You are currently viewing a new version of our website. To view the old version click .
Languages
  • Article
  • Open Access

21 February 2025

English as Symbolic Capital: Globalization and the Linguistic Landscape of Armenia, Quindío (Colombia)

and
1
Department of Spanish and Portuguese, Temple University, Philadelphia, PA 19122, USA
2
Faculty of Education Sciences, Literature and Spanish Language Program, University of Quindío, Armenia 630001, Colombia
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
This article belongs to the Special Issue Sociolinguistic Variation and Change: Focus on English as a Second and Foreign Language

Abstract

This research investigates linguistic hybridization in a commercial corridor of Armenia, Colombia, focusing on the usage of Spanish and English in public signage, particularly business names. Utilizing a quantitative methodology, we conducted a statistical analysis employing Chi-square tests to explore the relationship between symbolic language choice and variables such as location and type of establishment. The results demonstrated a significant association between location and language choice (Χ2 = 39.353, p < .001), revealing that commercial zones with high tourist traffic exhibited a pronounced preference for English (46.55%), reflecting branding strategies aimed at attracting a younger, cosmopolitan audience. Conversely, traditional sectors such as health services (74.24% in Spanish) and religious institutions (80% in Spanish) predominantly utilized Spanish, emphasizing the community’s need for accessible communication. Additionally, establishments in the most commercial area highlighted the presence of hybrid names, indicating a blending of languages. Our findings suggest that the hybridization of English and Spanish serves as both a reflection and reinforcement of cultural identity and social hierarchies, emphasizing the role of linguistic capital in shaping social dynamics within the urban landscape of Armenia, Colombia.

1. Introduction

Linguistic Landscape studies focus on analyzing signs in public spaces, a subfield of linguistics that has gained increasing recognition since the late 1990s, with evolving methodologies, approaches, and areas of coverage (; ). In recent decades, economic and sociopolitical issues like globalization and gentrification have significantly transformed linguistic landscapes around the world since “[c]ities around the globe are dealing with complex challenges like rapid expansion, increasing crowdedness, intersecting forms of diversity, and staggering inequality between the rich and the poor” (). This is leading to increased linguistic hybridization, especially in urban environments. This phenomenon is particularly evident in Colombia, where diverse linguistic influences converge, reflecting the interplay of local identities and global trends. The city of Armenia, the capital of Quindío, Colombia, serves as a compelling case study for examining these dynamics as its public signage and business names increasingly exhibit a blend of Spanish and English.
Globalization is a term that has gained prominence in recent years due to its versatility and its capacity to serve as a reference point for addressing various aspects of social changes. Essentially, it encompasses the global interconnectedness that has transformed social life through multiple economic, political, cultural, technological, and social dimensions, both collectively and individually. This phenomenon is not new; rather, it is a continuous process that has intensified over the last century and has evolved through distinct phases, each characterized by unique features (). () aligns with this viewpoint, emphasizing that globalization manifests in diverse dimensions and that its rapid expansion in the 21st century is largely attributable to the communication revolution—driven by the development of the Internet and digitalization—alongside new consumption trends and migration patterns that have accelerated since the 1990s.
The connections established through globalization and global cultural exchange have broadened our perception of the world and other cultures. However, despite the continual growth of the population in numerical terms, “the world has become a smaller place” (). This statement does not refer to a reduction in physical size but rather to an increased sensitivity toward cultures and the differences or otherness they embody. With globalization, discussions often center around cultural and even linguistic homogeneity (; ), although it is important to note that alternative perspectives advocate for heterogeneity and hybridity ().
From the standpoint of homogeneity, convergence is posited, suggesting that one of the repercussions of globalization is the global standardization of culture. This cultural convergence “promotes the possibility that local cultures may be shaped by more powerful cultures or even a global culture” (). From this perspective, cultural influence is often viewed as unidirectional, primarily driven by American cultural imperialism, which promotes consumer capitalism and homogenizes cultural aspects such as music, lifestyles, technology, and forms of entertainment (). Linguistically, the global status of English as a dominant language has been evident (; ), potentially impacting the speech forms and language used in public spaces within local communities. This phenomenon has been summarized as a process of Westernization, chiefly propelled by the American entertainment industry ().
The dominance of English as a global language has been particularly observed in large cosmopolitan cities, where phenomena such as gentrification and the migration of diverse communities have influenced the linguistic practices of their inhabitants, as seen in Japan (), Korea (), Russia (), and Mexico (), among others. However, how does globalization affect the linguistic practices of cities that are not directly influenced by these social phenomena?
The present study aims to explore linguistic hybridization in the public signage of the city of Armenia, Colombia, with a focus on the names of commercial establishments within a concentrated area of the city lined with businesses, shops, restaurants, and other commercial establishments. Specifically, it extends along Avenida 14 (14th Avenue) from Plaza de Bolívar at Calle 21 (21st Street) to Calle 10 Norte (10th North Street)—see Figure 1 for reference and a detailed description of this commercial corridor in Section 2. The research is grounded in the sociolinguistic framework that emphasizes the relationship between language use and sociocultural processes, drawing on ’s () concept of the Sociolinguistics of Globalization and ’s () approach to Linguistic Landscape and complexity, exposing how linguistic practices in public spaces are shaped by historical, economic, and social dynamics, resulting in complex forms of hybridization. By following this framework, we can shed light on how multilingual signage reflects layered linguistic, cultural, and economic influences in urban environments.
Figure 1. Data collection zones.
Our analysis employs quantitative methods, particularly Chi-square tests and logistic regressions, to investigate the statistical association between the choice of symbolic language and various contextual factors, such as the location of the establishment and the type of business.

