Making sense of handwritten signs in public spaces

References

• Blommaert, J. 2013. “Semiotic and Spatial Scope: Towards a Materialist Semiotics.” In Multimodality and Social Semiosis, edited by M. Böck, and N. Pachler, 33–42. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Brooks, A., C. and R, and J. Kushner. 2001. “Cultural Districts and Urban Development.” International Journal of Arts Management 3 (2): 4–15.
   Google Scholar
• Busch, B. 2016. “Categorizing Languages and Speakers: Why Linguists Should Mistrust Census Data and Statistics.” Working Papers in Urban Language & Literacies 189. https://heteroglossia.net/fileadmin/user_upload/publication/WP189_Busch_2016._Categorizing_languages.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Campbell, K. 2012. “Total Legacy: The Stratford Metropolitan Area Masterplan.” Journal of Urban Regeneration & Renewal 5 (4): 311–316.
   Google Scholar
• Coupland, J., ed. 2000. Small Talk. London: Longman.
   Google Scholar
• Coupland, N. 2001. “Stylization, Authenticity and TV News Review.” Discourse Studies 3 (4): 413–442. doi: 10.1177/1461445601003004006
   Google Scholar
• Coupland, N. 2007. Style: Language Variation and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Domke, C. 2015. “Prohibition Signage in Public Places: On the Functional Organization of Different Media, Communication Forms, and Text Types (Excerpt).” 10plus1 (1). http://10plus1journal.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/02_WEBGRAPHIC_Excerpt_Domke.pdf.
   Google Scholar
• Dong, J. 2020. “Space, Signs, and Legitimate Workers’ Identities: An Ethnography of a Beijing ‘Urban Village’.” Social Semiotics 30 (2): 151–167. doi: 10.1080/10350330.2018.1532655
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Dray, S. 2010. “Ideological Struggles on Signage in Jamaica.” In Semiotic Landscapes: Language,Iimage, Space, edited by A. Jaworski, and C. Thurlow, 102–122. London: Continuum.
   Google Scholar
• Elsheshtawy, Y. 2011. “Informal Encounters: Mapping Abu Dhabi’s Urban Public Spaces.” Built Environment 37 (1): 92–113. doi: 10.2148/benv.37.1.92
   Google Scholar
• Ferreri, M. 2016. “Pop-up Shops as an Interruption in (Post-) Recessional London.” In Cities Interrupted: Visual Culture and Urban Space, edited by S. Jordan, and C. Linder, 141–156. London: Bloomsubry.
   Google Scholar
• Florio, S., and M. Edwards. 2001. “Urban Regeneration in Stratford, London.” Planning Practice and Research 16 (2): 101–120. doi: 10.1080/02697450120077334
   Google Scholar
• Garcia, B. 2004. “Cultural Policy and Urban Regeneration in Western European Cities: Lessons from Experience, Prospects for the Future.” Local Economy 19 (4): 312–326. doi: 10.1080/0269094042000286828
   Google Scholar
• Georgakopoulou, A. 2007. Small Stories, Interaction and Identities. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Giddens, A. 1982. “Hermeneutics and Social Theory.” In Profiles and Critiques in Social Theory, edited by Anthony Giddens, 1–17. London: Palgrave.
   Google Scholar
• Haskins, E. V., and J. P. DeRose. 2003. “Memory, Visibility, and Public Space: Reflections on Commemoration(s) of 9/11.” Space and Culture 6 (4): 377–393. doi: 10.1177/1206331203258373
   Google Scholar
• Hodge, R., and G. Kress. 1988. Social Semiotics. Cambridge: Polity Press.
   Google Scholar
• Hutton, C. M. 2011. “Vernacular Spaces and ‘Non-places’: Dynamics of the Hong Kong Linguistic Landscape.” In Stadt und Urbanität, edited by M. Messling, D. Läpple, and J. Trabant, 162–184. Berlin: Kadmos.
   Google Scholar
• Imrie, R., and M. Raco, eds. 2003. Urban Renaissance?: New Labour, Community and Urban Policy. Bristol: Policy Press.
   Google Scholar
• Järlehed, J., and A. Jaworski. 2015. “Typographic Landscaping: Creativity, Ideology, Movement.” Social Semiotics 25 (2): 117–125. doi: 10.1080/10350330.2015.1010318
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jaworski, A. 2016. “Review of Chaim Noy. 2015.” Annals of Tourism Research 60: 183–185. doi: 10.1016/j.annals.2016.05.002
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Krase, J., and T. Shortell. 2011. “On the Spatial Semiotics of Vernacular Landscapes in Global Cities.” Visual Communication 10 (3): 367–400. doi: 10.1177/1470357211408821
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lamarre, P. 2014. “Bilingual Winks and Bilingual Wordplay in Montreal's Linguistic Landscape.” International Journal of the Sociology of Language 228: 131–151.
