TURİZMDE JEOSEMİYOTİK: BİR META-SENTEZ ÇALIŞMASI

Abstract

ÖZ Gösterge, başka bir şeyi temsil etmek için kullanılabilecek herhangi bir şey olarak tanımlanmaktadır. Gösterge sistemlerinin çalışmasına göstergebilim denmektedir. Jeosemiyotik ise, mekân göstergebilimi, görsel göstergebilim ve etkileşim düzeni bileşenlerinden oluşmaktadır. Mevcut çalışmada jeosemiyotik ve turizm kapsamında gerçekleştirilmiş alan araştırmalarının meta-sentezi yapılmıştır. Bu amaçla ilk olarak çeşitli veri tabanları taranarak konuyla ilgili çalışmalara ulaşılmış, ardından bu çalışmalar bir elemeye tabi tutularak toplamda 14 çalışmanın ortaya koyduğu ortak temalar belirlenmiş ve bu temalar yorumlanmıştır. Araştırma bulgularına göre, İngilizce’nin bir statü veya bir ayrıcalık göstergesi, bir dışlanma ve içerilme aracı olarak kullanılabilmekte olduğu, özellikle otantik bir deneyim amaçlandığında ise küresel göstergelerin yerini yerel göstergelere, yerel dil kullanımlarına bırakmakta olduğu ortaya çıkmıştır. Ayrıca dışlanma ve içerilmeye ilişkin göstergeler en çok turistlerin kendini ayrıcalıklı hissetmek istediği lüks veya alternatif turizm türleriyle kitle turizmi arasındaki ayrımda gerçekleşmektedir. Sonuç kısmında, sentezde ulaşılan temel noktalar özetlenmiş ve araştırmanın, takip eden araştırmalara bir yol çizmesi hedeflenmiştir.

Keywords

• jeosemiyotik
• jeosemiyoloji
• turizm ve jeosemiyotik
• meta-sentez

GEOSEMIOTICS IN TOURISM: A META-SYNTHESIS STUDY

Abstract

A sign is defined as anything that can be used to represent something else. The study of sign systems is called semiotics. Geosemiotics, on the other hand, consists of spatial semiotics, visual semiotics and interaction order components. In the present study, the meta-synthesis of field studies carried out within the scope of geosemiotics and tourism has been made. For this purpose, firstly, various databases were searched and related studies were reached, then these studies were subjected to a screening and common themes revealed by a total of 15 studies were determined and these themes were interpreted. According to the research findings, it has been revealed that English can be used as a status or a sign of privilege, a tool of exclusion and inclusion, and global indicators are replaced by local indicators, local language usages, especially when an authentic experience is aimed. In addition, the indicators of exclusion and inclusion mostly occur in the distinction between luxury or alternative tourism types and mass tourism, where tourists want to feel privileged. In the conclusion part, the main points reached in the synthesis are summarized and it is aimed that the research will set a path for the following researches.

Keywords

• Geosemiology
• Geosemiotics
• Turism and Geosemiotics

References

1. Agnihotri, R. K., and McCormick, K. (2010). Language in the Material World: Multilinguality in Signage, International Multilingual Research Journal, 4(1), 55–81.
2. Beck, C. T. (2002). A Meta-Synthesis of Qualitative Research, MCN, The American Journal of Maternal/Child Nursing, 27(4), 214–221.
3. Berger, A. A. (2011). Tourism as a Postmodern Semiotic Activity, Semiotica, 2011, 183, doi:10.1515/semi.2011.006.
4. Chumley, L. (2017). Qualia and Ontology: Language, Semiotics and materiality; An Introduction, Signs and Society, 5(1), 1–20.
5. Denzin, N. K. (1987). On Semiotics and Symbolic Interactionism, Symbolic Interaction, 10(1), 1–19.
6. Dowling, T. (2012). Translated For The Dogs: Language Use İn Cape Town Signage, Language Matters, 43(2), 240–262.
7. Echtner, C. M. (1999). The Semiotic Paradigm: Implications For Tourism Research, Tourism Management, 20(1), 47–57.
8. Ferenčík, M. (baskıda). Im/politeness On The Move: A Study Of Regulatory Discourse Practices İn Slovakia’s Centre Of Tourism, Journal of Pragmatics, 134, 183–198. doi:10.1016/j.pragma.2018.05.011.