The Pluri-Ethnic Identity of Quindío: Historical Perspectives and Contemporary Realities

The Quindío Department was established in 1966, having previously been part of Caldas, or Viejo Caldas [Old Caldas]—a department that encompassed territories segmented from Antioquia, Cauca, and Tolima, and was founded in 1905. Although Quindío gained autonomy as a department, it could not detach itself from the inherent imagery associated with its predecessor, which assumes that both territories are products of Antioquian colonization. Therefore, the identity of its people is often linked to being Antioquian in all its dimensions, including their dialect, which is frequently referred to as the “antioqueño-caldense” subdialect, shared by the departments of Quindio, Antioquia, Risaralda, and Caldas (; ). However, some scholars argue that the reality is much more varied and complex. As () notes, “Old Caldas is a multi-ethnic and multicultural human mosaic in search of its own identity, and not merely an appendix of Antioqueness1“. This assertion equally applies to Quindío, as its historical formation reveals the convergence of individuals from different origins: Antioqueños, Caucanos, Santandereanos, Cundiboyacenses, Tolimenses, Nariñenses, and Vallunos. Similarly, (, ) has also argued that Quindío’s speech differs from that spoken in Antioquia, but sociolinguistic research in this territory is still lacking.
The configuration of this pluri-ethnic mosaic has gradually been unveiled through the accumulation of various sources that, interwoven, give voice to a history of migration and colonization that had remained silent. For instance, the novel Hombres transplantados [Transplanted men] () vividly depicts the diverse origins of Quindío’s early inhabitants, highlighting not only Antioquians but also Caucanos, Santandereanos, and people from the Cundiboyacense highlands. Historical records from some municipalities in Quindío also confirm this pluri-ethnic configuration. For example, the municipality of Salento was initially considered a mandatory stop for immigrants traveling from Cartago to Ibagué via the National Road; these individuals were not solely Antioquians but came from all corners of Colombian territory, many of whom settled in the region ().
In Calarcá, a varied migration–colonization process is evident. Examples of this can be found in the book Calarcá en anécdotas [Calarcá in anecdotes] (), which documents the rivalries between Antioquians settled in the municipality and the so-called Orientals (Tolimenses, Cundiboyacenses, and Santandereanos). Regarding the municipality of La Tebaida, it was the coffee boom and the arrival of the train that initially attracted a large contingent of Valluno migrants, followed by Caucanos, Santandereanos, and Boyacenses ().
In summary, Quindío, like the former Old Caldas, is a territory where transhumance—understood as the constant movement and migration of people—defines the coordinates of its identity, where the establishment of a symbolic capital has yet to be firmly rooted due to the mobile and transitory nature of those who, originating from various regions of Colombian territory, continuously populate and repopulate this young department.
Currently, migratory movements in Quindío are fueled by both internal and foreign human capital. The presence of foreigners in the department is so strong that the local perspective has turned towards them as they constitute an additional element of the landscape. Consequently, cultural and economic dynamics have been transformed to accommodate the needs and preferences of foreigners, a fact that impacts the fragile symbolic capital of Quindío’s identity, leaving it vulnerable to globalization processes whose manifestations are evident in the daily life of some municipalities.
Thus, the influence of globalization has added a new layer of complexity to this already rich cultural diversity. A visible aspect of this global influence is the use of English in public spaces. This phenomenon is not yet a sign of gentrification but serves as palpable evidence of globalization’s impact and the emblematic functions of language (), in which the sign is purely semiotic, not linguistic. In other words, its function is emblematic rather than denotative, serving as a sign that does not convey information but rather possesses a “chic appeal”.
After a brief ethnographic survey of the streets of Armenia, it is not difficult to encounter linguistic borrowings and calques derived from English in various urban contexts: from commercial signs and restaurant menus to signage and cultural events. This linguistic transformation suggests a process of globalization and acculturation, reflecting changes in identity and the symbolic capital of the region.
The relevance of this study lies in its approach to exploring the sociolinguistic dynamics and linguistic identities in the city of Armenia and the Quindío department, areas where such studies are still scarce. By shedding light on the evolving linguistic landscape, our research contributes to raising awareness about language in society and multilingualism in Colombia, offering insights into how global influences are reshaping local identities and language use in this particular context.

