdg LLC
specialises in women’s modest clothing, and UNESCO Building Materials sells construction
equipment, while Nobel Hair provides hairstyling products.

English-Arabic bilingualism?
Researching multilingual public signs in Tokyo, Backhaus (2007) made a distinction
between official top-down signs that give the same bilingual information, suggesting
that they were intended for monolingual readers of the two languages. He concluded
that the bottom-up signs, on the contrary, included different information in the two
languages, suggesting that their audience was assumed to be multilingual. In Dubai, it
may be also assumed that speakers of different languages may seek different items,
hence it is not needed to have the exact bilingual content even if the audience is mono-
lingual. It may be more useful to selectively target different items in different languages. At
times, some specific vocabulary may be difficult to translate.
As mentioned previously, the rules and regulations in Dubai require bilingual company
operating names as per the trade licence to be posted on display boards. The operating
name is composed of a name of choice, that according to the regulations should meet
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUALISM 13

certain criteria such as not be offensive, and often also includes the company type such as
general trade company, ready-made garments trading, textile trading, LLC, etc. The
company type, i.e. its specialisation in trade and legal status, are always translated, but
the name of choice not necessarily. While newer regulations suggest transliteration of
names of choice, so readers of Arabic and English alike could recognise the same entity,
this is not always the case in Souk Naif. Furthermore, if the name of the shop appears
in addition to the operating company name, it does not require any translation no
matter the language used, but those found in the sample were written in large majority
solely in English. The sample presents exact translations, transliterations from Arabic to
English, or from English to Arabic, incomplete transliterations, or in one case lack of the
second language equivalent. Proper names, made up words and acronyms that cannot
be translated (161 total written in both Arabic and English) were ommitted. The break-
down is as follows (Table 1).
The researcher separated the names using words that are translatable, as opposed to
proper names, acronyms and made up words, that by nature have no translation and
can be only transliterated. The examples below offer some observations. Even if the
display boards offer a translation, it is not necessarily fully correct. The board in Figure 9
uses the exact translation of the operating company name serving as the name of the
shop; yet with a mistake in the use of the particle ‘al’. In Figure 10, the operating
company name is written at the bottom in both Arabic and English. The shop has a
name Royal Night Perfumes, but the sign maker/shop owner made grammatical errors
in the Arabic rendition of Royal Night and also dropped Perfumes altogether.
Occasionally spelling mistakes are visible on display boards, with the English word
shoes misspelled causing the most recurrent problem (Figure 6 discussed previously).
The transliteration of operating company names from Arabic to English is a minority in
the sample as compared to from English to Arabic. Such linguistic choices behind transli-
terations offer some insights into the ratios of Arabic-speaking vs. non-Arabic speaking
business proprietors as the latter would most likely transliterate from English to Arabic.
In addition, the examples below offer further illustrations of the phenomenon of transli-
teration, but also of spatial positioning. In Figure 11, the operating name of the
company is transliterated to English as Wahat Al Ziyafah rather than translated as oasis
of hospitality. Despite the transliteration proceeding from Arabic to English, the English
inscription is still made more visible than the Arabic one. In Figure 12, Happy Mood
Trading LLC is transliterated to Arabic. Similarly, the English inscription stands out.
Similarly, 49 shops that have individual names apart from company names, opted to
promote them solely in English. Figure 13 presents the case of an acronym used as a
name, written only in English as well and occupying the largest proportion of the

Table 1. The use of English and Arabic in company operating names and shop names.
Operating company Name of the shop (additional to the company
name name)
Solely English 1 29
Translation in both languages 30 2 (1 incomplete)
Transliteration from Arabic to English 38
Transliteration from English to Arabic 52
Incomplete transliteration or mixing of 5
languages
14 M. KAROLAK

Figure 9. Examples of translation. Arabic inscription: mwssa al-aswd w abyd al-tjarya sh.z .m.m.

Figure 10. Examples of translation. Arabic inscription top: lyla almlki. Bottom: shrka ‘bd al-lt yf l-ltjara
(z .m.m.) (fr’).

Figure 11 . Transliteration from Arabic to English. Arabic inscription: wah a al-z yafa l-ltjrya w tjara
almnsujat.

