Content uploaded by Janice Nakamura
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Janice Nakamura on Sep 23, 2022
Content may be subject to copyright.
Asia-Pacific Social Science Review | Vol. 22 No. 3 | September 2022
Copyright © 2022 by De La Salle University
RESEARCH ARTICLE
COVID-19 Signs in Tokyo and Kanagawa:
Linguistic Landscaping for Whom?
Janice Nakamura
Kanagawa University, Kanagawa, Japan
janice-nakamura@kanagawa-u.ac.jp
Abstract: COVID-19 has dramatically transformed Japan’s linguistic landscape. This paper determines the types of
COVID-19 store signs in Tokyo and Kanagawa and the extent to which they cater to the growing number of non-Japanese
residents living in this highly populated urban region. Analysis of 293 COVID-19 signs shows that many are text-and-
image monolingual Japanese signs that display multiple messages related to customer and staff policies. Although the stores
predominantly prepare these signs, they are inuenced by government policy, particularly those related to social distancing.
Only a quarter of these signs is multilingual, and many contain Japanese and English only. Consequently, the majority of the
foreign population from non-English-speaking countries who cannot read either language well may need to rely on the images
contained in COVID-19 signs and the signs’ positioning to decipher the meaning. However, this paper demonstrates that
neither images nor the positioning of Japanese monolingual signs is an adequate substitute for the greater use of multilingual
signs. The prevalence of monolingual Japanese COVID-19 signs suggests that non-Japanese residents in Japan potentially
face a linguistic disadvantage in navigating a linguistic landscape altered by COVID-19.
Keywords: COVID-19, multilingual, store signs, linguistic landscape, Japan
Contemporary Japanese society is becoming
increasingly multiethnic with a growing number of
non-Japanese residents. Their numbers already exceed
2.8 million and make up more than 2% of the country’s
total population (Table 1-1, Immigration Services
Agency of Japan, 2021). Most non-Japanese people
in Japan come from Asia (84.3%) and South America
(9.6%), with China, Vietnam, Korea, the Philippines,
and Brazil as the top source countries. At the same
time, the number of foreign tourists visiting Japan
has increased five-fold since 2009 to more than 31
million in 2019 (Japan National Tourism Organization,
2021). Although the Japanese language is the dominant
societal language used in all aspects of society, the
growing number of foreign residents and visitors has
led to more multilingual services, particularly in the
public service, transportation, and tourism sectors.
Multilingual signs in public spaces such as government
offices, train stations, stores, and tourist attractions are
indicators of Japan’s nascent multilingualism. They
are highly important for non-Japanese residents and
visitors because not many may understand the complex
Japanese writing system, which consists of four scripts.
They include kanji (the Japanese adaptation of Chinese
characters), hiragana (a syllabic script to represent
functional words and morphemes), katakana (a syllabic
81
Asia-Pacific Social Science Review | Vol. 22 No. 3 | September 2022
script used mainly for foreign loan words), and the 26
letters of the Roman alphabet.
Linguistic landscape research, that is, the study of
language in public spaces, is a thriving sociolinguistic
discipline that offers an accessible way to study
multilingualism in Japan. Public signs are useful
indicators of social change and transformation, even
when changes happen at a highly rapid and immediate
scale (Blommaert & Maly, 2014), as it is in the
COVID-19 situation. Since early 2020, the pandemic
has dramatically impacted social and economic
activities worldwide, and Japan is no exception. Strict
border controls led to a drastic decrease in foreign
visitors, even when Tokyo hosted the 2020 Summer
Olympics and Paralympics. The pandemic has also
transformed Japan’s linguistic landscape within a
very short time. Signs compelling people to adhere
to COVID-19 preventive measures appeared to have
mushroomed almost overnight in public spaces. Due
to the prolonged health crisis and the likelihood of a
new normal in the post-pandemic future, these signs are
probably not a temporary feature of Japan’s linguistic
landscape.
Linguistic landscaping for whom? This is a central
question in linguistic landscape research (Backhaus,
2007, 2010) which is even more relevant in a pandemic.
Although there may be fewer foreign visitors, foreign
residents continue their day-to-day lives in Japan. In
times of crisis, they are a vulnerable group. During the
Great Eastern Japan Earthquake in 2011, marriage-
migrant women had little access to tsunami warnings
and evacuation information because of their lack of
Japanese competency (Uekusa, 2019). Likewise, an
inability to understand COVID-19-related messages on
public signs has ramifications for the health and safety
of foreign residents and the general public. Moreover,
although pre-pandemic multilingual signs address both
foreign residents and visitors alike, the lack of foreign
tourists in Japan due to the health crisis may contribute
to fewer multilingual signs, particularly those related
to COVID-19. Consequently, an investigation of
COVID-19 signs may reveal the specific and implicit
language policies associated with Japan’s linguistic
minorities.
