the korean english linguistic landscape

World Englishes, Vol. 31, No. 1, pp. 70–92, 2012. 0883-2919

The Korean English linguistic landscape

C. BRUCE LAWRENCE∗

ABSTRACT: This paper utilizes sociolinguistic theories of social stratification, gravity and cascademodels to analyze the usage of English in the linguistic landscape of Korea. Public signs in differentregions of Seoul and Korea were photographed and analyzed according to the percentage of English, Korean,Konglish, and Chinese. Labov’s gravity model was not found to be accurate, but his social stratificationand cascade models were moderately supported. However, in all regions of Seoul and greater Korea, thereare domains of English. English is found in the physical domains of main streets, amusement parks andforeign districts, in the product domains of beer, wine and clothing, and in the sociolinguistic domains ofmodernity, luxury and youth.

INTRODUCTION

The spread of English in Korea

English has become the lingua franca of the world, so that, today, many people in theEuropean Union, for example, use English to communicate with neighboring countries.The economic and cultural influence of the United States has lead to the increased use ofEnglish around the world and it is now the main language of international communication.English vocabulary items such as ‘taxi’, ‘visa’ and ‘exchange’ are used throughout theglobe the tourism domain, and other English words are being borrowed into specificlanguages for specific purposes, such as ‘high hat’ (someone who puts on airs, a snob) inthe Philippines (Platt, Weber, and Ho 1984), and ‘hand phone’ (cellular phone) in Japanand Korea (Lawrence 2010).

However, the numbers that support this are confusing. English is not the languagewith the largest number of ‘native speakers’ (i.e. speakers of English in Inner Circlecountries; see below). The Summer Institute for Linguistics (SIL) Ethnologue Survey(Gordon 2005), lists the top three languages by native speakers as Chinese, English andHindi/Urdu. English is the most common language designated a ‘second language’, andCrystal (2003) lists 75 nations in which English ‘holds a special place’ with numerous L1(first language) and L2 (second language) speakers. He calculates that there are around98 million speakers of English as a second language, but estimates that number to bearound 350 million if you include ESL immigrant populations living in English-speakingcountries, adding that if you allow for those with a limited ability in English the numberwould soar to 1,500 million (Crystal 1995; 1997). Gargesh (2006) notes that English is alsothe preferred ‘language of the educated elite’ in many countries. Kachru (1985) suggestsdividing the English-speaking world into three concentric circles. The first ‘Inner Circle’includes countries such as the USA and the UK where English is used as a first language.The second ‘Outer Circle’ includes the countries where English is spoken as a second or

∗Ajou University, Dept. of Humanities, San 5, Woncheon-dong, Yeongton-gu, Suwon 443–749, S. Korea, (PhDcandidate Seoul National University [SNU]). E-mail: [email protected]

C© 2012 Blackwell Publishing Ltd

The Korean English linguistic landscape 71

Figure 1. Korean education spending (Kim 2008)

significant language such as India and Singapore. The third ‘Expanding Circle’ refers tocountries where English has acquired cultural or commercial importance, such as Chinaand Russia. Recent estimates include Crystal’s (2003) estimation of the Outer Circle asbeing 300–500 million and Crystal’s (2010: 37) estimate of ‘First language speakers ofEnglish’ (369,706,100) and the population of ‘countries where English has special statusas a medium of communication, including those where people learn it, usually in school,as a second language’ (2,902,853,000).

The fever for English is by no means foreign to Korea, and Koreans now studyEnglish from elementary school all the way through university, although the KoreaNational Statistics Office estimates that school fees only cover about 24 per cent ofEnglish education costs. Today, Korean parents spend millions of won and thousands ofdollars on extra-curricular English classes at language institutes or hagwons, covering73 per cent of domestic English education costs, and an increasing amount of Koreanparents are sending their children abroad to study English (see Figure 1).

However, the nation of Korea and the city of Seoul actually have a rather tenuous rela-tionship with English. While some policy makers feel that Korea needs to adopt Englishas an official language, others have argued that this would bring about the decline of theKorean language and the destruction of national identity. For example, The Seoul Devel-opment Institute (2004) has compared Singapore’s successful attempt to make English anofficial language with Jeju Island’s failure to do so. Jeju is an island off the south west coastof Korea, where despite President Roh Moo-hyun’s efforts and the Jeju Provincial Gov-ernment’s interest in making English the ‘second official language’, local people remainresistant to this policy (Korea Herald 2003; Young 2008). The Institute concluded thatSingapore succeeded because of ‘cultural flexibility’ and Jeju failed because of feelings ofnational identity, even though Jeju Island continues to promote English education and usethrough projects such as ‘The English Education City’ and ‘The Jeju Free InternationalCity’ (Young 2008). The Institute suggested that the Seoul City government work on in-creasing the population’s cultural flexibility and familiarity with English and, rather thanadopting English as an official language, it should adopt English as a ‘public language’,


72 C. Bruce Lawrence

which they define as being ‘more culturally common than official language’ (author’stranslation).

In addition to Jeju Island, Korea and other Asian countries have mixed attitudes towardEnglish. Some research indicates a positive attitude toward English due to its associationswith ‘internationalization’, ‘reliability’, ‘modernity’ and ‘sophistication’ (Haarmann 1984;Takashi 1990; Song 1998). Other research indicates a neutral attitude toward English andits use for ‘new technology terms’, ‘neologisms’ and ‘euphemisms’ (Honna 1995) andit being ‘attitudinally neutral’ (Morrow 1987). Other research shows a negative attitudetoward English. Lee (2004) suggests that Korean pop musicians use English as a languageof ‘self-assertion’ and ‘resistance’ against older conservative values, while Lee (2006: 237)criticizes K-Pop star BoA for using ‘two languages of the other: the ex-colonizer Japanand the oft-accused unofficial imperialist America’. Collins (2005) argues that Englishwas associated with ‘pro-Japanese conservativism’ and the ‘US military government’ andcriticizes Korean pop singer J for not knowing what ‘tong-il (the reunification of Northand South Korea)’ is. Baik (1992) argues that many Koreans are involved in the movementfor the ‘purification’ of Korean and the use of ‘pure’ Korean words. So ‘English as a PublicLanguage’ has its opponents.

Konglish

The tenuous relationship between English and Korean has produced an offspring:Konglish. Like its name, it entails a mixture of English and Korean, but defining it israther difficult. Academic studies have focused on loanwords (Tranter 1997), while (Shim1999) viewed it as ‘codified Korean English’. However, Konglish is a spoken, not codified,language and its vocabulary has undergone too much transmutation to be simply labeledloanwords. Konglish is mentioned in a number of ESL textbooks (Fisher and Stuart 2006a,2006b; Holt, Middleton, and Park 2008), and is the subject of a number of internet web-sites (such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konglish; http://efl.htmlplanet.com/konglish.htm;http://www.funtrivia.com/trivia-quiz/Humanities/Konglish-101–203597.html).

