Overt or Covert: Who Cares About the Language Policy?

Öz

The aim of this paper is to explore the overt or covert language policy in action in the divided capital city of Cyprus, Nicosia, through the notion of linguistic landscape. Examining language use on public signs provides valuable insights into the linguistic situation of a given place, including the visibility of official language policies, ideological orientations, and power relations among linguistic groups. Official language policies refer to explicit or implicit rules and regulations that shape or control language use in public space. To this end, the study analyzes both top-down (official) and bottom-up (non-official) public signs displayed in two historically and socially significant neighboring areas of Nicosia: Arasta in the northern part of the city and Ledra Street in the southern part. Drawing on social action theory as a methodological framework, the study investigates whether the linguistic choices observed on these signs align with the provisions of official language policies or reflect covert practices shaped by social actors. Data were collected through systematic photographic documentation of public signs and analyzed in terms of language choice, order of appearance, and relative prominence. The findings reveal clear asymmetries between policy and practice, indicating that Greek is more visible and symbolically powerful than Turkish, particularly in the southern part of the city. Moreover, the results suggest that language policy, whether overt or covert, plays a limited role in shaping the linguistic landscape of public space.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• linguistic landscape
• Nicosia
• Cyprus
• language policy
• covert policy
• overt policy

Etik Beyan

This study was prepared in accordance with the principles of rese-arch and publication ethics, and all works consulted have been cited in the reference list.

Açık veya Örtük: Dil Politikasını Kim Önemsiyor?

Öz

Bu makalenin amacı, dilsel manzara kavramı üzerinden Kıbrıs’ın bölünmüş başkenti Lefkoşa’da açık veya örtük dil politikasının nasıl uygulandığını incelemektir. Kamusal alanlarda bulunan tabelalardaki dil kullanımının incelenmesi, resmî dil politikalarının görünürlüğü, ideolojik yönelimler ve dil grupları arasındaki güç ilişkileri dâhil olmak üzere belirli bir yerin dilsel durumuyla ilgili değerli bilgiler sağlar. Resmî dil politikaları, kamusal alanda dil kullanımını kasıtlı olarak şekillendiren veya kontrol eden açık veya örtük kuralları ve düzenlemeleri ifade eder. Bu amaç doğrultusunda, bu çalışma Lefkoşa’nın tarihsel ve sosyal açıdan önemli olan iki komşu bölgesinde (şehrin kuzeyinde bulunan Arasta ve güneyindeki Ledra Caddesi) yer alan hem resmî (yukarıdan aşağıya dilsel manzara) hem de resmî olmayan, bireysel, ticari ya da özel aktörler tarafından üretilmiş (aşağıdan yukarıya dilsel manzara) kamusal tabelaları analiz etmektedir. Sosyal eylem teorisinin metodolojik bir çerçeve olarak kullanıldığı bu çalışma, söz konusu tabelalarda gözlemlenen dilsel seçimlerin resmî dil politikalarının hükümleriyle uyumlu olup olmadığını veya sosyal aktörler tarafından şekillendirilen gizli uygulamaları yansıtıp yansıtmadığını araştırmaktadır. Veriler, kamusal tabelaların sistematik fotoğraf dokümantasyonu yoluyla toplanmış ve dil seçimi, görünme sırası ve göreceli önem açısından analiz edilmiştir. Bulgular, politika ve uygulama arasında açık asimetriler bulunduğunu ortaya koymakta olup; özellikle şehrin güney kesiminde Yunancanın Türkçeden daha görünür ve sembol olarak daha güçlü olduğunu göstermektedir. Dahası sonuçlar, açık veya örtük dil politikasının kamusal alanın dilsel manzarasını şekillendirmede sınırlı bir rol oynadığını öne sürmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• dilsel manzara
• Lefkoşa
• Kıbrıs
• dil politikası
• örtük dil politikası
• açık dil politikası

Etik Beyan

Çalışma hazırlanırken bilim ve etik ilkelerine uyulmuş ve yararlanılan çalışmaların tamamı kaynakçada belirtilmiştir.