This paper determines the types of COVID-19
store signs in Tokyo and its neighboring prefecture,
Kanagawa, and the extent to which they cater to non-
Japanese residents living in the region. After giving
brief accounts of Japanese and COVID-19 linguistic
landscape research, I will introduce the scope of the
present study and the method used to answer the
research questions. Then I will analyze the findings
from the data collected. Finally, I will reflect on the
main findings and discuss their implications in the
discussion section.
Literature Review
Linguistic Landscape in Japan
Linguistic landscape is a term coined by Landry and
Bourhis (1997) in their seminal work on ethnolinguistic
vitality and signage in Canada. Since it emerged as a
new discipline in sociolinguistic research, the field
has expanded tremendously with numerous studies
conducted in various sites around the world. Linguistic
landscape research offers a first-line sociolinguistic
diagnosis of a given territory, that is, it can identify
monolingual or multilingual sociolinguistic regimes
that are in place (Blommaert & Maly, 2014). In other
words, the visibility of a language or languages in
public signs reveals the language policy of a locality
(Shohamy, 2006). As “multilingualism’s most visible
harbinger” (Backhaus, 2010, p. 361), signs in public
spaces also reveal information about language change
in society due to globalization and migration. Many
linguistic landscape studies in Japan follow this
research strand, and Tokyo’s multitudinous shop signs
are a popular subject of investigation.
In 1972, geographer Yasuo Masai described the
signs of Tokyo as gengo keikan [linguistic landscape].
However, it was not until the 2000s that the field
greatly expanded. Studies in the 2000s generally
focused on commercial signs in Tokyo. Someya’s
(2002) survey of store signs around the stations
on the Odakyu Line indicates that many Japanese
language signs adopt logographic kanji characters.
Kanji is probably preferred because it can convey
more information with limited text than the syllabic
katakana or hiragana. However, Jiang (2009) observed
that Tokyo’s linguistic landscape is shifting towards
multilingualism. Comparing her data on Tokyo’s most
commercial districts with Masai (1972) and Someya
(2002), Jiang found fewer kanji characters and more
Roman alphabet letters on shop signs.
English and Japanese-English bilingual signs are
visible in stores in affluent Tokyo suburbs (MacGregor,
2003). However, the purpose of using English is to
82
Asia-Pacific Social Science Review | Vol. 22 No. 3 | September 2022
enhance the stores’ status and appeal to Japanese
customers rather than to help English-speaking
customers. Department store signs in trendy Ginza
or Omotesando also include European languages, for
example, French, for the same reasons (Jiang, 2009;
Tanaka et al., 2007). In contrast, electronic and duty-
free stores in Tokyo’s Akihabara district tend to display
Japanese-English-Chinese-Korean multilingual
signs for their predominantly Asian clientele. Status-
enhancing multilingual signs intended for Japanese
readers may be identified by their non-duplicating
information, that is, the English text typically
complements the Japanese text (Backhaus, 2010).
However, signs containing a full or partial translation
very likely address people without Japanese reading
proficiency.
Tanaka et al. (2007) found a progressive pattern
in multilingual signs, that is, from monolingual
Japanese to Japanese-English and subsequently
Japanese-English-Chinese-Korean. Backhaus
(2010) illustrated this diachronic change on garbage
collection information boards in Tokyo. Initially only
available in Japanese, these signs became Japanese-
English bilingual signs and later included Chinese
and Korean. Nevertheless, multilingual signs are
still lacking in Japan, and they are inadequate in
disseminating critical messages, that is, those related
to disaster evacuation. In Tan and Ben-Said’s (2015)
survey of Miyagi Prefecture, which was severely
hit by the Great Eastern Japan Earthquake in 2011,
most post-disaster multilingual evacuation signs
still contain only Japanese and English. Therefore,
foreigners in Japan who are neither proficient in
these two languages would face a huge linguistic
disadvantage when disaster strikes again. Despite
such a plight, policymakers’ preference for Japanese-
English bilingual signs seems unchanged, as evident
in the 2020 Tokyo Olympic and Paralympic Games
organizers’ decision to use only Japanese, English,
and pictograms in their signs (Inoue, 2016). Against
this backdrop, the extent to which public signs
adequately serve foreign residents in Japan remains
an important subject that needs further investigation.