2. Materials and Methods

To understand the changes occurring in the city of Armenia regarding the use of languages in public spaces, an urban ethnographic approach () was employed. This approach allows for the study of the city “from within”. It serves as a tool to analyze the impact of various sociopolitical changes such as segregation, gentrification, migration, and globalization on urban environments as ethnographic data provide insights into “the process of production of culture, identity, and space or place” ().
Based on previous studies of linguistic landscapes (; , ; ; ), we selected the location and type of establishment as independent variables to assess their impact on language choice. For this study, language choice was measured through two dependent variables: symbolic language and informative language. The following research questions were formulated:
(a)
To what extent is English part of the linguistic landscape of Armenia, Quindío?
(b)
How does location affect the use of the linguistic code in the linguistic landscape of Armenia?
(c)
In what ways does the type of establishment influence the linguistic code in the city of Armenia?
Data collection was conducted in three areas of the city—see Figure 1. Zone 1 (points A and B) encompassed Carrera 14 between Calle 21 and Calle 12; a pedestrian boulevard known as Cielos Abiertos [Open Skies]. This area is recognized for being busy with various food and craft sales points and connects two main parks in the city: Plaza de Bolívar (point A) and Parque Sucre (point B). Zone 2 included Carrera 14 from Calle 12 (point B) to Avenida Las Palmas (point C), where various restaurants, clothing stores, two shopping centers, and two universities are located. Finally, Zone 3 comprises Carrera 14 from Avenida Las Palmas (point C) to Calle 10 Norte (point D). This corridor features a variety of cafés, restaurants, health clinics, important parks for the city, and churches.
Across these three areas, certain types of establishments are consistently present. For example, all three zones feature food outlets or restaurants, clothing stores, and beauty salons, among others. The primary criterion for delineating these zones was their shared location within the city’s most heavily trafficked corridor. This area functions as a central hub for shopping, medical and governmental errands, and serves as a key meeting point for individuals finishing their workday who seek leisure activities before returning home.
It is important to highlight that this study does not employ cross regressions. The variable type of establishment is utilized to analyze language usage in general across all three zones collectively, rather than individually. In other words, the type of establishment functions as a variable for analyzing language use, not for differentiating the zones.
A total of 498 tokens were collected (N = 498): 196 in Zone 1, 88 in Zone 2, and 214 in Zone 3. For the data distribution, the study followed the Variationist Linguistic Landscape Study (VaLLS) methodology (), where independent variables are used to measure their impact on another variable, similar to a variationist sociolinguistic study. Previous studies of linguistic landscapes informed the selection of variables (; ; ; ). Thus, symbolic language and informative language were treated as dependent variables (see Figure 2 as an example), while the location and type of establishment served as independent variables.
Figure 2. Example of symbolic and informative languages. Photograph taken in Zone 1.
Following the principle of accountability concerning data, which requires the analyst to quantitatively analyze not only the forms of interest but also those that might appear within the same reference domain (), all languages found in the linguistic landscape were captured and recognized as valid tokens. This means that, although our objective is to measure the use of English in the linguistic landscape, every language encountered was collected and included in the corpus of this study.
For data analysis, since all variables were categorical, contingency tables were created, and Chi-square tests were conducted to measure the association, impact, and statistical significance of the location and type of establishment in relation to language use. Additionally, upon identifying a variable with significant association, logistic regression analysis was performed to measure that variable’s predictive capacity. Furthermore, since some guidelines require the inclusion of effect size in research articles (), the association values of Cramér’s V were also reported.
In the Chi-square tests, the null hypothesis (H0) posits that no association exists between the categorical variables, indicating that the observed differences in frequency distribution among categories are due to chance. In our study, the null hypothesis (H0) suggests that neither the location nor type of establishment modifies the linguistic code. Conversely, the alternative hypothesis (H1) would indicate that the location or type of establishment does indeed impact and modify the use of languages in the public space of this commercial corridor of city of Armenia, meaning that there is an association between variables. As is common in the studies of this nature, our results will be evaluated based on a significance level (p) of less than 0.05, suggesting sufficient evidence to reject the null hypothesis. The data analysis and statistical tests were conducted using JASP version 0.18.3 (), and the graphs were designed using the ggplot package () in Rstudio version 2024.04.2+764.