Kaynakça

1. Al-Jarf, R. (2021). Teaching English with linguistic landscapes to Saudi students studying abroad (SSRN Scholarly Paper No. 3838041). Social Science Research Network. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=3838041
2. Anuarudin, A. A. S., Heng, C. S., & Abdullah, A. N. (2013). Exploring multilin-gual practices in billboard advertisements in a linguistic landscape. Pertanika Journal of Social Sciences & Humanities, 21(2), 783–796.
3. Arasta Street. (2021). https://wikimapia.org/8918621/Arasta-Street
4. Backhaus, P. (2007). Linguistic landscapes: A comparative study of urban multi-lingualism in Tokyo. Multilingual Matters. https://doi.org/10.2307/jj.27195495
5. Blommaert, J. (2013). Citizenship, language, and superdiversity: Towards complexity. Journal of Language, Identity & Education, 12(3), 193–196. https://doi. org/10.1080/15348458.2013.797276
6. Cenoz, J., & Gorter, D. (2008). The linguistic landscape as an additional source of input in second language acquisition. IRAL, International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching, 46(3), 267–287. https://doi.org/10.1515/ IRAL.2008.012
7. Chern, C. L., & Dooley, K. (2014). Learning English by walking down the street.
8. ELT Journal, 68(2), 113–123. https://doi.org/10.1093/elt/cct067