Figure 12 . Transliteration from English to Arabic. Arabic inscription: haby mud l-ltjara sh.z .m.m.
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUALISM 15

Figure 13. Dominance of English. Arabic inscription: kabul khan l-tjara l-alah dhya sh.z .m.m.

board. As mentioned previously, 42.6% of all display boards prioritised the space for
English.
There were also examples of mixing translation and transliteration encountered in the
studied sample. On two occasions, the Arabic article al-, which translates to ‘the’ was left
out of the translation and transliterated, while the remaining part of the name was trans-
lated, as below, in Figure 14.
At times, the name itself testifies to a mix of languages, such as the expression of new
khalifa in Figure 15, even though khalifa has its own equivalent in English. The Arabic
inscription uses a transliteration of the English word new as below.
Other difficulties of translation stem from the vocabulary related to Muslim clothing.
Shop Pardha Land (Figure 6 previously) uses the South Asian word referring to women’s
custom of covering. Such a reference will be clear for Muslims and Hindus from the
region. Further difficulties stem from the various types of Muslim clothing that may be
difficult to render in English and that may appeal mostly to customers who read Arabic.

Figure 14. Language mixing. Arabic inscription: al-mh yt .

Figure 15. Language mixing. Arabic inscription: nyu khlyfa l-tjara alaqmsha sh.z .m.m.
16 M. KAROLAK

Figure 16. Bilingualism in commercial board. Arabic inscription top: mrkz tsuq; bottom: al-‘baya (t
missing), ‘baya ras, al-h jab, al-shyla, h qaib al-sydat, sh’r al-t by’y, mfarsh mnzlya, fstan zfafa, mlbys al-
jadhra al-nsaa.

Figure 17. Multiplicity of references. Arabic transcription top: myamy; bottom: al-s df al-fd y l-tjara al-
jlud sh.z .m.m.

The display board (Figure 16) provides descriptions of various wares sold in English and in
Arabic; however, there is an inconsistency between both languages with the English
version focusing on bedding sets, duvet covers and comforters, while the Arabic version
provides a more detailed description of Muslim female clothing that does not figure in
English, namely a gharb worn over the head as one piece (abayat ras) and shawl (shal).
The term shayla is a local Arabic one and is transliterated in English. The board targets cus-
tomers based on their ethnic background.
In three other instances, shops used on their display boards the word abaya without
providing its Arabic version. One used in addition the term kandoora, a word denominat-
ing the Emirati traditional male clothing. Such local words entered the English vocabulary
of the UAE, and are widely known among the resident population, but also among tourists
who visit Souk Naif area to buy inexpensive souvenirs. Similarly, another shop rereferred to
jalabiya in English (Figure 17). While the word for this piece of garment is not a local Arabic
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUALISM 17

Figure 18. Use of a third language.

one, some tourists who visited Egypt may be familiar with it. The board is also a good
example of the multiplicity of ideas, stretching between the references to an Egyptian
garment and the city of Miami, as well as shell, and leather production.
Translation from one language to another poses problems for some shop owners who
are not fluent in the target language and may resort to using technologies such as Google
Translate tool. Modern language application tools may be more or less reliable depending
on the languages required. Figure 18 displays a translation from most likely Chinese into
both Arabic and English. In both target languages there are multiple mistakes to the point
of making the phrase difficult to understand. The English word is also partially cut out as it
did not fit the display window properly. The first rule spelled out by Spolsky and Cooper
(1991) may be broken then thanks to the use of translation apps and in contexts where the
use of some languages is mandated whether the sign-maker speaks them or not. Figure 19
also features problems of translation of the bottom right-hand side phrase, most likely due
to the use of a machine translation tool; as well as welcome being misspelled. Both signs
are secondary texts.
Within the area studied, the researcher found only two informal advertisements posted
by individuals printed on regular paper pasted on the building walls. Unlike other souks
visited in the past, among others in Bahrain, the exchange of such informal information
that would get posted on empty wall spaces, lamp posts, etc. is minimal in Souk Naif.
Posting unauthorised ads is illegal, but most importantly, the municipality workers strive
to remove them to preserve the visual character of the place. At the time of social
media, such notices may also be moved online where various national communities
organise themselves in groups, among others, on Facebook. The two notices found,
were solely in English. One advertised a bed space, while the other, visa services assistance
and business set up services. Another way of advertising is to print sticker ads that can be
18 M. KAROLAK

Figure 19. Machine translation.

distributed to the public or placed on windows. Three of such stickers were spotted on a
glass door of a building and were trilingual Arabic, English and Hindi.
The official signs posted by the municipality such as street names, shop numbers and
rules and regulations are by default bilingual and preserve the 50:50 ratio for the display of

Figure 20. Machine translation.