9. Fierman, W. (2009). Identity, Symbolism and the Politics of Language in Central Asia, Europe-Asia Studies, 61(7), 1207–1228.
10. Grey, A. (2019). Tourist tongues: High-speed Rail Carries Linguistic and Cultural Urbanisation beyond the City Limits in Guangxi, China. Applied Linguistics Review, doi:10.1515/applirev-2019-0099
11. Lamb, G. (2019). Spectacular Sea Turtles: Circuits of a Wildlife Ecotourism Discourse in Hawai‘i, Applied Linguistics Review, doi:10.1515/applirev-2019-0104.
12. Lee, J. W., and Lou, J. J. (2019). The Ordinary Semiotic Landscape of an Unordinary Place: Spatiotemporal Disjunctures in Incheon’s Chinatow,. International Journal of Multilingualism, 1–17. doi:10.1080/14790718.2019.1575837.
13. Lesh, K. N. (2019). Basque Gastronomic Tourism: Creating Value for Euskara through the Materiality of Language and Drink, Applied Linguisgics Review, doi: 10.1515/applirev-2019-0101.
14. Lou, J. (2010). Chinatown Transformed: Ideology, Power and Resources in Narrative Place-Making, Discourse Studies, 12(5), 625–647.
15. Lou, J. J. (2017). Spaces of Consumption and Senses of Place: A Geosemiotic Analysis of Three Markets in Hong Kong, Social Semiotics, 27(4): 513–531.
16. Lourenção, M., de Moura Engracia Giraldi, J., and de Oliveira, J. H. C. (2020). Destination Advertisement Semiotic Signs: Analysing Tourists’ Visual Attention and Perceived Ad Effectiveness, Annals of Tourism Research, 84, doi:10.1016/j.annals.2020.103001
17. Metro-Roland, M. (2009). Interpreting Meaning: An Application of Peircean Semiotics to Tourism, Tourism Geographies, 11(2), 270–279.
18. Metro-Roland, M. M. (2011). Tourists, Signs and the City: The Semiotics of Culture in an Urban Landscape. Great Britain: Ashgate.
19. Nikolaou, A. (2016). Mapping the Linguistic Landscape of Athens: The Case of Shop Signs, International Journal of Multilingualism, 14(2), 160–182.
20. Noy, C. (2011). Articulating Spaces: Inscribing Spaces and (İm)Mobilities in an Israeli Commemorative Visitor Book, Social Semiotics, 21(2), 155–173.
21. Parsaee, M., Parva, M., and Karimi, B. (2015). Space and Place Concepts Analysis Based on Semiology Approach in Residential Architecture, HBRC Journal, 11(3), 368–383.
22. Peters, S. (2017). Sharing Space or Meaning? A Geosemiotic Perspective on Shared Space Design, Applied Mobilities, 1–21, doi:10.1080/23800127.2017.1386850.
23. Pietikäinen, S. (2013). Spatial interaction in Sámiland: Regulative and Transitory Chronotopes in the Dynamic Multilingual Landscape of an Indigenous Sámi Village, International Journal of Bilingualism, 18(5): 478–490.
24. Sowa, J. F. (2000). Ontology, Metadata and Semiotics, Conceptual Structures: Logical, Linguistic, and Computational Issues, 55–81. doi:10.1007/10722280_5.
25. Thomsen, R. C., and Vester, S. P. (2015). Towards a Semiotics-based Typology of Authenticities in Heritage Tourism: Authenticities at Nottingham Castle, UK, and Nuuk Colonial Harbour, Greenland, Scandinavian Journal of Hospitality and Tourism, 16(3), 254–273.
26. Thurlow, C., & Jaworski, A. (2017). The Discursive Production and Maintenance of Class Privilege: Permeable Geographies, Slippery Rhetorics, Discourse & Society, 28(5), 535–558.
27. Torkington, K. (2014). Tourism-related Mobilities and Discursive Landscaping in the Algarve, Dos Algarves, 24, 40-63.
28. Tsaur, S. H., Liao, Y. L. and Tsai, C. F. (2020) Analyzing the Important Implications of Tourism Marketing Slogans and Logos in Asia Pacific Nations, Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, 25 (4), 355-368.
29. Ye, Z., and Jeon, H.-Y. (2020). Chinese City Brands and Semiotic Image Scales: A Tourism Perspective, Social Semiotics, 1–24, doi:10.1080/10350330.2020.1769405.
30. Zhang, X. and Sheng, J. (2017). A Peircean Semiotic Interpretation of a Social Sign, Annals of Tourism Research, 64, 163–173.