Konglish is often defined via vocabulary, sometimes via grammar, sometimes via pro-nunciation, and sometimes simply classed as ‘bad English’. Some of the processes involvedin Konglish are similar to those of pidginization and creolization. For example, numer-ous scholars have noted the process of ‘simplification’ in the pidginization of languages(Decamp 1971; Hymes 1971; Foley 1997), and Konglish words such as ‘aircon (aircon-ditioner)’, ‘OT (orientation)’ and ‘home p (homepage)’ display similar simplification.Konglish is also similar to what Lightbrown and Spada (2001) define as ‘interlanguage’,which is a learner’s developing second language knowledge that may have characteristicsof the learner’s first language, characteristics of the second language, and some characteris-tics that occur in most interlanguage systems. However, Konglish is perhaps closest to Plattet al.’s (1984) notion of ‘new Englishes’. They sought to distinguish ‘new Englishes’ fromerroneous English or creative, but fleeting, usages of English, and devised the followingcriteria:

1. It has developed through the education system.2. It has developed in an area where a native variety of English was not the language

spoken by most of the population.



3. It is used for a range of functions among those who speak or write it in the regionwhere it is used.

4. It has become ‘localized’ or ‘nativized’ by adopting some language feature of itsown, such as sounds, intonation patterns, sentence structures, words, expressions.(Platt et al. 1984: 2–3)

Yet, all of these definitions fall short of delineating precisely what Konglish actually is.It cannot be described as a traditional ‘pidgin’ or ‘creole’ because it the context of itsdevelopment has been very different from that found in pidgin/creole contexts. It is nota ‘new English’ or an interlanguage, because it is not an identifiable variety as such,but might rather be conceptualized as a sub-variety of Korean, in the form of words andphrases. At the same time, it cannot be considered a series of ‘mistakes’ either, becauseeducated Koreans recognize that ‘director’ is not spelled ‘direkter’ or ‘Yesterday, I havevisited to Japan’ should be ‘Yesterday, I visited Japan’. There should also be a recognizableconsistency of usage in order to be termed Konglish. Therefore for this paper I will use adefinition of Konglish that was communally generated at the March 27th Seoul KOTESOLConference:

Konglish, Chinglish and Janglish are potential contact vernaculars developing as a creative mix betweenEnglish and the local language, which normally include morphology, semantics and syntax but may alsoinclude pronunciation, pragmatics and discourse. They are ‘potential’ in that they are not consideredlanguages, but subsections of languages. They are ‘contact’ in that they result from the contact ofEnglish and local languages. They are ‘creative’ in that they are not static, but dynamic with newelements appearing and some disappearing over time. They are a ‘mix’ in that elements of English aremixed with elements of the local language, or changed, or recombined with other elements of English inunique ways. (Lawrence 2010: 45)

Labov’s research on language variation

Labov (1966) noted that pronunciation was linked to social stratification in New YorkCity. He investigated the pronunciation of post-vocalic /r/ in relation to social status andhypothesized that the pronunciation of post-vocalic /r/ is an indicator of high status, andits absence is an indicator of low status, and that this distinction is correlated to the socialenvironment. His research methodology was to go to three different department stores andask for something which he knew was on the fourth floor (which contains two tokens ofpost-vocalic /r/) and note the pronunciation of the answer given. The department storeswere chosen according to class: Sak’s 5th Avenue (upper middle class), Macy’s (lowermiddle class), and S. Klein (working class). He found that Sak’s 5th Avenue employeespronounce post vocalic /r/ the most (45%), followed by Macy’s (15%), then by S. Kleinemployees (5%). His data indicated that post-vocalic /r/ deletion is associated with theworking class and post-vocalic /r/ pronunciation with the higher class. The pronunciationof /r/ ‘cascades’ down from upper middle class, to lower middle class and working class. Inhis later research on the linguistic influence between cities, Labov (2007) cites two models:‘gravity’ and ‘cascade’. Trudgill’s (1974) gravity model describes the development and thespread of non-standard features from London to smaller British cities, through a processof diffusion related to the population size of cities. However, in other cases research usingthis model has not been as successful (Callary 1975; Bober and Strassel 2000). The moregeneral cascade model, in which change proceeds from the largest to next largest city in



an area, has proven to be more applicable, but other studies indicate that it is only one ofmany possible models of territorial diffusion (Baily, Wikle, Tillery, and Sand 1993).

Linguistic landscapes

In recent years, there has been growing interest in ‘linguistic landscapes’ (LL), a termfirst popularized by Landry and Bourhis (1997: 25) who define it as the ‘language of publicroad signs, advertising billboards, street names, place names, commercial shop signs, andpublic signs on government buildings [which] combines to form the linguistic landscape ofa given territory, region, or urban agglomeration’. However, research in this area actuallystarted earlier. The linguistic landscape of Jerusalem was studied by Rosenbaum, Nadel,Cooper, and Fishman (1977), by Spolsky and Cooper (1991), and again by Ben-Rafael,Shohamy, Amara, and Trumper-Hecht in 2004. They found that the western areas of thecity are dominated by Hebrew, while the eastern parts, including the Old City, are Arabicdominated. Another pattern emerged in that public signs have much more Hebrew andprivate signs have more English, suggesting that English is considered to be a ‘neutral’language. Lee (1979) undertook research into the linguistic landscape of six different citiesin Korea and found that larger cities, apparel shops and city centers have more signboardscontaining foreign language, and that the use of hangeul (Korean characters) is on the rise.Montreal’s linguistic landscape was assessed by Monnier (1989) who found that Frenchdominated the east and English the west. Monnier also found that 90 per cent of departmentstores signs were monolingual French, whereas this number was only 39 per cent in hotelsand restaurants, suggesting the necessity of English in the domain of tourism. Calvet (1990;1994) compared the cities of Paris and Dakar, and found that despite being ‘a French city’,Paris had a high degree of multilingualism with signs in French, written in the Romanalphabet, Arabic in Arabic script, and Chinese in Chinese characters. Dakar’s notion oflinguistic landscape was more inclusive in some respects, and, for example, Chinese scripton a restaurant was not merely seen as a literal message, but an indication that Chinesefood is served there. The linguistic landscape of Brussels was studied by Wenzel (1996)who found that the city is divided geographically: the north had more Dutch on billboards,whereas the south had more French; in the city center, English was more visible in thesigns of shops selling electronic products, whereas French was used for fashion products.Scollon and Scollon (2003) noted that in Beijing English signs are not used for the benefitof foreign residents, but rather to ‘symbolize foreign taste and manners’. Reh (2004)noted that in Lira Town, Uganda, English was used in the domains of health, stationery,bookshops, photocopying and computer services, whereas the local language of Lwo wasused in the domain of agriculture.