 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUALISM 19

English and Arabic. The researcher found only a handful of such signs in the area studied
(19 total). A sign warning passerby against littering was spotted as Naif area may have
struggled with this problem (Figure 20). The researcher has not seen those signs in
other areas of Dubai considered wealthier and having other types of commercial set up
such as malls. Such a problem may be specifically acute in some districts of Dubai but
not in others.
All in all, bilingualism in Souk Naif is a complex result of the official regulations, bottom-
up negotiation of these rules, and Arabic and English being used often by speakers who
are not proficient. Hence, they navigate the complexities of using the two languages that
they may have learned from the surroundings but without taking classes. This explains the
errors of various kinds observed in the sample. In addition, those who do not speak these
languages at all may resort to machine translation tools. The vocabulary of the display
boards is also enriched by the use of words borrowed from other languages, and by
the conscientious choices of what to display in which language in order to appeal to
the passersby. As such, the sample offers some additional insights into the categories of
multilingualism devised by Reh.

The presence of other languages

The sample collected around Souk Naif included only a handful of examples of languages
other than English and Arabic being used. The languages present were Russian (6), Hindi
(3), Amharic (2), Chinese (3) and Malayalam (1). The use of other languages is marginal and
if present, they figure as side notices mostly on shop windows, i.e. as secondary text. Only
two were found to be added above the main shop display boards, yet the choice of colours
and size of fonts made them less visible than English ones. One shopping board was fully
trilingual, and Arabic, Chinese and English were juxtaposed, yet the Chinese inscription
occupied the centre (Figure 21). The trilingual board was posted above the smaller
board for the same company, that placed English in the most visible place.
The remaining signs were added to provide a specific information about the product
offerings in a language of the customers. Saffron was translated to Chinese on a door of
a shop selling the product, while Russian was used at times in handwritten notices to
inform customers of the specifics of its products or notify customers of the change of
the shop opening timings. Figure 22, specifically, advertises camel and woollen clothing
that may be of interest to Russian-speaking visitors. As mentioned before, even if perma-
nent, the third language was all but one example less visible than English, and in Figure 23,
Russian inscription has been pasted independently of the main display board in a variety
of upper and lowercase letters.
Creativity in a third language was encountered in one instance where a shop display
window featured a motto written in Russian (Figure 24) that can be translated as: Good
shoes carry us to good/nice places. There was no equivalent posted in any other language.
The African population in UAE is growing with Ethiopians being one of the top African
nations, according to the statistics available (GLMM, 2015). The studied area featured two
inscriptions in Amharic, similar to the ones described above, advertising a specific product
to the target population. Figure 25 displays an inscription meaning: different types of
Turkish clothing.
20 M. KAROLAK

Figure 21. Official notice.

Figure 22. Trilingual board.

 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUALISM 21

Figure 23. Shop window notice.

Such secondary texts on display windows may indicate that the shop keepers speak this
language, and in this manner attract customers who are also speakers. The inscriptions in
languages other than Arabic and English are limited. The vast majority of shop keepers
come from the Indian Subcontinent and speak regional languages. As such, there is prob-
ably no need to post additional information on the display windows as customers who are
also in majority from that region, can walk up to the shops and speak their mother tongues
inside.