9. Dressler, R. (2015). Sign”geist”: Promoting bilingualism through the linguistic landscape of school signage. International Journal of Multilingualism, 12(1), 128–145. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2014.912282
10. Erozan, F., & Büyükoğlu, N. (2025). An analysis of linguistic landscape in the Old Town of Famagusta (Suriçi). Turkish Studies - Language and Literature, 19(4), 1519–1542. https://doi.org/10.7827/TurkishStudies.76135
11. Gorter, D. (2006). Introduction: The study of the linguistic landscape as a new approach to multilingualism. International Journal of Multilingualism, 3(1), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790710608668382
12. Gorter, D. (2018). Linguistic landscapes and trends in the study of schoolscapes. Linguistics and Education, 44, 80–85. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lin-ged.2017.10.001
13. Gorter, D. (2019). Language contact in the linguistic landscape. In J. Darquennes,
14. J. Salmons, & W. Vandenbussche (Eds.), Language contact: An international handbook (pp. 431–441). De Gruyter Mouton.
15. Hadjioannou, X., & Tsiplakou, S. (2016). Language policy and language planning in Cyprus with a contribution by Matthias Kappler. In R. Kaplan, R. Baldauf Jr., & N. Kamwangamalu (Eds.), Language planning in Europe (pp. 43–109). Routledge. https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781315540627-8/language-policy-language-planning-cyprus-contribution-matthias-kapp-ler-xenia-hadjioannou-stavroula-tsiplakou
16. Hadjioannou, X., Tsiplakou, S., & Kappler, M. (2011). Language policy and language planning in Cyprus. Current Issues in Language Planning, 12(4), 503–569. https://doi.org/10.1080/14664208.2011.629113
17. Hiippala, T., Väisänen, T., Toivonen, T., & Järv, O. (2020). Mapping the languages of Twitter in Finland: Richness and diversity in space and time. Neuphilologische Mitteilungen, 121(1), 12–44. https://doi.org/10.51814/nm.99996
18. Hopkyns, S., & Hoven, M. van den. (2022). Linguistic diversity and inclusion in Abu Dhabi’s linguistic landscape during the COVID-19 period. Multilingua, 41(2), 201–232. https://doi.org/10.1515/multi-2020-0187
19. Jaworski, A., & Thurlow, C. (2010). Semiotic landscapes: Language, image, space. A&C Black.
20. Jiang, R., Luo, Q., & Yang, G. (2024). Exploring the geo virtual linguistic landscape of Dublin urban areas: Before and during the COVID-19 outbreak. International Journal of Multilingualism, 21(2), 802–822. https://doi.org/10.1 080/14790718.2022.2096615
21. Karmellou, C. (2008). Language policy in education and its affect in Cyprus issues on the development of identity and interethnic relationships. Online Submission. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED503438
22. Karoulla-Vrikki, D. (2009). Greek in Cyprus: Identity oscillations and language planning. In A. Georgakopoulou & M. Silk (Eds.), Standard languages and language standards: Greek, past and present (pp. 187–219). Ashgate Publis-hing Ltd.
23. Karyolemou, M. (2001). From linguistic liberalism to legal regulation: The Greek language in Cyprus. Language Problems and Language Planning, 25(1), 25–50. https://doi.org/10.1075/lplp.25.1.03kar
24. Karyolemou, M. (2008). Promoting bi/multilingualism in Europe: Language use and language teaching in higher education. Studies for the Greek Language, 28, 194–205. https://www.academia.edu/8079910/Promoting_Bi_Multi-lingualism_in_Europe_Language_Use_and_Language_Teaching_in_Higher_ Education
25. Keles, U., Yazan, B., & Giles, A. (2020). Turkish-English bilingual content in the virtual linguistic landscape of a university in Turkey: Exclusive de facto language policies. International Multilingual Research Journal, 14(1), 1–19. https:// doi.org/10.1080/19313152.2019.1611341
26. Kılgın, S., & Erozan, F. (2025). A guide for developing ELT materials by using the linguistic landscape of the Salamis Road. Dil Eğitimi ve Araştırmaları Dergisi, 11(1), 429–469. https://doi.org/10.31464/jlere.1520266
27. Koç, M. (2019). The use of the linguistic landscape of a university campus for English language teaching and learning purposes [Master’s thesis, Eastern Mediterranean University (EMU) - Doğu Akdeniz Üniversitesi (DAÜ)]. htt-ps://i-rep.emu.edu.tr/xmlui/handle/11129/5225
28. 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/10.1177/0261927X970161002
29. Ledra Street. (2025). https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Ledra_Street&oldid=1326677067
30. Motschenbacher, H. (2020). Walking on Wilton Drive: A linguistic landscape analysis of a homonormative space. Language & Communication, 72, 25–43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.langcom.2020.02.002
31. Önal, B. (2014). Exploring the linguistic landscape of North Cyprus and its use in ELT classrooms [Master’s thesis, Middle East Technical University]. https:// open.metu.edu.tr/handle/11511/69866
32. Papapavlou, A. (2001). Linguistic imperialism?: The status of English in Cyprus. Language Problems and Language Planning, 25(2), 167–176. https://doi. org/10.1075/lplp.25.2.04pap
33. Papapavlou, A., & Pavlou, P. (2007). Sociolinguistic and pedagogical dimensions of dialects in education. Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
34. Phillipson, R. (1992). Linguistic imperialism (Nachdr.). Oxford University Press.
35. Phillipson, R. (1997). Realities and myths of linguistic imperialism. Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development, 18(3), 238–248. https://doi. org/10.1080/01434639708666317
36. Republic of Cyprus. (1960). https://www.constituteproject.org/constitution/Cyprus_2013
37. Roos, J., & Nicholas, H. (2019). Using young learners’ language environments for EFL learning: Ways of working with linguistic landscapes. AILA Review, 32(1), 91–111. https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.00022.roo
38. Rosenbaum, Y., Nadel, E., Cooper, R. L., & Fishman, J. A. (1977). English on Keren Kayemet Street. In J. A. Fishman, R. L. Cooper, & A. W. Conrad (Eds.), The spread of English (pp. 179–196). Newbury House.
39. Rowland, L. (2013). The pedagogical benefits of a linguistic landscape project in Japan. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 16(4), 494–505. https://doi.org/10.1080/13670050.2012.708319
40. Shibliyev, J. (2019). Prolegomena to the field of linguistic landscape: The-state-of-the-art paper. Bilig, 90, 67–91. https://doi.org/10.12995/bilig.9004
41. Solmaz, O., & Przymus, S. (Eds.). (2021). Linguistic landscapes in English language teaching: A pedagogical guidebook. LLinELT. https://doi.org/10.18776/ tcu/book/45344
42. Tang, H. K. (2020). Linguistic landscaping in Singapore: Multilingualism or the dominance of English and its dual identity in the local linguistic ecology? International Journal of Multilingualism, 17(2), 152–173. https://doi.org/10.108 0/14790718.2018.1467422
43. Trudgill, P., & Schreier, D. (2006). Greece and Cyprus / Griechenland und Zypern. In U. Ammon, N. Dittmar, K. J. Mattheier, & P. Trudgill (Eds.), Sociolinguistics: An international handbook of the science of language and society / Sozi-olinguistik: Ein internationales Handbuch zur Wissenschaft von Sprache und Gesellschaft (Vol. 3, pp. 1881–1888). De Gruyter. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110184181.3.9.1881
44. Ullah, F., & Akram, A. (2023). Linguistic imperialism in the globalized world: Examining English dominance and its sociolinguistic consequences. https:// doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.11420082
45. Van Mensel, L. (2016). Children and choices: The effect of macro language policy on the individual agency of transnational parents in Brussels. Language Poli-cy, 15(4), 547–560. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10993-015-9391-x
46. Vinagre, M. (2022). Engaging with difference: Integrating the linguistic landscape in virtual exchange. System, 105, 102750. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2022.102750
47. Xiao, R., & Lee, C. (2022). English in the linguistic landscape of the Palace Mseum: A field-based sociolinguistic approach. Social Semiotics, 32(1), 95–114. https://doi.org/10.1080/10350330.2019.1697542