Another important study of linguistic landscapes is Backhaus (2007), in which he com-piled a corpus of 2,444 multilingual signs observed in 28 survey areas in and aroundTokyo. Backhaus distinguishes between a ‘semiotic sign’, defined as ‘any meaningfulunit interpreted as standing for something other than itself’ (Backhaus 2007: 4) and a‘public sign’, defined as ‘an inscribed surface displayed in public space in order to conveya message of wider concern to a non-specified group of readers’ (Backhaus 2007: 5).He classified government-related signs as ‘top-down signs’ and all others as ‘bottom-up’. Backhaus found that English appeared more frequently on bottom-up signs, whileJapanese was predominant in top-down signs (over 97%). English also exhibited whathe called ‘idiosyncrasies’ or ‘deviation from what is considered “proper” language use



[. . .] used [in his research] in order to avoid expressions such as “error” or “mistake”’(Backhaus 2007: 117). Idiosyncrasies were observed at the orthographic (‘alcohl’,‘Chainese’), morphosyntactic (‘home made burger and cake’, ‘drug and cosmetic’) andlexical levels (‘coffee and restaurant’, ‘make facial cut’) (Backhaus 2007: 119–120). Id-iosyncrasies in Korean signs were absent, possibly because Korean texts are written bypeople of Korean origin (Backhaus 2007: 129). He concluded that public signs are a ma-jor semiotic sign of where one is in the world and what languages one ought to know(Backhaus 2007: 145).

The research of Backhaus and others indicates two things. One is that English and otherlanguages are distributed across linguistic landscapes unevenly according to geography.Another is that they are also distributed according to domains, with previous researchrevealing that English seems to be most dominant in the domains of tourism, technology,fashion and ‘bottom-up’ signs.

THE PRESENT RESEARCH

Drawing on Labov, Backhaus and others, the research for this paper consisted of visitingdifferent areas of Seoul and Korea that have different social status and taking pictures ofpublic signs, and then analyzing such signs according to language, location, and domains.Research questions were as follows. Regarding language, what is the percentage of English,Konglish, Korean and Chinese in the signs? Regarding location, does the percentage changeaccording to locale (main streets, alleys, inside stores and on street vendor signs)? Does itchange in relation to various districts in Seoul (specifically, Gangnam, Sadang, Ttukseom,Itaewon, Insadong, Namdaemun and Dongdaemun markets)? Does it change in relation tocities in Korea (Bundang, Suwon, Shinduri and Busan)? Does it change in relation to othersites (Everland [theme park in Yongin], public transportation and bridges)? Regardingdomains, are there certain domains where English can be expected to either exist or beabsent? At the theoretical level, are the social stratification, gravity or cascade modelssupported by the data?

Although this research is by nature qualitative, a quantitative aspect was included. Uponexiting a subway station a direction was chosen and a count was made of how many of out100 were in English, Korean and Chinese. This gave a rough estimate of the percentageof each. The nearest alley was analyzed using the same method. Then, the nearest storewas analyzed according to the amount of the three languages on the menu and wallposters. Any small, mobile, street vendors in the area were also photographed and a roughestimate of the amount of the target languages on their signs or menus was made. Thesevendors may be permanent tents or mobile, electrically motorized carts with shelteringcanopies, and they may sell anything from clothing and caps to freshly cooked seafood anddrinks.

Seoul

Seoul is the largest city and the capital city of Korea. It is divided into numerous districtscalled gu, which are subdivided into smaller dong. This study looked at different areasof Seoul including Gangnam, Sadang, Ttukseom, Itaewon, Insadong, and the markets ofNamdaemun and Dongdaemun (see Figure 2).



Figure 2. Korea and SeoulSource: Korean map modified from: http://printable-maps.blogspot.com/2009/11/map-of-korea.html

Seoul map modified from: http://mapsof.net/seoul/static-maps/gif/map-seoul-teukbyeolsi

Gangnam

Gangnam (or Kangnam) is the financial heart of Seoul. In a broad sense, it is the part ofSeoul which is located on the southern bank of the Han River. In a narrow sense, it is one ofsome 20 administrative districts of the city of Seoul (see Figure 2). First developed in thelate 1960s, the area soon became fashionable and its land prices skyrocketed. In late 2006,the average price of one pyeong (3.3 square meters) in a Gangnam apartment complex wasmore than twice the Seoul average, and the district was home to a number of the rich andfamous (Storey and Park 2001; Lankov 2009). One possible speculation, according to thegravity and cascade models, might be that Seoul is the starting place for language changein Korea, and, within Seoul, Gangnam might be the point of origin for language change inSeoul. The main street of Gangnam is full of English and Korean signs. Out of 100 signs,50 were in English, 40 in Korean, and 5 in Chinese. There were 5 instances of Konglish:‘Skinfood’, ‘FooVis’, ‘I’m Converse’, ‘Grand Open’ and ‘Size free’. ‘Skinfood’ obviouslymeans food for your skin. ‘FooVis’ is a creative combination of ‘food’ and ‘vision’. ‘I’mConverse’ is a direct translation from the Korean practice of saying “naneun cola imnida/I’m cola” when indicating which drink they want. ‘Grand Open’ is a shortening of ‘GrandOpening’. ‘Size free’ is a modification to the English phrase ‘One size fits all’ (seeFigure 3).

Inside the nearest shop, the frequency of English dropped. Some instances of Konglishwere noticed (Men Restroom = Men’s Restroom). The dominant language became Korean,and Chinese disappeared (see Figure 4).

One alley back from the main street revealed a very different pattern. Korean becamedominant in 70 per cent of the signs. English was mixed with Konglish. There were more



Figure 3. Street signs in Gangnam

Figure 4. No smoking and restrooms

Chinese signs than on the main street, especially for tea shops and oriental medicine stores.A row of street vendors had neither English nor Chinese, just Korean or no signs at all.

The distribution showed that English is highly present on the main street, but decreasesinside shops, in alleys and with vendors. Korean is moderately present on main streets andincreases inside shops, in alleys and with vendors (see Figure 5 and Table 1).