In a pandemic, public signs related to signs related to
health and safety deserve research attention.
Linguistic Landscape in the COVID-19 Situation
Since its onset, the pandemic has transformed the
linguistic landscape of most parts of the world. In
particular, the efforts of governments and businesses to
reassure tourists and keep infections at bay contribute
toward more COVID-19 signage in tourist destinations.
Describing it as a “translation landscape,” Lees (2021)
studied COVID-19 notices in Thessaloniki, Greece,
which were translated into English for foreign tourists.
He identified two types of notices: those conveying
official safety precautions that apply to the store and
those informing customers on how business operations
have changed since the pandemic. Lees (2021)
suggested that the first type is neither a “top-down”
sign typically issued by authorities nor a “bottom-
up” sign put up by businesses. Instead, it represents a
hybrid sign that disseminates government-approved
guidelines in a way that the store sees fit. Given the
sudden impact of COVID-19 on businesses, non-
professional translators with varying levels of English
proficiency have little choice but to draw from their
linguistic resources to produce a translation. Mulyawan
and Artawa (2021) investigated how a Balinese hotel
adheres to the new normal protocols that the Indonesian
Health Department has set for the tourism industry. In
their qualitative study, they observed how strategically
placed signs deliver a clear and firm order for guests to
comply with these protocols, for example, by washing
their hands before entering the hotel. Colorful images
and choice of text make the signs more reader-friendly.
The placing of English before Bahasa Indonesia on
some signs suggests that the target readers are foreign
hotel guests.
Although multilingual COVID-19 signs may be
more visible in the linguistic landscape of tourist
destinations, monolingualism is probably the norm
in other places. Marshall (2021) observed that many
COVID-19 signs were already added to existing signs
in Vancouver’s parks in the early months of 2020.
These signs employ multimodality to help convey
social distancing messages. However, they are mainly
monolingual English signs. Kalocsányiová et al. (2021)
reported similar findings in Hackney, London, where
many signs are in English only. Although 20% of
Hackney’s residents do not use English as their main
language, there is a lack of multilingual signs serving
their linguistic needs. Kalocsányiová et al. also found
that more deprived areas in Hackney have fewer and
less prominent signs than less deprived areas. Although
social distancing messages are prominent in both
types of neighborhoods, there is a lack of signs in
more deprived areas conveying other key measures,
83
Asia-Pacific Social Science Review | Vol. 22 No. 3 | September 2022
including self-isolation, limiting non-essential travel,
and mask-wearing.
The Current Study
The studies above highlight the prevalence of
monolingual COVID-19-related signs in Canada and
the United Kingdom. Only in tourist destinations
are multilingual signs more visible. In a prolonged
global health crisis, tourists are probably not as
disadvantaged as minority groups who have to
use their limited linguistic resources to navigate a
daunting and uncertain environment every day. The
current study adds to the small body of research on the
altered linguistic landscape caused by the pandemic by
exploring the situation in Japan. The country has one
dominant societal language—Japanese. However, it is
becoming a more linguistically diverse society due to
the greater influx of foreign immigrants and visitors
in recent decades. Specifically, Japan’s tourism boom,
which built up in the years leading to the 2020 Tokyo
Olympics and Paralympics, has encouraged greater
multilingualism, particularly in the tourism sector.
However, the postponement of the 2020 Games to
2021 with a ban on spectators coupled with tight
controls on international travel seems to have reversed
Japan’s move towards greater internationalization.
Within this backdrop of a back-and-forth trend in
internationalization, this study seeks to determine the
COVID-19 signs that have changed Japan’s urban
public spaces and the extent to which they reflect the
growing linguistic diversity within the country. The
specific questions are:
1) What types of COVID-19 signs are displayed
in public spaces?
2) To what extent do they cater to foreign
residents?
Method
Data Collection
The site for the present study is Tokyo and its
adjacent prefecture of Kanagawa. Together, they form
the most densely populated region of Japan. Tokyo is
the most populated city, followed by the two Kanagawa
cities of Yokohama and Kawasaki, which are ranked
second and seventh, respectively (Ministry of Internal
Affairs and Communications, 2021). The site is part
of the Greater Tokyo Area, which has the highest
concentration of foreign residents in Japan (Table
7-A, Immigration Services Agency of Japan, 2021).
The region is also popular with tourists and received a
high number of foreign visitors prior to the pandemic.
