TYPOGRAPHY AS SOCIAL INDEX: SOVIET LANDSCAPE IN THE MODERN RUSSIAN DISCOURSE
DOI: 10.23951/2312-7899-2023-2-50-73
This paper suggests a focus on the typography and the typographic design of the text. Typography is considered as a semiotic resource with a meaning-making potential. It may act as social index proving links to contexts and social environments in which these links become crucial for social actors. The paper argues that typographic forms reveal ideological ascriptions. These can be discussed as graphic ideologies or ideologies of graphics, which means a set of beliefs about the socially significant meaning of graphic variants. The theoretical and methodological foundations of the analysis are found in the modern investigations in social semiotics, multimodality, social indexicality, and thus are in line with explanatory approaches in sociolinguistics, linguistic anthropology, discourse analysis, typographic linguistics. The sociolinguistic theory and typographic linguistics provide a social meaning of visual signs or, in a more narrow sense, typographic meaning. This is a kind of pragmatic meaning, arising from the indexical links of the visual sign to the social context of its use. In this framework, the explanatory charge of the concept of landscape is revealed, which attracted many scholars to denote a multimodal, socially and discursively shaped space, both in the sense of a cultivated environment and also as ideological sites. The notion of landscape involves signs, situation, social actors and ideologies. Therefore, the concepts of semiotic landscape, visual landscape, typographic landscape, which are identified in modern researches, are discussed. The paper shows that typographic landscapes as semiotic products with a social meaning are framed and evaluated in a dynamic way. Typographic meaning is an interpretive phenomenon that derives from the communicative knowledge of interlocutors and is a result of an interactive ascription within a socially embedded practice. The research question is related to the study of how typography becomes, in Agha’s terms, a social emblem. It is investigated in connection with the Soviet landscape in the modern Russian urban context. The term “Soviet landscape” refers to a multimodal space in which various semiotic resources, verbal and visual signs, texts, visual images, symbols refer to the sociocultural practices and (self)identification of a person in the former Soviet society. The main object of the suggested analysis within this framework is the Soviet type, characteristic for the Soviet newspapers and framed as such by social actors in the modern context. The analysis is based on multimodal texts used in modern Russian socio-cultural practice when creating advertising, social, and commercial messages. Dealing with landscapes reveals how Soviet nostalgia and the relevance of Soviet meanings give rise to the social indexicality of the sign and to the typographic meaning as a special social index. The analysis shows that typography has a precedent nature, acts as one of the semiotic tools for meaning making in socio-cultural practice.
Keywords: landscape, multimodality, sociolinguistics, social meaning, Soviet landscape, typographic meaning, typographic linguistics
References:
Abramov, R. N. (2019). Attitude to the late soviet past as an object of sociological research. Obshchestvennye nauki i sovremennost’, 5, 108–120. (In Russian).
Agha, A. (2007). Language and Social Relations. Ser.: Studies in the Social and Cultural Foundations of Language (vol. 24). Cambridge University Press.
Androutsopoulos, J. (2004). Typography as a Resource of Media Style: Cases from Music Youth Culture. In K. Mastoridis (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Typography and Visual Communication (pp. 381–392). University of Macedonia Press.
Backhaus, P. (2007). Linguistic Landscapes: A Comparative Study of Urban Multilingualism in Tokyo. Multilingual Matters.
Bain, P., & Shaw, P. (Eds.) (1998). Blackletter: Type and National Identity. Princeton Architectural Press.
Blommaert, J. (2005). Discourse: A Critical Introduction. Cambridge University Press.
Blommaert, J. (2013). Ethnography, Superdiversity and Linguistic Landscapes: Chronicles of Complexity. Ser.: Critical Language and Literacy Studies (vol. 18). Multilingual Matters.
Bourdieu, P. (1991). Language and Symbolic Power. Harvard University Press.
Chernyavskaya, V. E. (2020). Metapragmatics: When the author brings meaning and the addressee context. Vestnik SPbGU. Yazyk i literatura – Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Language and Literature, 1, 135–147. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu09.2020.109 (In Russian).
Chernyavskaya, V. E. (2021a). Social meaning in the mirror of political correctness. Vestnik SPbGU. Yazyk i literatura – Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Language and Literature, 2(18), 383–399. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu09.2021.208 (In Russian).