Sadang

Sadang is located in the south part of Seoul, in Dongjak-gu, at the crossing of subwaylines 2 and 4 (see Figure 2). Following the social stratification, gravity and cascade modelone would predict a smaller amount of English in the area of Sadang, because it is smallerand less significant than Gangnam. The history of ‘Sadang Furniture Street’ dates backto the 1970s when Gangnam became Seoul’s biggest booming area. Hundreds of newapartment complexes, townhouses and office buildings were built and residents needednew furniture to fill their new homes. Sadang became the location of furniture stores.Presently, it is suffering from the world economic crisis and the number of both foreignand domestic customers is falling (Jung 2009). Out of 100 signs on the main street only30 per cent were in English. There was some Konglish (5%) (Soju and Hof = KoreanAlcohol and Foreign Beer). There were some Chinese signs (5%). Inside the nearest shopthere was an interesting pattern of English and Korean. All coffees were written in English



Figure 5. Korean street signs

Table 1. Language percentage in Gangnam

English Konglish Korean Chinese

Main 50 5 40 5Inside 40 5 55 0Alleys 10 10 70 10Vendors 0 0 100 0

Table 2. Language percentage in Sadang


Main 30 5 60 5Inside 30 0 70 0Alleys 5 5 90 0

with Korean in brackets, for example Capuccino (��). However, ‘smoothies’ and‘sandwiches’ were written only in Korean. I asked the owner why and he said ‘I want tointroduce my customers to English. I tried to write it all in English, but I couldn’t.’ Therewas also a large number of beer posters on the wall with the brand names of the beerwritten in English: ‘Hite’ and ‘Cass’. The alleys of Sadang showed a remarkable dropoff in English. Out of 100 signs, only 10 were in English, 5 of which had Konglish. Theremaining 90 per cent were in Korean. No Chinese signs or vendors were seen in Sadang(see Table 2).

Ttukseom

The district of Ttukseom is located west of downtown Seoul, in Seongdong-gu, onsubway line 2 (see figure 2). It does not have the power and wealth of Gangnam, nor the



Table 3. Language percentage in Tteukseom



Table 4. Language percentage in Itaewon



exotic foreign influence of Itaewon, so according to the gravity model it would not possessmuch ‘gravity’. On the main streets there was not much English (10%), but what littlethere was had no Konglish. Inside English dropped off (5%) and exhibited some Konglish(5%) (‘A/S Center’ short for ‘After Service’ = Customer Service/Warranty Center). Alleysand vendors showed no sign of any language other than Korean (see Table 3).

Itaewon

The area known as ‘Itaewon’ is the place for foreigners in Korea. It is located in thecentral area of Seoul, in Yongsan-gu, on subway line 6 (see Figure 2). After the US set upa military base in Korea during the 1970s, many foreigners stationed at the base settled inthe area, naturally developing the region into a district catering to foreigners. It becamefamous for shopping, bars and nightlife (Storey and Park 2001) and infamous for ‘hostessbars’ and ‘Hooker Hill’ (Robinson, Bartlett and Whyte 2007, 128). In 1997, Itaewon wasfinally designated an official tourist zone (The Korea Tourism Organization 2011). On themain street of Itaewon, 80 per cent of the signs were in perfect English, 10 per cent hadKonglish (‘24 open’ = ‘open 24 hours’). Korean signs made up 10 per cent. The amount ofEnglish inside actually increased. The only Korean observed were some menu items andan unfortunate ‘foreigners only’ sign. Alleys had a majority of perfect English (80%) andsome Korean (20%). However, street vendors had an abundance of Chinese (90%) withonly some Korean (10%). This perhaps indicates that Chinese is a marker of ‘traditional’items (see Table 4).

Insadong

Insadong is also a specialized area. It is located in the central area of Seoul, in Jongno-gu, near subway line 2 (see Figure 2). It is where officials, members or the extended royalfamily, and the yangban (aristocratic class) lived during the Joseon Dynasty (1392–1910).The shops originally established here carried everyday items of the privileged class, andlater became antique shops and art galleries in the face of modernity (Song 2004). The



Figure 6. The Insadong streetscape

Table 5. Language percentage in Insadong



main street of Insadong mostly had Korean signs (60%). There were some Chinese signs(15%) and English signs (20%), usually on art galleries and restaurants, and some Konglish(5%), mostly on menu signs (‘chicker leg with vegetable’). Actually, Insadong is famousfor forcing Starbucks to write its sign in Korean. People in the area proudly told me it is theonly case in the world where Starbucks did not use the English alphabet. It was governmentpolicy to have all outdoor signs in Korean (Lee 2001), but there were still many Chinesesigns, and the Italian restaurant right beside Starbucks had its sign only in English.

Inside the nearest shop, there was an interesting pattern. In other areas of Seoul, teashops were all in Chinese, but in Insadong there was a mixture of Korean, English andJapanese. Alleys had a slight increase in English because the ‘Korean only’ law appliesonly to the main street. Street vendors had mostly Korean or no language at all (seeFigure 6 and Table 5).

Namdaemun market

Namdaemun market is the biggest traditional market in Korea, selling clothing, miscel-laneous goods, kitchenware and local and imported products. It is located in the center ofSeoul, in Jung-gu (see figure 2). Namdaemun, as its name suggests (‘Great South Gate’or Sungnyemun, ‘Gate of Exalted Ceremonies’) was once the main gate to the city, andis designated ‘National Treasure No. 1’ (Storey and Park 2001). There are hundreds ofshops open day and night, offering both wholesale and retail prices, which enable visitorsto purchase various shopping items at extremely inexpensive prices (Robinson et al. 2007,p. 135). The market is made up of a labyrinth of alleys with no main street. These alleys



Figure 7. Namdaemun Market

Table 6. Language percentage in Namdaemun market


Alleys 10 0 85 5Inside 5 5 85 5Vendors 5 0 90 5

had mostly Korean signs (85%), some English signs (10%), which had no Konglish, butwere usually short (1∼3 words), and some Chinese and Japanese signs (5%). Inside theshops, the quantity of English dropped. The instances of correct English were usually ‘sale’signs and anything handwritten usually had some Konglish (‘PC Room’ = Internet Cafe).The ‘sale’ signs were usually large and colorful, and if percentages were given they werewritten from largest to smallest (e.g.%60-%40 SALE), the opposite convention to that ofInner Circle countries.

Street vendor signs had very little English (5%). Chinese and Japanese signs wereseen in equal numbers (5%) in alleys, shops and with street vendors (see Figure 7 andTable 6).

Dongdaemun market

Dongdaemun market is one of the major markets in Korea specializing in wholesaleclothing. It is located in the center of Seoul, in Jung-gu, and was also a major gate to thecity (‘Great East Gate’ or Heunginjimun ‘Gate of Rising Benevolence’) (see Figure 2). Themarket is a massive collection of traditional markets, street vendors and department storesincluding ‘Migliore’ and ‘Doota’ (Robinson et al. 1988). On the main street there was amajority of Korean signs (60%), but there were many English signs (40%), mostly brandnames. Inside there was a majority of English (70%), partly because of brand names and‘sale’ signs, but primarily due to English on clothing, where there were numerous casesof Konglish (‘Nike, Just Do Me’, ‘Doota’ = Doosan Tower). Alleys had less English andstreet vendors had only Korean (see Figure 8 and Table 7).