3. Results

The aim of this study was to analyze the presence and degree of use of English in the linguistic landscape (LL) of a busy commercial corridor of Armenia, Colombia, identifying in which contexts and how frequently this language appears in public spaces, and to measure the impact of location and type of establishment on the choice of linguistic codes in public spaces across three zones of the city.
A total of 498 tokens were collected from the LL. After careful review and coding of the data for analysis, the dataset was reduced to 354 tokens, as some signs did not meet the parameters established for this study. Specifically, signs were excluded if they contained only symbolic or informative language, if they were semiotically different but conveyed the same information, or if the same sign was found in multiple locations. Chart 1 presents the distribution of symbolic languages identified in the dataset, meaning the languages used to name stores or establishments. The distribution of symbolic languages in our data shows that Spanish is the predominant language, representing 55.36% of the total instances. English comes in second place with 22.31%. The “Hybrid” and “Other” categories have similar percentages, with 10.45% and 11.86%, respectively. The “Other” category includes languages such as Italian and French, which, while less frequent, were still present in the dataset. Figure 3 presents some examples of English as a symbolic language. Establishments such as “Sport Medical Center”, “Glam Beauty Salon”, “The Grand Bell”, “Phone”, “Sky Blue Spa”, “Chicken Armenia”, “Fish Point”, “Mr. Beer Liquor Store”, and “Beauty Shop Esthetics [sic]” were found.
Chart 1. Distribution of symbolic languages found in the LL of Armenia.
Figure 3. English as symbolic language.
On the other hand, regarding informative languages, Spanish remains the most prevalent linguistic code. However, compared to symbolic languages, its use is much higher, representing 73.87% of the instances. English, on the other hand, is no longer the second most common language, as it was found in only 10.11% of the data. In the advertisements, according to our results, the second most used language was a hybrid of Spanish and English, that is, bilingual ads, which were found in 13.76% of the data, while information in other languages only represented 2.24%—see Chart 2.
Chart 2. Distribution of informative languages found in the LL of Armenia.
These results indicate a strong predominance of Spanish in the context of informative languages, with a significant presence of bilingual or hybrid ads, where information is presented in a mixture of Spanish and English. In Figure 4, we present examples of stores where English is used to provide information about the products offered, either partially or entirely. Ad A offers, among other items, snacks, smokes, and candies; Ad D offers cafe [sic] and food; and Ad F is presented as a smoke shop. Other ads provide all their information in English, such as sign B, which offers “soufth [sic] ice cream”; sign C, which offers a cocktail bar and food experience; or sign E, which offers retro games and burgers.
Figure 4. English as informative language.
Thus, to answer our first research question (to what extent is English part of the linguistic landscape of Armenia, Quindío?), we can conclude that English has a moderate presence in the city’s linguistic landscape. In terms of store names (symbolic languages), English constitutes 22.31%, indicating a relevant, though not dominant, presence. Therefore, English ranks as the second most common language for symbolic names after Spanish. However, its presence significantly decreases in the realm of informative languages, where it only constitutes 10.11% of the instances observed, mainly because most information is given primarily in Spanish, followed by a hybrid or bilingual form, as exemplified in Figure 4.
This suggests that, while English is visible in the names of establishments, its use is far less frequent in the information about products and services, where Spanish predominates. Additionally, there is a significant percentage of bilingual or hybrid information. Figure 3 shows some examples of the use of English as a symbolic language, while Figure 4 presents examples of hybrid ads where the morphological elements of both languages are used. Comments on these findings will be presented in Section 4.
To determine which variables influence the choice of linguistic code in the LL of Armenia, two independent variables were considered: location (in which zone the sign was found) and the type of establishment. To measure the impact of these variables on symbolic and informative languages, Chi-square tests were conducted, and Cramer’s V was calculated to assess the strength of each association.
When combining the variables location and symbolic language, as shown in Table 1, our results reveal that there is a statistically significant association between these variables (Χ2 = 39.353, df = 6, p < 0.001, V = 0.236). In zone 1, Spanish is the predominant symbolic language, with 49.07% of cases, followed by English (23.14%), other languages (19.44%), and hybrid languages (8.33%). In zone 2, English predominates, representing 46.55% of the instances, surpassing Spanish-language signs (32.75%), hybrid signs (13.79%), and other languages (6.89%). Finally, in zone 3, Spanish is clearly dominant, with 65.95% of the data, while English has a lower presence (14.36%). Other languages represent 9.04%, and hybrid signs 10.63%.
Table 1. Contingency table and Chi-square test for symbolic language and location.
