PRESUPPOSING AUTHENTICITY THROUGH TYPOGRAPHIC TRAITS IN COMMERCIAL SIGNS

Autori

  • Stefano Presutti University of California, Rome Study Center, and The American University of Rome, Department of Italian Studies.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.54103/2037-3597/22016

Abstract

This transdisciplinary study aims to investigate pragmatic and semantic aspects related to a still underexplored area of human communication; namely that involving paraverbal features of written language. In particular, it examines the construction and diffusion of meaning ascribed to traditional and pseudo-traditional typographic mimicry used in commercial signs present in two semiotic landscapes in central areas of Rome and Athens, the capital cities of Italy and Greece. According to previous studies, as well as prosodic features in speech, typography is essential paraverbal and multimodal quality for written communication that can be seen as a code in its own right. Specifically in store naming, typographic mimicry can convey implicit social, political and cultural meaning. Through a methodological approach set on critical discourse analysis, the present study investigates how typographic features present in store names can convey positive ideas linked to the authenticity of the product or business in which they are used. A qualitative diachronic, sociological and linguistic analysis is conducted of both traditional Roman and pseudo-Greek fonts and the two specific semiotic landscapes of Testaccio and Plaka districts in which target typefaces are used for commercial purposes. Finally, interviews are conducted with owners and authors of the signs examined. The findings show that traditional Latin and pseudo-Greek fonts used in commercial signs can implicitly activate presuppositions related to real or commodified authenticity only if present in suitable contexts where the recipients share the same common ground with the issuers.

 

Presupporre l’autenticità attraverso i tratti tipografici delle insegne commerciali

Questo studio transdisciplinare si propone di indagare gli aspetti pragmatici e semantici relativi alle caratteristiche paraverbali del linguaggio scritto. In particolare, esamina la costruzione e la diffusione di significato attribuito all’imitazione tipografica tradizionale e pseudo-tradizionale utilizzata nelle insegne commerciali presenti in due paesaggi semiotici nelle zone centrali di Roma e Atene, le capitali di Italia e Grecia. Secondo studi precedenti, oltre alle caratteristiche prosodiche del parlato, la tipografia è una qualità paraverbale e multimodale essenziale per la comunicazione scritta che può essere vista come un codice a sé stante. In particolare, nella denominazione di attività commerciali, la mimica tipografica può veicolare significati sociali, politici e culturali impliciti. Attraverso un approccio metodologico basato sull’analisi critica del discorso, il presente studio indaga su come le caratteristiche tipografiche presenti nei nomi dei negozi possano veicolare idee positive legate all’autenticità del prodotto o dell’azienda in cui vengono utilizzate. Viene condotta un’analisi qualitativa diacronica, sociologica e linguistica dei caratteri tipografici tradizionali romani e pseudo-greci e dei due specifici paesaggi semiotici dei quartieri di Testaccio e Plaka in cui i caratteri tipografici di riferimento sono utilizzati per scopi commerciali. Sono state inoltre effettuate interviste con i proprietari e gli autori dei segni grafici esaminati. I risultati mostrano che i caratteri tradizionali latini e pseudo-greci utilizzati nelle insegne commerciali possono attivare implicitamente presupposti legati all’autenticità reale o mercificata solo se presenti in contesti adeguati in cui i destinatari condividono lo stesso terreno comune con gli autori.

Riferimenti bibliografici

Ben-Rafael E. (2009), “A sociological approach to the study of linguistic landscapes”, in Shohamy E., Gorter D. (eds.), Linguistic Landscape. Expanding the Scenery, Routledge, New York, pp. 40-54 .

Blommaert J., Maly I. (2014), “Ethnographic linguistic landscape analysis and social change: A case study”, in Blommaert J., Maly I. (eds.), Language and superdiversity, Routledge, New York, pp. 207-227.

Bucholtz M. (2003), “Sociolinguistic nostalgia and the authentication of identity”, in Journal of Sociolinguistics, 7, 3, pp. 398-416.

Buonopane A. (2021), Manuale di Epigrafia Latina, Carocci, Roma.

Capodarte M. (2009) “Nascita di un quartiere industriale: Testaccio”, in Lucignani R. (ed.), Testaccio. Dove batte più forte “er core” dei romani, Gangemi Editore, Roma.

Cicalò E. (2018), “I caratteri del potere. Il potere dei caratteri”, in XY, 3, 6, pp. 36-57:

http://www.xydigitale.it/images/rivista/pdf-dig/05/05-2018_54-73.pdf.

Coulmas F. (2003), Writing systems: An introduction to their linguistic analysis, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.

Coulmas F. (2014), “Writing systems and language contact in the euro- and sinocentric worlds”, in Applied Linguistics Review, 5, 1, pp. 1-21.

Dickinson J. (2015), “Plastic letters: alphabet mixing and ideologies of print in Ukrainian shop signs”, in Pragmatics, 25, 4, pp. 517-534.

Drucker J. (1995), The alphabetic labyrinth: The letters in history and imagination, Thames and Hudson, London.

Duchêne A., Heller M. (2012), Language in late capitalism: Pride and profit, 43, Routledge, New York.

Fairclough N. (2001), “Critical discourse analysis as a method in social scientific research”, in Wodak R., Meyer M. (eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis, Sage, London, pp. 121-138.

Gür B. F. (2012), “Local performance in the construction of national identity: Plaka district of Athens during the Nineteenth century”, in Journal of Urban History, 38, 1, pp. 39-70.

Heller M. (2003), “Globalization, the new economy, and the commodification of language and identity”, in Journal of Sociolinguistics, 7, 4, pp. 473-492.