Four other cities were chosen for investigation, located at increasing distance from Seoul.These were, in order of proximity, Bundang, Suwon, Shinduri and Busan.



Figure 8. Dongdaemun market

Table 7. Language percentage in Dongdaemun market



Table 8. Language percentage in Bundang


Main 50 10 40 0Inside 30 0 70 0Alleys 10 0 90 0

Bundang

Bundang is a district of the small city of Songnam, located 30 minutes south of Seoul(see figure 2). During the Joseon Dynasty (1392–1910), Bundang was a large farmland ofrice paddies. In 1989, the local government announced that it would undertake constructionof a futuristic and environmentally conscious city with a population of 450,000 people. Itbecame a planned community to alleviate the excessive demand for high quality apartmentsin the similarly affluent, but much older, Gangnam area (Kim 1999). The signs on the mainstreet of Bundang were mostly in English (50%) with some Konglish (‘Style Holic’). Insideshops and in alleys, the frequency of English dropped (30%). No Chinese signs were found,and there were no street vendors (see Table 8).



Table 9. Language percentage in Suwon



Table 10. Language percentage in Shinduri


Main 20 0 80 0Inside 20 10 70 0Pension 40 0 60 0Minbak 0 0 100 0

Suwon

Suwon lies approximately 30 kilometers south of Seoul (see Figure 2). It is the provincialcapital of Gyeonggi Province and is a mixture of modern nightlife and ancient history. Thegently meandering walls of Hwaseong fortress draw tourists from around the world. Thefortress was built in the late 1700s with a palace attached to the walls that contain a watergate, a fire tower and numerous observation towers. The palace was destroyed by Japaneseoccupation forces, but was restored and designated a World Heritage site. Suwon is close tothe Korean Folk Village, a reconstructed traditional Korean village (Robinson et al. 2007).Suwon’s main streets and alleys showed low levels of English (10%) and Konglish (5%)(‘Wa Bar’, which sounds like ��/waboa ‘come and see’), but it rose inside the nearestshops (25%) and then disappeared with vendors (see Table 9).

Shinduri

Shinduri Beach is a small, isolated, picturesque beach approximately 150 km from Seoul(see Figure 2). It is not a significant town in Korea, and so could be placed at the bottomof the cascade and gravity models of language change. Its only point of significance waswhen the South Korean government declared the area a ‘state of disaster’ due to Korea’sworst ever oil spill (Deseret News 2007). The beaches have since been cleaned. The mainstreet of Shinduri beach had very little English (20%), usually only hotel names. Inside thehotels the total frequency of English rose (30%), but with it rose the frequency of Konglish(10%) (‘No Loud’ = No Noise). The most interesting feature of the area was the differencebetween ‘pensions’ and ‘minbak’. In English ‘pension’ means a ‘French boarding house’(Webster’s Dictionary 1990: 284). In Korea, it means a small, modern, hotel that is moreexpensive than a local ‘minbak’, which are older, local guesthouses. The amount of Englishon pension signs is higher than anywhere else in the area (40%), while English is absenton minbak signs (see Figure 9 and Table 10).



Figure 9. Shinduri Beach

Table 11. Language percentage in Busan



Busan

Busan (or Pusan) is the largest port city in South Korea and is the second largestmetropolis, after Seoul. The city is located on the Southeastern tip of the Korean Peninsulaand faces the Korea Strait (see Figure 2). It has had a long history of foreigner presence andinfluence, especially Japanese: Hideyoshi Totomi’s first invasion (1592–1593) started inBusan (Turnbull 2002). Busan has also had a long history of exposure to sailors from aroundthe world (Storey and Park 2001). It was the only area not taken during the Korean War(Stokesbury 1990). Busan’s main street of Haeundae beach has a large amount of English(60%). English drops slightly inside (40%) and in alleys (40%) and almost disappearswith street vendors (5%). The highest frequency of Konglish occurred inside stores (10%)(‘IcePia’ = ‘ice’ + ‘utopia’) (see Table 11).

Everland

Other sites were also analyzed for the frequency of English, including a theme park‘Everland’, public transportation and bridges. Everland is a large theme park locatedone hour south of Seoul. It is the largest amusement park in Korea and is owned bySamsung. It contains three distinct themes: Festival World, Caribbean Bay, and Speedway.Festival World includes regional themes such as American, European, and EquatorialAdventure and has a zoo, a botanical garden and numerous rides. Caribbean Bay is awater park that offers a wave pool, sandy beaches and other water adventures. EverlandSpeedway offers automobile, motorcycle and mountain bike racing (Robinson et al. 2007;Storey and Park 2001). There are no alleys in Everland, so main streets, inside stores andvenues and vendors were studied. The frequency of English on main streets was very high(60%), but 10 per cent of it was Konglish such as ‘Headgear’, ‘Gamepia’ and ‘Zootopia’



Table 12. Language percentage in Everland


Main 60 10 30 0Inside 20 10 70 0Vendors 40 10 50 0

Figure 10. Signs in the subway, on a taxi, on a road and in a bus

(‘game/zoo’ + ‘utopia’). Inside stores, English dropped, but Konglish remained at (10%).On vendor signs, English increased (40%) as many vendors and vending machines arebilingual (see Table 12).

Public transportation

Public transportation was also analyzed in the areas of subway, buses, taxis and roadways.These signs would be considered ‘top-down’ according to Backhaus’s (2007) analysis. Thesubway system had the highest amount of English (30%) with Korean, English and Chineseon almost all maps and signs. Each line and stop on the Seoul subway system has a number,color and name. The only problem encountered by tourists is finding which direction togo on the subway line. The names of certain stations are posted to indicate which directionthe train is going along the line. Koreans know the history of Seoul, and the stationsposted are all famous places. The foreigner’s knowledge of Seoul is minimal, so touristserroneously assume that stations posted are transfer points. Taxies had the next highest infrequency of English (20%). For example, all taxies have a sign reading ‘free interpretationservice’ with a telephone number. Roadways had a high frequency of English (15%) as allroad signs are written in Korean, English and Chinese (see Figure 10). Most of the moredetailed information, such as traffic conditions, are written in Korean and sometimes onlyon the road itself. Buses had the lowest frequency of English content (5%). Very few busdestinations were in English and very few signs in the bus, such as fares, were in English(see Table 13).