Since the Chi-square test results were statistically significant (p < 0.001) and a moderate association (V = 0.236) was found between the location and symbolic languages, a logistic regression analysis was conducted. The aim was to determine whether the location, in addition to being associated with symbolic language, could also be a predictor of its use. However, the results indicated that location alone is not sufficient to predict the use of Spanish or other languages in the public spaces of the city. As shown in Table 2, the McFadden R2 value of 0.544 and Nagelkerke R2 value of 0.678 suggest a moderate model fit, but the p-value of 0.062 for location in the regression model indicates that, at the standard significance threshold of 0.05, location does not provide sufficient predictive power for language choice. While location may be associated with language use, we believe that other factors, not captured by location alone, are likely contributing to the language choices in these public spaces.
Table 2. Logistic regression for symbolic language and location.
Following the analysis of symbolic language and location, we extended our investigation to examine the relationship between informative language and location. While symbolic language covers broader cultural or identity-related meanings, informative language serves a more practical function, such as providing directions or conveying rules. Given the distinctions between these two types of language use, we sought to determine whether location played a similarly significant role in shaping the choice of informative language in public spaces. To explore this, we conducted a Chi-square test, the results of which are presented in Table 3.
Table 3. Contingency table and Chi-square test for informative language and location.
Our results indicate a slight association between this informative language and location (Χ2 = 11.931, df = 6, p = 0.064, V = 0.130). While the p-value is marginally above the 0.05 threshold, the predominant use of Spanish remains consistent across all three zones, representing 72.22% in zone 1, 67.24% in zone 2, and 76.84% in zone 3. Although there are slight variations in the use of English and hybrid signs across the zones, these differences are not statistically significant, and we cannot reject the null hypothesis that postulates no association between the variables.
Thus, to answer our second research question (to what extent does location affect the use of linguistic codes in the linguistic landscape of Armenia?), it can be stated that location does influence the use of linguistic codes in Armenia’s public spaces, but differently depending on the type of language. There is a significant –though not predictive– association in the use of symbolic languages, which varies between zones, while the use of informative language remains stable and shows no significant association with location. This suggests that although the geographic location influences the symbolic language used in public spaces, other factors may account for the stability in the use of informative language.
Another variable considered in this study was the type of establishment. Before conducting statistical analyses, the levels of symbolic and informative language were modified to reduce the degrees of freedom. Instead of considering the variables with the levels of Spanish, English, hybrid, and others, the measurement of the association of establishments was simplified by focusing solely on the use of Spanish versus other languages in general. Thus, the variables were redefined as Spanish vs. others.
The results indicate a statistically significant association between the type of establishment and symbolic language (Χ2 = 36.044, df = 12, p < 0.001, V = 0.319). This suggests that the type of establishment influences the choice of language used in signs and advertisements, reflecting the identity and target market of each business.
In contrast, while the association between establishment type and informative language does not meet the conventional threshold for statistical significance (Χ2 = 20.727, df = 12, p = 0.055, V = 0.242), the p-value is marginally significant. This suggests that the type of establishment may have some influence on informative language choices, though the effect is not as strong as with symbolic language. Despite these variations, Spanish remains the predominant language in informative communication across all business types.
These results reveal clear patterns in the use of Spanish versus other languages across different types of establishments, as shown in Chart 3. For example, in service establishments, such as payment services, money transfers, or law offices, 80.95% use Spanish. In contrast, in clothing stores, only 34.78% use Spanish, while 65.22% prefer other languages for naming their businesses. Thus, certain types of establishments show a clear preference for Spanish or for other languages. Sectors such as health (74.24% in Spanish), services (80.95% in Spanish), and religion (80% in Spanish) tend to predominantly use Spanish. On the other hand, establishments like clothing (65.22% in other languages), entertainment (61.11% in other languages), and beauty and spa (53.12% in other languages) show a preference for other languages or for hybrid names where Spanish is combined with English or other languages.
Chart 3. Symbolic languages and establishments.
In this way, we answer the third research question (how does the type of establishment influence the linguistic code of the city of Armenia?) by pointing out that the type of establishment presents a significant association with symbolic languages but not with informative languages. The results indicate that sectors such as vehicle sales and repair, clothing stores, entertainment venues, and beauty salons and barbershops show a clear tendency to use languages other than Spanish for naming their businesses. On the other hand, religious establishments, service offices, and home goods stores maintain their names in Spanish, reflecting a preference for this language in contexts involving more formal or traditional communication.