   Google Scholar
• Lee, D. 2013. “‘Anybody can do it’: Aesthetic Empowerment, Urban Citizenship, and the Naturalization of Indonesian Graffiti and Street Art.” City & Society 25 (3): 304–327. doi: 10.1111/ciso.12024
   Google Scholar
• Macrury, I., and G. Poynter. 2008. “The Regeneration Games: Commodities, Gifts and the Economics of London 2012.” The International Journal of the History of Sport 25 (14): 2072–2090. doi: 10.1080/09523360802439254
   Google Scholar
• Massey, J., and B. Snyder. 2012. “Occupying Wall Street: Places and Spaces of Political Action.” Places Journal September 2012. doi:10.22269/120917.
   Google Scholar
• Monaghan, F. 2020. “F/Anfield: Banners, Tweets, and ‘Owning’ Football’s Linguistic Landscape.” In Reterritorializing Linguistic Landscapes: Questioning Boundaries and Opening Spaces, edited by D. Malinowski, and S. Tufi, 168–187. London: Bloomsbury.
   Google Scholar
• Neef, S. 2011. Imprint and Trace: Handwriting in the Age of Technology. London: Reaction Books.
   Google Scholar
• Noy, N. 2015. “Thank You for Dying for Our Country”: Commemorative Texts and Performances in Jerusalem. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Peck, A., and K. D. Good. 2020. “When Paper Goes Viral: Handmade Signs as Vernacular Materiality in Digital Space.” International Journal of Communication 14: 626–648.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Peukert, H. 2013. “Measuring Language Diversity in Urban Ecosystems.” In Linguistic Superdiversity in Urban Areas: Research Approaches, edited by J. Duarte, and I. Gogolin, 78–98. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.
   Google Scholar
• Roberts, P., H. Sykes, and R. Granger, eds. 2016. Urban Regeneration. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Rubdy, R., and S. Ben Said, eds. 2015. Conflict, Exclusion and Dissent in the Linguistic Landscape. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.
   Google Scholar
• Scollon, R., and S. Wong Scollon. 2003. Discourses in Place: Language in the Material World. London: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Seargeant, P. 2012. “Between Script and Language: The Ambiguous Ascription of ‘English’ in the Linguistic Landscape.” In Linguistic Landscapes, Multilingualism and Social Change, edited by C. Hélot, M. Barni, R. Janssens, and C. Bagna, 187–200. Frankfurt am Main: Peter Lang.
   Google Scholar
• Shohamy, E., E. Ben-Rafael, and M. Barni, eds. 2010. Linguistic Landscape in the City. Bristol: Multilingual Matters.
   Google Scholar
• Silk, M. 2014. “The London 2012 Olympics: The Cultural Politics of Urban Regeneration.” Journal of Urban Cultural Studies 1 (2): 273–293. doi: 10.1386/jucs.1.2.273_1
   Google Scholar
• Smith, J., and M. Osborn. 2008. “Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis.” In Qualitative Psychology, 2nd ed., edited by J. Smith, 53–80. London: Sage.
   Google Scholar
• Spitzmüller, J. 2013. Graphische Variation als soziale Praxis, Eine soziolinguistische Theorie skripturaler ›Sichtbarkeit‹. Berlin: De Gruyter.
   Google Scholar
• Svendsen, E. S., L. K. Campbell, and H. L. McMillen. 2016. “Stories, Shrines, and Symbols: Recognizing Psycho-social-spiritual Benefits of Urban Parks and Natural Areas.” Journal of Ethnobiology 36 (4): 881–907. doi: 10.2993/0278-0771-36.4.881
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tallon, A. 2013. Urban Regeneration in the UK. Abingdon: Routledge.
   Google Scholar
• Watt, P. 2013. “‘It’s not for us.’ Regeneration, the 2012 Olympics and the Gentrification of East London.” City 17 (1): 99–118. doi: 10.1080/13604813.2012.754190
   Google Scholar
• Zhu, Hua. 2020. “Urban Public Signs during a Pandemic.” Viral Discourse. https://viraldiscourse.com/2020/06/07/urban-public-signs-during-a-pandemic/.
   Google Scholar