Bridges

One final, intriguing pattern on language distribution occurred under bridges: longmessages were in Korean graffiti, while tagging (signing one’s graffiti name) was inEnglish (see Figure 10). This finding fits in with international research on gangs. It hasbecome apparent that the study of gangs can no longer be limited to local conditions,



Table 13. Language percentage in Public transportation


Subway 30 0 50 20Taxi 20 0 80 0Road 15 0 75 10Bus 5 0 95 0

Figure 11. Graffiti

but must also considered in the global context. For there are now Jamaican ‘posses’ inKansas (Gunst 1995), Mexican gangs in San Diego (Rotella 1998), Russian ‘maffia’ inChicago (Finckenauer and Waring 1998), female Muslim gangs in Oslo (Lien 2002), LA’sMS-13 and 18th Street gangs in Honduras and El Salvador (Decesare 2003), Nigeriandrug smugglers coming through Ronald Reagan International Airport (Grennan, Britz,Rush and Barker 2000), LA’s Crips gang in the Netherlands (van Gemert 2001), US tongslinked to Chinese Triads (Booth 1999), and numerous other examples of global networkingof gangs. Sullivan (2006) divides gangs into three levels: first generation gangs, whichare traditional street (or prison) gangs with a turf orientation; second generation gangs,which have a business focus; and third generation gangs, which have evolved politicalaims. There was no indication that graffiti under bridges had been done by even a firstgeneration gang, for there were only tags of individual names, not the name of a gang.However, it seems likely that these individuals are developing ‘resistance identities’, whichare identities formed in opposition to the dominant culture and the uncertainties of anunstable modernity (Castells 1997), and they are using English to ‘voice’ that identity.

CONCLUSION

A number of tentative conclusions might be drawn from the preceding research. Withreference to the choice of language and the percentages of English, Konglish, Koreanand Chinese on signs, the data showed an inverse correlation: in most cases, as Englishincreased, Korean decreased. The data also showed a positive correlation, as in manycases, as English increased, so did Konglish. There was no correlation to frequencies ofChinese. With reference to particular locations, for example, main streets, alleys, insidestores and with street vendors, the data showed that in 4 out of 7 districts of Seoul,the frequency of English was highest on main streets, then it dropped consecutively inalleys, inside stores and with street vendors. This pattern might support the cascade model



Figure 12. English in the streets of SeoulNote: GN = Gangnam, SD = Sadang, TS = Ttukseom, ITW = Itaewon, ISD = Insadong,

NDM = Namdaemun market, DDM = Dongdaemun market.

Figure 13. English in particular districts of SeoulNote: GN = Gangnam, SD = Sadang, TS = Ttukseom, ITW = Itaewon, ISD = Insadong,

NDM = Namdaemun market, DDM = Dongdaemun market.

suggested by Labov (1966). The areas that do not follow this pattern are Itaewon (due to itsspecialization for foreigners, there are high frequencies of English everywhere), Insadong(due to government regulations, most signs are written in Korean only) and Dongdaemun(due to its specialization in clothing retail, there is a high frequency of English on T-shirts).Figure 12 illustrates this pattern

Regarding particular districts of Seoul (Gangnam, Sadang, Ttukseom, Itaewon,Insadong, Namdaemun and Dongdaemun markets), the data showed that the frequencyof English on main streets was high in Gangnam, but then decreased in Sadang andTtukseom. Again, because of the specialized nature of Itaewon and Dongdaemun, fre-quencies of English were quite high. Figure 13 illustrates this pattern.



Figure 14. The languages of street signs in Korean cities

In other cities of Korea (Bundang, Suwon, Shinduri and Busan), the data showed that thefrequency of English was high in Seoul (50% Gangnam), higher in Busan (60%), droppingin Bundang (50%), lower in Suwon (15%), but slightly higher in Shinduri (20%). Thisdoes not support the social stratification, cascade or gravity models. Rather, this supportsthe idea of English being linked to modernity, luxury and youth (see Figure 14).

Regarding other sites (Everland, public transportation and bridges), the data did notfollow the social stratification, cascade or gravity models discussed above. In Everlandthe frequency of English and Konglish on main streets was higher than anywhere else inKorea. The frequency of English dropped inside shops but increased again with vendors.On public transportation the frequency of English was high in subways, then it continuouslydropped in taxis, roads and buses. The frequency of English on bridges was high in tagsbut low in longer graffiti messages.

With reference to the theoretical model that discussed in the early session of this paper,the evidence was that the social stratification model was only minimally supported bythe data. In terms of location, the data supported the social stratification model in fourout of seven districts in Seoul, where the frequency of English is highest on main streets,then cascades down continuously in alleys, inside stores and with street vendors. Withreference to the districts of Seoul, the data supported the social stratification model inthat the incidence of English (on main streets) was high in Gangnam (high class), thendecreased in the Sadang (middle class) and Ttukseom (working class) districts, althoughthe data does not support the model in the districts of Itaewon and Dongdaemun becauseof the high frequency of English found in those areas. With reference to the cities of Korea,the data only minimally supported the social stratification model in that the frequency ofEnglish was high in Seoul, Busan and Bundang, and low in Suwon and Shinduri. However,even though Seoul might be considered ‘higher class’ in certain respects than Busan, it hada lower frequency of English. Also, Shinduri had a higher frequency of English than Suwon,but it is not considered a ‘high class’ area. In terms of other sites, the results were alsomixed. Everland, which is considered a ‘classy’ amusement park, has a high frequency ofEnglish, thus supporting the model. However, there appears to be no foundation for sayingthat the descending frequency of English in public transportation (subway > taxi > road >bus) is due to class, and any assumption that tags are higher class than longer graffitimessages is meaningless. Therefore, the social stratification model was only minimallysupported. In this context, it should be noted that the notion of ‘class’ as deployed here,



can only be regarded as a somewhat blunt instrument, based on generalized perceptionsin the population as a whole. Further research on this issue would require a much morefiner-grained analysis of social class patterns in the Korean context.

With reference to the gravity and cascade models, the following observation might bemade. The gravity model was not supported by the data, as the frequency of English didnot decline according to the population and location of the cities. In fact, the amount ofEnglish in the second largest city of Busan was higher than in Seoul (Gangnam), and thefrequency of English in the small beach town of Shinduri was higher than that of the city ofSuwon. Similarly, the cascade model was only minimally supported by the data. In termsof locale and district of Seoul, the data could be interpreted as indicating that the frequencyof English cascaded down from main streets, to inside stores, thence alleys and finallystreet vendors, and down from Gangnam, to Sadang, to Ttukseom. However, the cascademodel is based on the size of a city, so it is arguably inapplicable to locale and district.Even so, only four out of seven districts followed the cascade pattern (Figure 12). In termsof cities of Korea, the frequency of English cascaded down from Seoul, to Bundang, toSuwon (Figure 13). However Busan had a greater frequency of English than Seoul eventhough it is smaller. Tiny Shinduri also had higher levels of English than the large city ofSuwon. The total amount of English (including Konglish) in the small district of Bundangwas the same as the large city of Busan. In other locations, the frequency of English didseem to cascade down from subway, to taxi, to road and to bus, but due to the cascademodel’s relation to city size, this data is inapplicable. Therefore, the cascade model is onlyminimally supported by the data of this research.