JappoRomano, “Japporomano”: https://www.japporomano.it.

Järlehed J. (2015) “Ideological framing of vernacular type choices in the galician and basque semiotic landscape”, in Social Semiotics, 25, 2, pp. 165-199.

Jaworski A., Thurlow C. (2010), “Introducing semiotic landscapes”, in Iid (eds.), Semiotic Landscapes: Language, Image, Space, A&C Black, London, pp. 1-40.

Karachalis N. (2015), “New tourism geographies in Athens: Heritage routes, changing neighbourhoods and the need for new narratives”, in Pharos, 21, 1, pp. 57-71.

Lacoste V., Leimgruber J., Breyer T. (2014), “Authenticity: A view from inside and outside sociolinguistics”, in Iid., Indexing Authenticity: Sociolinguistic Perspectives, De Gruyter, Berlin, pp. 1-13.

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

Leeman J., Modan G. (2009), “Commodified language in Chinatown: A contextualized approach to linguistic landscape”, in Journal of Sociolinguistics, 13, 3, pp. 332–362.

Lombardi Vallauri E. (2019), La lingua disonesta. Contenuti impliciti e strategie di persuasione, il Mulino, Bologna.

Lyons K., Rodríguez-Ordóñez I. (2015), “Public legacies: Spanish - English (In)authenticity in the linguistic landscape of Pilsen, Chicago”, in University of Pennsylvania Working Papers in Linguistics, 21, 2:

https://repository.upenn.edu/pwpl/vol21/iss2/14.

Mackridge P. (2009), “A language in the image of the nation: Modern Greek and some parallel cases”, in Beaton R., Ricks D. (eds.), The Making of Modern Greece: Nationalism, Romanticism, and the Uses of the Past (1797–1896), Routledge, New York, pp. 177-188.

Malinowski D. (2008), “Authorship in the linguistic landscape: A multimodal- performative view”, in Shohamy E., Gorter D. (eds), Linguistic Landscape, Routledge, New York, pp. 147-165.

Meletis D. (2021), “‘Is your font racist?’ Metapragmatic online discourses on the use of typographic mimicry and its appropriateness”, in Social Semiotics, pp. 1-23.

Moriarty M. (2015), “Indexing authenticity: The linguistic landscape of an Irish tourist town”, in International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 232, pp. 195-214.

Petrucci A. (1986), La scrittura: ideologia e rappresentazione, Einaudi, Torino.

Presutti S. (2023), “Authentic Roman type: historical legacies in contemporary Rome’s city brand”, in Visual Communication. DOI: 10.1177/14703572231199973.

Presutti S. (2022), “Spanish tilde as a visual semiotic marker of pan-Hispanism”, in Social Semiotics, pp. 1-18.

Presutti S. (2021), “The development of Latin alphabet identity markers: A comparison among three Romance graphemes”, in Lingua, 259, pp. 103-118.

Ranaldi I. (2009), “La vita sociale a Testaccio”, in Lucignani R. (ed.), Testaccio. Dove batte più forte “er core” dei romani, Gangemi Editore, Roma.

Ranaldi I. (2012), Testaccio: da quartiere operaio a village della capitale, FrancoAngeli, Milano.

Shaw P. (2009), “Stereo Types”, in PRINT Magazine: https://www.printmag.com/post/stereo_types.

Silverstein M. (1993), “Metapragmatic discourse and metapragmatic function”, in Lucy J. A. (ed.), Reflexive language. Reported speech and metapragmatics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 33-58.

Spirou C. (2008), “The evolution of the tourism precinct”, in Hayllar B., Griffin T., Edwards D. (eds), City Spaces - Tourist Places: Urban Tourism Precincts, Elsevier, Amsterdam, pp. 19-38.

Stalnaker R. (2002), “Common ground”, in Linguistics and Philosophy, 25, 5/6, pp. 701-721.

Stöckl H. (2005), “Typography: body and dress of a text - A signing mode between language and image”, in Visual Communication, 4, 2, pp. 204-214.

Strandberg J. A. E. (2020), “‘Nordic cool’ and writing system mimicry in global linguistic landscapes”, in Lingua, 235, 102783, pp. 1-14:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0024384119305327?via%3Dihub.

Sutherland P. (2015), “Writing system mimicry in the linguistic landscape”, in SOAS Working Papers in Linguistics, 17, pp. 147-167.

Van Leeuwen T. (2006), “Towards a semiotics of typography”, in Information Design Journal, 14, 2, pp. 139-155.

Van Leeuwen T. (2005), “Typographic meaning”, in Visual Communication, 4, 2, pp. 137-143.

Wachendorff I. (2018), “Cultural stereotypes in letter forms in public space”, in Erlhoff M., Jonas W. (eds.), New Experimental Research in Design, Birkhäuser, Basel, pp. 206-234.

Wodak R. (2001), “What is CDA about - A summary of its history, important concepts and its developments”, in Wodak R., Meyer M. (eds.), Methods of Critical Discourse Analaysis, Sage, London, pp. 1-13.

Wu H., Techasan S., Huebner T. (2020), “A New Chinatown? Authenticity and Conflicting Discourses on Pracha Rat Bamphen Road”, in Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 41, 9, pp. 794-812.

Zhou B., Zhang J., Edelheim J. R. (2013), “Rethinking Traditional Chinese Culture: A Consumer-Based Model Regarding the Authenticity of Chinese Calligraphic Landscape”, in Tourism Management, 36, pp. 99-112.

Dowloads

Pubblicato

2023-12-15

Fascicolo

Sezione

QUADERNI DI ITALIANO LINGUADUE 6