5. Conclusions

Through our exploration of the LL of Armenia, Colombia, we have shed light on the impact of globalization on the use of Spanish and English in public signage, particularly in business names. Our findings aim to add to the literature of the sociolinguistics of globalization and to our understanding of linguistic hybridization, cultural identity, and social dynamics.
The study was guided by three primary research questions: the extent to which English is part of the linguistic landscape of Armenia, how location affects language choice, and how the type of establishment influences language use. These questions were addressed through a quantitative methodology, employing Chi-square tests and logistic regression to analyze the relationship between symbolic language choice and variables such as location and type of establishment.
The analysis revealed several significant findings. On the one hand, there was a statistically significant association between location and language choice2 = 39.353, p < 0.001), with commercial zones having high tourist traffic, such as Zone 2, showing a pronounced preference for English (46.55%). This reflects branding strategies aiming to attract a younger, cosmopolitan audience. Similarly, the type of establishment also significantly influenced symbolic and—to some extent—informative language use. Traditional sectors like health services (74.24% in Spanish) and religious institutions (80% in Spanish) predominantly used Spanish, emphasizing the community’s need for accessible communication.
Furthermore, we highlighted the presence of hybrid names, indicating a blending of languages, particularly in the most commercial areas. This hybridization serves as both a reflection and reinforcement of cultural identity and social hierarchies. At the same time, English functions as symbolic capital, enhancing the prestige and appeal of commercial establishments. This phenomenon is emblematic rather than denotative, possessing a “chic appeal” that reflects the influence of globalization on local cultural dynamics.
We believe that, among the local population, there is a prevailing perception or “imaginary” () that the most suitable or highest-quality products for consumption originate in the United States. In line with this perception, the symbolic act of naming establishments in English—stripping the names of their original meaning—reveals how a significant portion of Armenia’s population aligns itself with the values inherent to American culture, even without a precise understanding of what those values entail.
With our study we would like to highlight the importance of location and type of establishment in shaping the linguistic landscape of urban environments and aim to support the notion that linguistic hybridization is a complex process influenced by both local identities and global trends. Furthermore, our study emphasizes that Quindío’s pluri-ethnic and multicultural identity is further complicated by globalization. The use of English in public spaces is not a sign of gentrification but rather a manifestation of globalization’s impact, adding a new layer of complexity to the region’s cultural diversity.
Drawing from our sociolinguistic ethnographic approach, in this paper, we aim to focus on the relationship between language use and sociocultural processes, demonstrating how language shapes and is shaped by social dynamics within urban landscapes, particularly in the context of globalization. Finally, we argue that in Armenia, Colombia, English serves as symbolic capital, influencing social hierarchies and cultural identity within the urban landscape of the city. This symbolic function of language is crucial in understanding how globalization affects local language practices.
Future studies could further explore the dynamics of linguistic hybridization in other urban environments, particularly in regions with diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds. Investigating the perceptions of local residents and business owners regarding the use of English in public signage could provide additional insights into the social and cultural implications of linguistic hybridization. Moreover, a longitudinal study could track changes in the linguistic landscape over time, offering a more comprehensive understanding of how globalization continues to shape local language practices.
Finally, one limitation of our study was that we only collected quantitative data from the LL and did not have the opportunity to explore or inquire about citizens’ perceptions and attitudes toward the use of language in these public spaces. However, we are conducting a qualitative study, which is currently in the data analysis and coding phase, and is expected to be published in the future. Despite this, we acknowledge this limitation and hope to design a new study to further explore the dynamics of language use in the city.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, D.G.; methodology, D.G.; software, D.G.; validation, D.G.; formal analysis, D.G.; investigation, D.G. and D.A.-C.; resources, D.G. and D.A.-C.; data curation, D.G. and D.A.-C.; writing—original draft preparation, D.G and D.A.-C.; writing—review and editing, D.G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

The supporting data for the reported results in this article are available in an Excel sheet hosted on Overdrive. This dataset contains the information analyzed during the study and is open for public scrutiny. Access to the dataset is facilitated through contacting the main author for further inquiries or clarifications.

Acknowledgments

The authors express their sincere gratitude to Karen Tatiana Aguirre-Rodríguez, an undergraduate student at Universidad del Quindío, for her invaluable assistance in data collection and coding. We also appreciate the insightful comments and suggestions from the anonymous reviewers and the guest editor, which have greatly improved the quality of this paper.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Note