Discussion and conclusion

The findings of the study of Souk Naif in Dubai are from many regards surprising but they

Figure 24. Motto.

confirm the observations of Piller (n.d.). Firstly, a much larger presence of foreigners in
Dubai did not lead to a greater diversity of languages in public spaces. Right on the con-
trary, as compared with Bahrain, greater cosmopolitanism in the case of Dubai is synon-
ymous with more progressive erasure of languages other than Arabic and English. The
area is composed of small privately-owned shops and the sign-makers seem to have a
margin of possibility for negotiating the top-down rules of the language use. Yet, from
the overview of the shop display boards, the primary stress is often put on English.
Arabic maintains its status due to regulations; yet, for over 40% of private signs it was a
secondary language and for further 18.7% both languages were of equal status. The
remaining 40% followed the official regulations. It is not possible to know whether
22 M. KAROLAK

Figure 25. Use of Amharic.

those sign-makers are Arabs, or they simply follow the rules. The difference with the souk
studied in Bahrain (Gomaa, 2017) where English is a secondary language and Arabic
primary, is no doubt, due to population ratios with Gulf and non-Gulf Arabs forming a
lower group in Dubai than in Bahrain. Other languages are sparsely used in most often
low-key fashion to provide additional information to targeted ethnic groups. This is
quite contrary to what one would expect, as observed by Ben-Rafael (2009, p. 47):
More generally, the more a setting qualifies for its definition as multicultural (i.e. being tolerant
of sociocultural differences and their institutionalisation), the more LL should allow room for
items to express particular identities – in addition to, or on account of, the room left to
symbols of overall-society solidarity.

UAE are on the forefront of promoting the ideas of tolerance within the country. The
approach, which is a state policy, is that of dialogue, peaceful co-existence and exchange.
It is a remarkable achievement in the region plagued by ethnic, and sectarian violence. Yet,
as observed by Piller (n.d.), the presence of a diverse population does not equate with a
greater linguistic exchange. As a matter of fact, various nationalities cluster around their
own compatriots, and often may not have a chance for a meaningful exchange with
others due to their life situations. Interestingly, even in an area like Souk Naif, which is
inhabited and frequented by South Asian nationals, those national languages are
almost non-existent in the linguistic landscape even though they are the most widely
spoken on the streets of Souk Naif. The names of proprietors and at times a country refer-
ence offer hints to the passerby, and hence, attract specific customers based on a shared
ethnicity. But overall, English has replaced the diversity of migrant languages in written
signs.
While studying Japanese media, Haarmann (1986) noted that language is a primordial
part of one’s ethnic identity. The use of English and other foreign languages that he
observed in Japan stood in contrast with the everyday language spoken by the
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUALISM 23

community, which is largely monolingual and Japanese. He coined the term ‘impersonal
multilingualism’ to account for that phenomenon. In Dubai, the more appropriate term
could be ‘impersonal bilingualism’ as Arabic and English maintain their status due to regu-
lations, and in this environment they contribute to erasing third languages. While English
remains the lingua franca in the country, the inhabitants of lower status do not necessarily
speak it or even if they speak it, they may not be able to read it if their own language uses a
different script. In Souk Naif, the streets teem with speakers of languages other than Arabic
and English. It is not known how many have mastered English or Arabic, but media in
various languages of the Indian Subcontinent thrive in UAE. A video reportage for a
South Indian channel, Media Gulf One, was filmed in Souk Naif and shop keepers and
owners spoke in Malayalam for the programme. A variety of vlogs filmed in the area by
residents are posted in Hindi and Urdu and also show live interactions with shop
owners.4 Lack of hardly any references in these languages in the linguistic landscape of
Souk Naif is rather surprising. This observation is also in sharp contrast with the study
of the souk of Manama (Gomaa, 2017). So far there were no studies on the linguistic abil-
ities of the expatriate population that is by nature transient in UAE, however, various lin-
guistic forms of broken language, whether Arabic or English, are reported through
anecdotal evidence or daily experiences. Whether these forms, also seen in the sample,
are considered means of appropriation, i.e. ‘personal’ multilingualism should be further
assessed.
The study testifies to the fact that bottom-up sign makers could use some negotiation
with regards to the official regulations to provide greater emphasis to their cultures of
origin, yet the signs produced are often symptomatic of deterritorialisation. Indeed,
foreigners in the UAE encounter themselves in a situation of a limited residence period
that is almost impossible to become permanent; hence anchoring oneself to the
country is difficult. With constant mobility, people become disconnected from their own
cultural matrices and the points of reference become fluid, generalisable or produce a
mix of concepts that put together, are surprising due to their diversity. Souk Naif area
stands in sharp contrast with Dubai luxury malls. Yet the appeal of commercial signs to
the passerby, emphasise ‘orientations toward comfort, luxury or prestige known as
widely consensual in the public, and, for the same reason, also make use of the same or
similar fashionable cultural codes’ (Ben-Rafael, 2009, p. 45). Forty-five words used in
shop names were found to be repeated or have similar meanings throughout the
sample. A handful of examples used the appeal of foreign or high prestige proper
names. Overall, commodification of language use produces similarity across the sample.
In addition, multiple shops advertised the same type of products on their display
boards. The use of colours and fonts makes the audience differentiate between them as
well as the choice to stress the English language or English transliterated signs, and not
the Arabic ones. One may infer that the competition for customers may be stark. The
overall low level of differentiation may account for some foreign visitors to be hassled
by shop owners to visit and buy products.5
Dubai illustrates the complexities of a highly cosmopolitan city. Its diverse population
has overall harnessed the English language as an undisputed means of multicultural com-
munication. The opportunities for a diverse linguistic landscape are thus limited to trans-
lation or transliteration to and from Arabic or English. In such a context of primary
languages used not being mother tongues to the majority of the population, the first
24 M. KAROLAK