Regarding domains, the data showed that there are certain domains where English can beexpected to exist or to be absent. In any region of the country, certain shops frequently haveEnglish signs, including coffee shops, sports equipment dealers, clothing stores, car dealers,fast food restaurants, hair salons, hotels, pensions, beer bars and wine stores. Certainshops usually have only Korean, as in most tabang (tea rooms), hanuiwan (traditionalmedicine stores), hanbok (traditional clothing), hanshikdang (Korean restaurants), minbakand yogwan (traditional guest houses). In addition, certain shops will have Chinese signs,including tea houses, traditional medicine stores, Chinese and Japanese restaurants. Thispattern applies to products as well, as certain items will definitely have English: hats, T-shirts, cellular telephones, hair products, sports equipment, beer, whisky and wine. Certainproducts will definitely have Korean or Chinese: tea, ramyeon (ramen noodles), hanyak(traditional medicine), traditional wine and soju (mass produced sweet potato wine).

These uses of English, Korean, and Chinese are influenced by larger sociolinguisticpatterns relating to modernity, luxury and youth. On minbaks in Shinduri one can findonly Korean, but in hotels and pensions there is a high frequency of English. This isbecause the hotels on this beach are luxurious, beachside retreats for companies andMTs (Konglish for ‘membership training’, that is, university student party/trips). Theamusement park Everland has more English and Konglish than anywhere in Korea becauseof its specialized nature as a Disneyworld-style amusement park. Beer and wine postersand labels have English, whereas soju (alcohol) posters have Korean. In other words,products that are associated with modernity (cell phones, Everland), luxury (hotels, wine)and youth (beer, T-shirts) are in English. Regions follow a similar pattern. Gangnam,Bundang, and beach/amusement resorts are associated with luxurious, modern living, andhave a high frequency of English. These patterns contrast with those for products suchas hanyak (oriental medicine), hanbok (Korean clothing), soju (Korean alcohol), and for



districts such as the Namdaemun market and Insadong, where a much higher frequencyof the Korean language is used. In the youthful domain of graffiti, tagging in Englishoften occurs. Therefore, if nothing else, this study strongly suggests that, in the linguisticlandscape of contemporary Korea, English served as a marker of modernity, luxury andyouth.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thanks are due to Professor Wang Hahn-Sok of SNU for his eye for academic detail, the anonymous reviewers of thispaper for their excellent feedback, and my wife Sim Sung-Ae for supporting and sustaining this research.

REFERENCES

Backhaus, Peter (2007) Linguistic Landscapes. A Comparative Study of Urban Multilingualism in Tokyo. Clevedon:Multilingual Matters Ltd.

Baik, Martin Jonghak (1992) Language shift and identity in Korea. Journal of Asian Pacific Communication 3, 15–31.Baily, Guy, Wikle, Tome, Tillery, Jan, and Sand, Lore (1993) Some patterns of linguistic diffusion. Language Variation

and Change 5, 359–390.Ben-Rafael, Eliezer, Shohamy, Elana, Amara, Muhammad Hasan, and Trumper-Hecht, Nira (2004) Linguistic Landscape

and Multiculturalism: A Jewish-Arab Comparative Study. Tel Aviv: Tami Steinmetz Center for Peace Research.Bober, Charles, and Strassel, Stephanie M. (2000) Short-a in Cincinnati: A change in progress. Journal of English

Linguistics 28, 108–126.Booth, Martin (1999) The Dragon Syndicates: The Global Phenomenon of the Triads. New York: Carroll and Graf.Callary, Robert E. (1975) Phonological change and the development of an urban dialect in Illinois. Language in Society

4, 155–170.Calvet, Louis-Jean (1990) Des mots sur les murs: Une comparaison entre Paris et Dakar. In Robert Chaudenson (ed.).

Des Langues et des Villes (Actes du Colloque International a Dakar, du 15 au 17 Decembre 1990 (pp. 73–83). Paris:Agence de cooperation culturelle et technique.

Calvet, Louis-Jean (1994) Les Voix de la Ville: Introduction a la Sociolinguistique Urbaine. Paris: Payot et Rivages.Castells, Manual (1997) The Information Age: Economy, Society and Culture (Volume 2: The Power of Identity). Malden,

MA: Blackwell.Collins, Samuel Gerald (2005) ‘Who’s this Tong-il’: English, culture and ambivalence in South Korea. Changing English

12, 417–29.Crystal, David (1995) The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the English language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Crystal, David (1997) English as a Global Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Crystal, David (2003) English as a Global Language, 2nd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Crystal, David (2010) The Cambridge Encyclopedia of Language, 3rd edn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Decamp, David (1971) Pidgin and creole languages. In Dell Hymes (ed.), Pidginization and Creolization of Languages.

(pp. 13–42). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Decesare, Donna (2003) From civil war to gang war: The tragedy of Edgar Bolanos. In Louis Kontos, David Brotherton,

and Luis Barrios (eds.) Gangs and Society: Alternative Perspectives (pp. 283–313). New York: Columbia UniversityPress.

Deseret News (2007) Oil slick devastates S. Korea area. Deseret News 10 December.Finckenauer, James O., and Waring, Elin J. (1998) Russian Mafia in America: Immigration, Culture, and Crime. Boston,

MA: Northeastern University Press.Fisher, Scott, and Stuart, Brian (2006a) Speaking for Everyday Life. Seoul: Darakwon Publishers.Fisher, Scott, and Stuart, Brian (2006b) Speaking for Everyday Life 2. Seoul: Darakwon Publishers.Foley, William A. (1997) Anthropological Linguistics: An Introduction. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.Gordon, Raymond G. Jr. (ed.) (2005) Ethnologue: Languages of the World, 15th edn. Dallas, TX: SIL International.Grennan, S., Britz, M. T., Rush, J., and Barker, T. (2000) Gangs: An International Approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ:

Prentice Hall.Gunst, Laurie (1995) Born Fi’ Dead: A Journey through the Jamaican Posse Underworld. New York: Henry Holt and

Company.Haarmann, Harald (1984) The role of ethnocultural stereotypes and foreign languages in Japanese commercials. Interna-

tional Journal of the Sociology of Language 50, 101–121.Holt, Jana, Middleton, Charles, and Park, Kwang-chul (2008) Things English Speakers Do Not Say! Seoul: Chonghab

Publishing.Honna, Nobuyuki (1995) English in Japanese society: Language within language. Journal of Multilingual and Multicul-

tural Development 16, 45–62.