1
Authors’ own translation.

References

  1. Amos, H. W., & Soukup, B. (2020). Quantitative 2.0: Toward variationist linguistic landscape study (VaLLS) and a standard canon of LL variables. In D. Malinowski, & S. Tufi (Eds.), Reterritorializing linguistic landscapes: Questioning boundaries and opening spaces (pp. 56–76). Bloomsbury Academic. [Google Scholar]
  2. Ardalan, K. (2017). Understanding globalization. A multi-dimensional approach. Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  3. Aristova, N. (2016). Rethinking cultural identities in the context of globalization: Linguistic landscape of Kazan, Russia, as an emerging global city. Procedia-Social and Behavioral Sciences, 236, 153–160. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Baudinette, T. (2018). Cosmopolitan English, traditional Japanese: Reading language desire into the signage of Tokyo’s gay district. Linguistic Landscape: An International Journal, 4(3), 238–256. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Baumgardner, R. J. (2007). English in Mexican product branding. In N. M. Antrim (Ed.), Seeking identity: Language in society (pp. 66–80). Cambridge Scholars Publishers. [Google Scholar]
  6. Ben-Rafael, E., Shohamy, E., Amara, M. H., & Trumper-Hecht, N. (2006). Linguistic landscape as symbolic construction of the public space: The case of Israel. International Journal of Multilingualism, 3(1), 7–30. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Blommaert, J. (2010). The sociolinguistics of globalization. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
  8. Blommaert, J. (2013). Ethnography, superdiversity and linguistic landscapes: Chronicles of complexity. Multilingual Matters. [Google Scholar]
  9. Bohuslavska, O., & Ciprianová, E. (2024). English in the Slovak glocalized urban space: A study of the English language and the processes of glocalization in the linguistic landscape of Bratislava. English Today, 40(1), 51–61. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Bourdieu, P. (1993). Language and symbolic power (G. Raymond, & M. Adamson, Trans.). Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar]
  11. Buitrago, J. (1943). Hombres transplantados: Novela del colonizaje. Imprenta Departamental. [Google Scholar]
  12. Carr, J. R. C. (2021). Reframing the question of correlation between the local linguistic population and urban signage: The case of Spanish in the Los Angeles linguistic landscape. In P. Gubitosi, & M. F. Ramos Pellicia (Eds.), Linguistic landscape in the Spanish-speaking world (Vol. 35, pp. 239–266). John Benjamins. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Cenoz, J., & Gorter, D. (2006). Linguistic landscape and minority Languages. In D. Gorter (Ed.), Linguistic landscape: A new approach to multilingualism. Taylor & Francis. [Google Scholar]
  14. Choi, J., Tatar, B., & Kim, J. (2021). Bilingual signs at an “English only” Korean university: Place-making and “global” space in higher education. International Journal of Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 24(9), 1431–1444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Cipria, A., & O’Rourke, E. (2024). Multimodal analysis of the Spanish linguistic landscape in Alabama. Languages, 9(8), 264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Correa, D., & Guerrero, C. H. (2024). Traces of coloniality in Colombia’s linguistic landscape: A multimodal analysis of language centers’ English advertisements. Revista Brasileira de Linguística Aplicada, 24(2), e21526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Eriksen, T. H. (2014). Globalization: The key concepts (2nd ed.). Bloomsbury Academic. [Google Scholar]
  18. Fernández Juncal, C. (2020). Funcionalidad y convivencia del español y el vasco en el paisaje lingüístico de Bilbao. Íkala, 25(3), 713–729. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Galindo, A., & Moreno, L. M. (2019). Educación bilingüe (españolinglés) en tres instituciones educativas públicas del Quindío, Colombia: Estudio de caso. Lenguaje, 47(2S), 648–684. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Galindo, A., & Murillo, A. F. (2024). Implementación del Programa Integral de Bilingüismo Quindío Bilingüe y Competitivo: Percepciones de actores intervinientes. Lenguaje, 52(1), e20412826. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. García Canclini, N. (1995). Hybrid cultures: Strategies for entering and leaving modernity. University of Minnesota Press. [Google Scholar]
  22. García Canclini, N. (2017). Urban spaces and networks: Young people’s creativity. International Journal of Cultural Studies, 20(3), 241–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Girola, L. (2020). Imaginarios y representaciones sociales: Reflexiones conceptuales y una aproximación a los imaginarios contrapuestos. Revista de Investigacion Psicologica, 23, 112–131. [Google Scholar]
  24. Gobernación del Quindío. (2021). Diagnóstico de la situación turística del departamento del Quindío. Available online: https://www.quindio.gov.co/home/docs/items/item_100/Plan_de_Turismo/Diagnostico_PET_1.pdf (accessed on 12 October 2024).
  25. Gorter, D., & Cenoz, J. (2023). A panorama of linguistic landscape studies. Multilingual Matters. Available online: https://www.multilingual-matters.com/page/detail/?k=9781800417151 (accessed on 10 March 2024).
  26. Guarín, D. (2021). Los pronombres de tratamiento en el paisaje lingüístico quindiano (Colombia). Miradas, 16(1), 77–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Guarín, D. (2022). El Uso de pronombres de tratamiento Tú, Usted y Vos en el departamento del Quindío (Colombia). Miradas, 17(2), 65–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Guarín, D. (2024a). From bilingualism to multilingualism: Mapping language dynamics in the linguistic landscape of hispanic Philadelphia. Languages, 9(4), 123. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Guarín, D. (2024b). Pronominal address in the linguistic landscape of Hispanic Philadelphia: Variation and accommodation of tú and usted in written signs. Language, Culture and Society, 6(1). [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Han, Y., & Shang, G. (2024). The linguistic landscape in China: Commodification, image construction, contestations and negotiations. Springer. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Hassa, S., & Krajcik, C. (2016). “Un peso, mami!” Linguistic landscape and transnationalism discourses in Washington Heights, New York City. Linguistic Landscape: An International Journal, 2(2), 157–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Hassi, A., & Storti, G. (2012). Globalization and culture: The three H scenarios. In H. Cuadra-Montiel (Ed.), Globalization—Approaches to diversity. InTech. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Haugen, E. (1972). The ecology of language. Essays by einar haugen. Stanford University Press. [Google Scholar]