rule mentioned by Spolsky is not a necessary condition. Those who arrive in Dubai may
have poor or no working knowledge of English, but they must adapt themselves to com-
municating even with no sufficient language skills and no language lessons. This situation
accounts for bottom-up public signs with spelling mistakes and the use of translation apps
that often fail to produce meaningful inscriptions in the target language. In addition, other
linguistics forms may be produced through mixing of linguistic forms. Further studies of
these phenomena could provide more insights.

Notes
1. The rules change, however, from one municipality to the other or from one developer to the
other. The DMCC Free Zone, for instance, does not require Arabic translations on display
boards.
2. The researcher did not insist on visiting the Dubai Municipality and seeking explanation for
these differences on site since this could have a negative impact on the shop owners.
3. Interestingly, newer advice on company names mentions that Dubai is a restricted name and
cannot be used in company names.
4. Some examples: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hkd3fntceEE, https://www.youtube.
com/watch?v=EmWZzOunMiQ
5. TripAdvisor site.

Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

References
Agence France-Presse. (2020). Dubai announces Record Tourism Arrivals in 2019. Retrieved from:
https://www.thejakartapost.com/travel/2020/01/22/dubai-announces-record-tourism-arrivals-in-
2019-.html.
Backhaus, P. (2007). Linguistic landscapes: A comparative study of urban multilingualism in Tokyo.
Multilingual Matters Ltd..
Ben-Rafael, E. (2009). A Sociological approach to the study of linguistic landscapes. In E. Shohamy &
D. Gorter (Eds.), Linguistic landscape: Expanding the scenery (pp. 40–54). Routledge.
Ben-Rafael, E., Shohamy, E., Amara, M. H., & Trumper-Hecht, N. (2006). Linguistic landscape as sym-
bolic construction of the public space: The case of Israel. International Journal of
Multilingualism, 31(1), 7–30. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790710608668383
Boyle, R. (2011). Patterns of change in English as a lingua franca in the UAE. International Journal of
Applied Linguistics, 21(2), 143–161. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1473-4192.2010.00262.x
Cenoz, J., & Gorter, D. (2006). Linguistic landscape and minority languages. In D. Gorter (Ed.), Linguistic
landscape: A New approach to multilingualism (pp. 67–80). Multilingual Matters Ltd..
Coulmas, F. (2009). Linguistic Landscaping and the Seed of the public Sphere. In E. Shohamy & D.
Gorter (Eds.), Linguistic landscape: Expanding the Scenery (pp. 13–24). Routledge.
Edelman, L. (2009). What’s in a name? Classification of proper names by language. In E. Shohamy & D.
Gorter (Eds.), Linguistic landscape: Expanding the Scenery (pp. 141–154). Routledge.
EI-Yasin, K., & Mahadin, S. (1996). On the pragmatics of shop signs in Jordan. Journal of Pragmatics, 26
(3), 407–416. https://doi.org/10.1016/0378-2166(95)00017-8
ElSheshtawy, Y. (2010). Dubai: Behind an urban spectacle. Routledge.
Friedrich, P. (2002). English in advertising and brand naming: Sociolinguistic considerations and the
case of Brazil. English Today, 18(3), 21–28. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0266078402003048
 INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF MULTILINGUALISM 25