A sample of 293 COVID-19 signs was collected
from July to December 2021 by the researcher and
11 research assistants. Being based in Yokohama, the
large research team could conduct fieldwork easily
in the city, adjoining Kawasaki, and Tokyo, which is
less than a 30-minute train ride away. Most of the data
were collected in Tokyo (N=117, 39.9%), Yokohama
(N=117, 39.9%), and Kawasaki (N=34, 11.6%). As this
research aims to study COVID-19 signs in places where
both Japanese and non-Japanese people live and work,
sites known to have a high concentration of foreign
tourists or a specific minority group were avoided. The
research team took photographs of COVID-19 signs
using their mobile devices. Most signs were sighted at
the entrance or windows of stores (N=173, 59.0%) and
food and beverage outlets (N=49, 16.7%). Some were
located indoors on premises accessible to the public,
such as elevator halls, lounges, and washrooms. Fewer
signs were collected from other facilities such as hair
salons, banks, office buildings, and movie theaters.
Data Coding and Analysis
Linguistic landscape research can take a more
quantitative or qualitative approach. Most recent
studies adopt a combination of both (e.g., Blackwood
et al., 2016). A mixed approach is also taken in this
study. Each sign was labeled and uploaded into a
shared online folder by the research team. The date on
which it was photographed, the type of establishment
(e.g., shopping mall), and the location of the sign (e.g.,
entrance) were recorded in an Excel spreadsheet. These
signs were analyzed based on the following categories:
i. Store policy
COVID-19 signs either display customer-
related policy, staff-related policy, or both. A
customer-related policy sign requests visitors to
adhere to the COVID-19 preventive measures set
by the store, for example, by limiting their time
in the store and the number of accompanying
persons. A staff-related policy informs visitors
of the measures taken by the store employees
84
Asia-Pacific Social Science Review | Vol. 22 No. 3 | September 2022
to reduce the risk of COVID-19 infection, for
example, the use of partitions at the payment
counter. Some signs include both policy types,
for example, contactless payment. Customers
are encouraged to use electronic forms of
payment to reduce contact with the staff. At the
same time, store employees give change using
coin trays and not by hand.
ii. Authorship
The signs were also analyzed according
to the authorship or source of the sign. Based
on Ben-Rafael et al.’s (2006) categorization of
signs, official signs issued by national and public
bureaucracies were labeled as “top-down.”
The public authors are usually mentioned on
the sign, for example, the Tokyo Metropolitan
Government indicates its authorship at the
bottom of Sign 4. Non-official signs created by
businesses were categorized as “bottom-up”
signs. The store’s name usually appears at the
bottom of the sign, for example, Signs 1, 3,
and 5. However, there may not be a clear-cut
distinction between top-down and bottom-up
signs. COVID-19 signs are likely influenced
by the successful campaigns of the Ministry of
Health, the Tokyo Metropolitan Government,
and other governmental bodies to avoid the
“three Cs”: closed spaces with poor ventilation,
crowded places, and close contact settings (e.g.,
close-range conversations). Nevertheless, as it
is with many of the other COVID-19 preventive
measures introduced by local authorities and
the central Japanese government, the display
of COVID-19 signs and the requests contained
in these signs (e.g., sanitizing one’s hands
upon entry into a store) are, for the most part,
not legally binding. Given the discretion that
business establishments can exercise as to
the type of COVID-19 sign they display, an
analysis of top-down and bottom-up signs is
still necessary to understand their COVID-19
policies and whom the signs are made for.
iii. Modality
The signs were also coded as text-only,
image-only, and text-and-image. Text-only signs
are printed messages with no images. Image-
only signs (e.g., Sign 3) contain minimal or no
text and rely on symbols or pictures to convey a
message (e.g., two human figures separated by
a two-way arrow to depict social distancing).
Text-and-image signs use symbols and images
to enhance textual messages (e.g., a picture of a
mask accompanying a mask-wearing message).
iv. Language
The signs were also grouped into
monolingual signs and multilingual signs.
Monolingual signs contain the Japanese language
in either one of its four scripts, including the
Roman alphabet. Signs containing at least one
language in addition to Japanese or in place of
Japanese were classified as multilingual signs
(Backhaus, 2010). Therefore, signs in a single
foreign language (e.g., English-only signs)
were also categorized as multilingual signs for
analytical purposes. The signs were analyzed
according to the type of translation used by
Reh (2004). Signs in two or more languages
have a “duplicating” translation when the same
information is provided in each language. They
have a “fragmentary” translation when a partial
translation of a more comprehensive message is
given. Signs have a “complementary” translation
when each language conveys separate messages.
v. Positioning
COVID-19 signs were also analyzed
for their “emplacement” (Scollon & Scollon,
2003) because their situated positioning in shop
entrances, elevator halls, and common areas also
contribute to their visibility and saliency.