  34. Jaramillo Ángel, R. (1976). Calarcá en anécdotas. Quin-gráficas. [Google Scholar]
  35. JASP Team. (2024). JASP (Version 0.18.3) [Computer software]. Available online: https://jasp-stats.org (accessed on 10 October 2024).
  36. Kallen, J. L. (2023). Linguistic landscapes: A sociolinguistic approach. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Kumaravadivelu, B. (2008). Cultural globalization and language education. Yale University. [Google Scholar]
  38. Landry, R., & Bourhis, R. Y. (1997). Linguistic landscape and ethnolinguistic vitality: An empirical study. Journal of Language and Social Psychology, 16(1), 23–49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Leeman, J., & Modan, G. (2009). Commodified language in Chinatown: A contextualized approach to linguistic landscape. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 13(3), 332–362. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Loerts, H., Lowie, W., & Seton, B. (2020). Essential statistics for applied linguistics (2nd ed.). Red Globe Press. [Google Scholar]
  41. Macías, D. F., & Mosquera-Pérez, J. E. (2024). English as a lingua franca, world Englishes, and the preparation of language teachers: An awareness-raising experience in an English teacher education program in Colombia. TESOL Journal, 15(3), e789. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Manan, S. A., David, M. K., Dumanig, F. P., & Channa, L. A. (2017). The glocalization of English in the Pakistan linguistic landscape. World Englishes, 36(4), 645–665. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Martin, E. (2007). “Frenglish” for sale: Multilingual discourses for addressing today’s global consumer. World Englishes, 26(2), 170–188. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Medina-Franco, G. (2021). La colonización silenciosa del Quindío. Academia de Historia Del Quindío. Available online: http://academiadehistoriadelquindio.blogspot.com/2021/05/la-colonizacion-silenciosa-del-quindio.html (accessed on 27 August 2024).
  45. Montes Giraldo, J. J. (1982). El español de Colombia: Propuesta de clasificación dialectal. Thesaurus: Boletín del Instituto Caro y Cuervo, 37(1), 23–92. [Google Scholar]
  46. Mufwene, S. (2001). The ecology of language evolution. Cambridge University Press. [Google Scholar]
  47. Muñoz, H. (1993). Villa de nueva salento. El trébol rojo. [Google Scholar]
  48. Observatorio de Turismo. (2025). Quindío destino familiar y para todos los estratos socioeconómicos. Cámara de Comercio de Armenia y del Quindío. Available online: https://camaraarmenia.org.co/quindio-destino-familiar-y-para-todos-los-estratos-socioeconomicos/ (accessed on 22 January 2025).
  49. Ordóñez, J. T., & Ramírez Arcos, H. E. (2019). At the crossroads of uncertainty: Venezuelan migration to Colombia. Journal of Latin American Geography, 18(2), 158–164. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Pastor, A. (2021). Ethnolinguistic vitality and linguistic landscape: The status of Spanish in Dallas, TX. In P. Gubitosi, & M. F. Ramos Pellicia (Eds.), Linguistic Landscape in the Spanish-speaking World (Vol. 35, pp. 73–104). John Benjamins. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Porcar Miralles, M., Velando Casanova, M., & Vellón Lahoz, J. (2019). Sociolingüística histórica del español: Tras las huellas de la variación y el cambio lingüístico a través de textos de inmediatez comunicativa (Vol. 41). Iberoamericana/Vervuert. [Google Scholar]
  52. Restrepo-Ramos, F. (2024). Contrastive language policies: A comparison of two multilingual linguistic landscapes where Spanish coexists with regional minority languages. International Journal of Multilingualism, 21(2), 906–931. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Ruiz Vásquez, N. F. (2020). El español de Colombia. Nueva propuesta de división dialectal. Lenguaje, 48(2), 160–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Schirato, T., & Roberts, M. (2020). Bourdieu: A critical introduction. Routledge. [Google Scholar]
  55. Silverstein, M. (2021). The dialectics of indexical semiosis: Scaling up and out from the “actual” to the “virtual”. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 2021(272), 13–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Valencia, G. (2016). Memorias de mi pueblo. Tipografía y encuadernación Cardona. [Google Scholar]
  57. Vandenbroucke, M. (2016). Socio-economic stratification of English in globalized landscapes: A market-oriented perspective. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 20(1), 86–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Velez-Rendon, G. (2003). English in Colombia: A sociolinguistic profile. World Englishes, 22(2), 185–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Verloo, N. (2020). Urban ethnography and participant observations: Studying the city from within. In N. Verloo, & L. Bertolini (Eds.), Seeing the city: Interdisciplinary perspectives on the study of the urban (pp. 37–55). Amsterdam University Press. Available online: https://www.aup.nl/en/book/9789463728942 (accessed on 15 June 2024).
  60. Verloo, N., & Bertolini, L. (2020). Introduction. In N. Verloo, & L. Bertolini (Eds.), Seeing the city: Interdisciplinary perspectives on the study of the urban (pp. 12–21). Amsterdam University Press. [Google Scholar]
  61. Weyers, J. R. (2016). English shop names in the retail landscape of Medellín, Colombia: How English denotes prosperity and status in a recently transformed city. English Today, 32(2), 8–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Wickham, H. (2016). ggplot2: Elegant graphics for data analysis (2nd ed.). Springer. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Article Metrics

Citations

Article Access Statistics

Multiple requests from the same IP address are counted as one view.