GLMM. (2015). Estimates of the population residing in UAE. https://gulfmigration.org/uae-estimates-of-

population-residing-in-the-uae-by-country-of-citizenship-selected-countries-2014/
Global Media Insights. (2020). UAE population statistics. https://www.globalmediainsight.com/blog/
uae-population-statistics/
Gomaa, Y. (2017). Linguistic landscape in the Arabian Gulf: The case of Manama, Kingdom of Bahrain.
Hermes Cairo University Center for Languages and Professional Translation, 2(2), 7–16.
Griffin, J. L. (2001). Global English invades Bulgaria. English Today, 17(4), 54–60. https://doi.org/10.
1017/S0266078401004060
Haarmann, H. (1986). Verbal strategies in Japanese fashion magazines – a study in impersonal bilin-
gualism and ethnosymbolism. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 58, 107–121.
https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl.1986.58.107
Huebner, T. (2006). Bangkok’s linguistic landscapes: Environmental print, codemixing and language
change. International Journal of Multilingualism, 3(1), 31–51. https://doi.org/10.1080/147907
10608668384
Kress, G., & Van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Reading images: The grammar of visual design. Routledge.
Ladousa, C. (2002). Advertising in the periphery: Languages and schools in a North Indian city.
Language in Society, 31(2), 213–242. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404501020164
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/10.1177/0261927X970161
002
Lanza, E., & Woldemariam, H. (2014). Indexing modernity: English and branding in the linguistic land-
scape of Addis Ababa. International Journal of Bilingualism, 18(5), 491–506. https://doi.org/10.
1177/1367006913484204
Lee, H. Y. (1979). The linguistic landscape of Korean cities. Geography–Education, 9, 61–77.
Monnier, D. (1989). Langue d’accueil et langue de service dans les commerces à Montréal [language of
welcome and language of service at merchant locations in Montreal]. Conseil de la langue française.
Muth, S. (2008). Multiethnic but multilingual as well? – The linguistic landscape of Vilnius. Retrieved
25 August 2016 from: http://www.biecoll.ub.uni-bielefeld.de
Nikolaou, A. (2017). Mapping the linguistic landscape of Athens: The case of shop signs. International
Journal of Multilingualism, 14(2), 160–182. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2016.1159209
Piller, I. (n.d.). Dubai: Language in the ethnocratic, corporate and mobile city. http://www.
languageonthemove.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Piller_Dubai_urban_sociolinguistics_
preprint.pdf
Reh, M. (2004). Multilingual writing: A reader-oriented typology – with examples from Lira municipal-
ity (Uganda). International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 170(170), 1–41. https://doi.org/10.
1515/ijsl.2004.2004.170.1
Ross, J. (1997). Signs of international English. English Today, 13(2), 29–33. https://doi.org/10.1017/
S0266078400009597
Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. W. (2003). Discourse in place language in the material world. 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). Routledge.
Spolsky, B., & Cooper, R. L. (1991). The languages of Jerusalem. Oxford: Clarendon Press. In E.
Shohamy & D. Gorter (Eds.), Linguistic landscape: Expanding the Scenery (pp. 25–39). Routledge.
Trumper-Hecht, N. (2009). Constructing national identity in mixed cities in Israel: Arabic on signs in
the public space of upper Nazareth. In E. Shohamy & D. Gorter (Eds.), Linguistic landscape:
Expanding the Scenery (pp. 238–252). Routledge.
Tulp, S. M. (1978). Reklame en tweetaligheid: Een onderzoek naar de geographische verspreiding van
franstalige en nederlandstalige affiches in Brussel. Taal en Sociale Integratie, 1, 261–288.
Wenzel, V. (1996). Reklame en tweetaligheid in Brussel: Een empirisch onderzoek naar de spreiding
van Nederlandstalige en Franstalige affiches. Brusselse Thema’s, 3, 45–74.