Chernyavskaya, V. E. (2021b). Tekst i sotsial’nyy kontekst: sotsiolingvisticheskiy i diskursivnyy analiz smysloporozhdeniya [Text and social context: sociolinguistic and discursive analysis of meaning generation]. URSS.
Crystal, D. (1998). Toward a Typographical Linguistics. Type. A Journal of the Association Typographique Internationale, 2(1), 7–23.
Daniels, S., & Cosgrove, D. (1988). Introduction: iconography and landscape. In S. Daniels, & D. Cosgrove (Eds.), The Iconography of Landscape (pp. 1–10). Cambridge University Press.
Eskilson, S. J. (2007 ). Graphic Design: A New History. Yale University Press.
Foucault, M. (1997). What is Critique? [Qu’est-ce que la critique? (Critique et Aufklärung)]. In M. Foucault, The Politics of Truth (pp. 41–82). Semiotext(e).
Gorter, D. (2013). Linguistic landscapes in a multilingual world. Annual Review of Applied Linguistics, 33, 190–212.
Gumperz, J. J. (1992 ). Contextualization Revisited. In P. Auer, & A. di Luzio (Eds.), The Contextualization of Language (pp. 39–53). Amsterdam and Philadelphia: Benjamins.
Huebner, T. (2016). Linguistic landscape: history, trajectory and pedagogy. Journal of Humanities, 22, 1–10.
Kirsanov, D. M. (2007). Istorikomorfologicheskaya model’ razvitiya russkogo nabornogo shrifta. Vzaimosvyaz’ ob”ektivnykh i sub”ektivnykh faktorov [Historical and morphological model of the development of Russian typesetting. The relationship of objective and subjective factors]. Abstract of Art Criticism Cand. Diss. Moscow.
Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality: A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. Routledge.
Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (1996). Reading images. The grammar of visual design. Routledge.
Kress, G., & van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal Discourse: The Modes and Media of Contemporary Communication. Hodder Education.
Molodychenko, E. N. (2019). “Lifestyle instruction” as an internet genre in consumer culture: A communicative-pragmatic perspective. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Filologiya – Tomsk State University Journal of Philology, 57, 79–102. https://doi.org/10.17223/19986645/57/5 (In Russian).
Molodychenko, E. N. (2020). Metasemiotic projects and lifestyle media: Formulating commodities as resources for identity enactment. Russian Journal of Linguistics, 24(1), 117–136. https://doi.org/10.22363/2687-0088-2020-24-1-117-136 (In Russian).
Molodychenko, E. N., & Chernyavskaya, V. E. (2022). Representing the social through language: Theory and practice of sociolinguistics and discourse analysis. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo universiteta. Yazyk i literatura – Vestnik of Saint Petersburg University. Language and Literature, 19(1), 103–124. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu09.2022.106 (In Russian).
Silverstein, M. (1979). Language Structure and Linguistic Ideology. In P. R. Cline, W. Hanks, & C. Hofbauer (Eds.), The Elements: A Parasession on Linguistic Units and Levels (pp. 193–247). Chicago Linguistic Society.
Spitzmüller, J. (2015). Graphic Variation and Graphic Ideologies: A Metapragmatic Approach. Social Semiotics, 25(2), 126–141.
Spitzmüller, J. (2021). Approaching Typographic Variation. Vestnik Sankt-Peterburgskogo Universiteta.Yazyk i Literatura, 18(4), 910–928. https://doi.org/10.21638/spbu09.2021.417
Stöckl, H. (2005). Typography: Body and Dress of a Text – a Signing Mode Between Language and Image. Visual Communication, 4(2), 204–214.
Stöckl, H. (2009). The language-image-text – Theoretical and analytical inroads into semiotic complexity. Arbeiten aus Anglistik und Amerikanistik, 34(2), 203–226.
van Leeuwen, T. (2005). Typographic Meaning. Visual Communication, 4(2), 137–143.
van Leeuwen, T. (2006). Towards a Semiotics of Typography. Information Design Journal, 14(2), 139–155.
Zubkova, E. Yu. (2019). Soviet life as an object of historical reconstruction. Rossiyskaya istoriya, 5, 3–14. (In Russian).
( 825.78 kB ) 
( 806.02 kB )
Issue: 2, 2023
Series of issue: Issue 2
Rubric: ARTICLES
Pages: 50 — 73
Downloads: 425