Hymes, Dell (ed.) (1971) Pidginization and Creolization of Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Jung, Ha-won (2009) Sadang brims over with top furniture bargains. Joongang Daily 24 March, Retrieved 8 November

2011 from: http://joongangdaily.joins.com/article/view.asp?aid=2902652.Kachru, Braj (1985) Standards, codification and sociolinguistic realism: The English language in the outer circle. In

Randolf Quirk and H.G. Widdowson (eds.), English in the World: Teaching and Learning the Language and Literatures(pp.11–30). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Gargesh, Ravinder (2006) South Asian Englishes. In Kachru, Braj, Yamuna Kachru and Cecil L. Nelson (eds.) TheHandbook of World Englishes. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing.

Kim, Gi-Bin (1999) ��Ј �Ф� Ф�� (The Story of the Name of Bundang), �� (KoreanLand Construction Museum).

Kim, Jason (2008) ‘English’ city lies at heart of Jeju’s development plans. JoongAng Ilbo, (Joong Ang Daily) October 22,2008. Retrieved 8 November 2011 from: http://joongangdaily.joins.com/article/view.asp?aid=2896358.

Korea Herald, The (2003) Roh Supports English as 2nd Official Language, The Korea Herald, 24 October 2003.8 November 2011 DATE from http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/roh-supports-english-2nd-official-language.

Korea Tourism Organization (2011) Isit Korea. Retrieved 8 November 2011, from http://english.visitkorea.or.kr/enu/SH/SH_EN_7_2.jsp?cid=273721

Labov, William (1966) The Social Stratification of English in New York City. Washington, DC: Center for AppliedLinguistics.

Labov, William (2007) Transmission and diffusion. Language 83, 344–387.Landry, Rodrigue and Bourhis, Richard Y. (1997) Linguistic landscape and ethnolinguistic vitality: An empirical study.

Journal of Language and Social Psychology 16, 23–49.Lankov, Andrei (2009, Jan. 1) (509) Gangnam fever. The Korea Times, 1 January. Retrieved 8 November 2011 from:

http://www.koreatimes.co.kr/www/news/special/special_view.asp?newsIdx=37117 and categoryCode=177.Lawrence C. Bruce (2010) The verbal art of borrowing: Analysis of English borrowing in Korean pop songs. Asian

Englishes 13, 42–63.Lee, Hyeon-Young (1979). ��Ј �� (The linguistic landscape of Korean cities). ��

(Geography–Education) 9, 61–77.Lee, Jamie Shinhee (2004) Linguistic hybridization in K-Pop: Discourse of self-assertion and resistance. World Englishes

23, 429–450.Lee, Jamie Shinhee (2006) Crossing and crossers in East Asian pop music: Korea and Japan. World Englishes 25, 235–250.Lee, Kwang-Pyo (2001) �� Ш�� ‘��’ (‘Starbucks’ in traditional street Insadong) Dong-

A Ilbo (Dong-A Daily), 19 August. Retrieved 8 November 2011 from http://www.donga.com/fbin/output?code=j__andn=200108190166 and curlist=30.

Lien, Inger-Lise (2002) The dynamics of honor in violence and cultural change. Unpublished manuscript, NorwegianInstitute for Urban and Regional Research, Oslo, Norway.

Lightbrown, Patsy M., and Spada, Nina (2006) How Languages are Learned. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Monnier, Daniel (1989) Langue d’Accueil et Langue de Service dans les Compares a Montreal. Quebec: Conseil de la

Langue Francais.Morrow, Philip R. (1987) The users and uses of English in Japan. World Englishes 6, 49–62.Platt, John, Weber, Heidi, and Ho, Mian Lian (1984) The New Englishes. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul Press.Reh, Mechthild (2004) Multilingual writing: A reader-oriented typology – with examples from Lira Municipality

(Uganda). International Journal of the Sociology of Language 170, 1–41.Robinson, Martin, Bartlett, Ray, and Whyte, Rob (2007) Lonely Planet: Korea, 7th edn. Victoria: Lonely Planet Publica-

tions Pty. Ltd.Rosenbaum, Yehudit, Nadel, Elizabeth, Cooper, Robert L., and Fishman, Joshua A. (1977) English on Keren Kayemet

Street. In Joshua A. Fishman, Robert L. Cooper and Andrew W. Conrad (eds.),The Spread of English (pp. 179–196).Rowley, MA: Newbury House.

Rotella, Sebastian (1998) Twilight on the Line: Underworlds and Politics at the U.S.-Mexico Border. New York: Norton.Scollon, Ron, and Scollon, Suzie Wong (2003) Discourses in Place: Language in the Material World. London and New

York: Routledge.Seoul Development Institute (2004) How to make English public language in Seoul. Seoul Studies 5, 119–144.Shim, Rosa Jinyoung (1999) Codified Korean English: process, characteristics and consequence. World Englishes 18,

247–258.Song, Do-Young (2004) ��Э� (Reading Seoul). Seoul: Sohwa Press.Song, Jae Jung (1998) English in South Korea revisited via Martin Jonghak Baik (1992, 1994), and Rosa Jinyoung Shim

(1994). World Englishes 17, 263–271.Storey, Robert, and Park, Eunkyong (2001) Lonely Planet: Korea, 5th edn. Victoria: Lonely Planet Publications

Pty. Ltd.Spolsky, Bernd, and Cooper, Robert L. (1991) The Languages of Jerusalem. Oxford: Clarendon Press.Stokesbury, James L. (1990) A Short History of the Korean War. New York: Harper Perennial.Sullivan, John P. (2006) Maras morphing: Revisiting third generation gangs. Global Crime, 7, 487–504.



Takashi, Kyoko (1990) A sociolinguistic analysis of English borrowings in Japanese advertising texts. World Englishes9, 327–341.

Turnbull, Stephen (2002) Samurai Invasion: Japan’s Korean War 1592–98. London: Cassell and Co.Tranter, Nicholas (1997) Hybrid Anglo-Japanese loans in Korean. Linguistics 35, 133–166.Trudgill, Peter (1974) Linguistic change and diffusion: Description and explanation in sociolinguistic dialect geography.

Language in Society 3, 215–246.van Gemert, Frank (2001) Crips in orange: Gangs and groups in the Netherlands. In M. Klein, H.-J. Kerner, C. L.

Maxson, and E. G.Weitekamp (Eds.), The Eurogang Paradox: Street Gangs and Youth Groups in the US and Europe(pp. 145–152). Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic.

Wenzel, Veronika (1996) Reklame en tweetaligheid in Brussel: Een empirisch onderzoek naar de spreiding van Neder-landstalige en Franstalige affiches. In Vrije Universiteit Brussel (ed.). Brusselse Thema’s 3 (pp. 45–74). Brussels: VrijeUniversiteit.

Webster’s Dictionary (1990) New York: Book Essentials Publications.Young, Richard F. (2008) English and Identity in Asia. Asiatic 2, 1–13.

(Received 16 May 2011)


Copyright of World Englishes is the property of Wiley-Blackwell and its content may not be copied or emailed

to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However,

users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.

the korean english linguistic landscape

Documents