Results
Store Policy on COVID-19
Table 1 lists the 22 types of COVID-19 messages
according to policy type. Ten message types relate
to customer policy (No. 1 to 10), and eight relate
to staff policy (No. 11 to 18). Masking, social
distancing, body temperature check, and contactless
payment (No. 19 to 22) are the four types of messages
common to both policies (i.e., they are required of
customers and practiced by the staff). Out of the 293
signs we surveyed, 217 (74.1%) contain customer-
related policies, 50 (17.1%) staff-related policies,
85
Asia-Pacific Social Science Review | Vol. 22 No. 3 | September 2022
and 26 (8.9%) both policy types. Masking (N=163,
55.6%), social distancing (N=142, 48.5%), and hand
sanitization (N=128, 43.7%) are the top three most
common messages. People are frequently reminded to
wear masks, distance themselves from other shoppers,
and sanitize their hands at the storefront. To a lesser
extent, these signs also inform customers that the
staff would wear masks and maintain social distance.
Other common messages are body temperature check
requirement (N=51, 17.4%), the restriction of people
(N=43, 14.7%), and regular ventilation (N=40,
13.7%). Less common messages include requests to
use personal protective equipment (e.g., disposable
gloves when obtaining food from the buffet table) and
bring home one’s trash (e.g., disposable face covers
when using the fitting room). These findings show that
most of the signs relate to customer policy. Therefore,
understanding these customer-related signs and
compliance with store-wide preventive measures are
important for people patronizing shops in a pandemic
situation.
However, the signs’ readability is affected by the
type and number of messages. It is not unusual for
multiple customer-related messages to be displayed;
Table 1
Types of COVID-19 Signs and Their Messages
Policy type
(no. of signs) Type of message No. of
messages %
Customer-related
policy (N=217)
1. Sanitize hands 128 43.7%
2. Stay home if unwell 30 10.2%
3. Refrain from talking 29 9.9%
4. Limit time on premises 16 5.5%
5. Limit the number of accompanying persons 16 5.5%
6. Refrain from eating on premises 9 3.1%
7. Practice proper etiquette when coughing or sneezing 8 2.7%
8. Register personal details on tracing apps 4 1.4%
9. Use personal protective equipment (e.g., disposable gloves) 4 1.4%
10. Bring home garbage 3 1.0%
Staff-related
policy (N=50)
11. The number of people entering the premises is restricted 43 14.7%
12. Premises are regularly ventilated 40 13.7%
13. Objects on premises are regularly disinfected 32 10.9%
14. Periodic washing of hands by staff 24 8.2%
15. Partitions are used 16 5.5%
16. Periodic gargling by staff 12 4.1%
17. Service out of use (e.g., hand dryer) 12 4.1%
18. Staff have been fully vaccinated 6 2.0%
Both (N=26)
19. Mask wearing 163 55.6%
20. Social distancing 142 48.5%
21. Body temperature check 51 17.4%
22. Contactless payment (e.g., use of credit cards and coin trays) 15 5.1%
86
Asia-Pacific Social Science Review | Vol. 22 No. 3 | September 2022
nine different customer-related requests have appeared
in a single sign. Moreover, some signs combine
customer-related and staff-related policies (e.g., Sign
1). The top half of Sign 1 conveys eight messages
relating to customer policy, whereas the second half
explains eight messages concerning staff policy. Each
message is numbered according to the message type in
Table 1. For example, the message at the bottom right
corner of Sign 1 (No. 11) corresponds with the message
type with the same number in Table 1 (i.e., the number
of people entering the premises is restricted). Some
messages are duplicated, for example, the masking
message (No. 19) appears in the first and third rows
because one relates to the store’s customer-related
policy and the other its staff-related policy). Other
messages are not numbered because they are general
requests unrelated to COVID-19. For instance, the
message at the top left corner reminds customers to
be considerate to each other. However, for people
who cannot read the Japanese text, the heart-shaped
image accompanying the message provides little
clue as to its meaning. Therefore, despite the use of
images to enhance readability, the extent to which
Sign 1’s multiple messages are read and understood
by customers before entering the store is questionable.
Sign 1: A sign with multiple messages conveying
customer-related and staff-related policies.
Authorship
Almost all of the signs in our sample (N=272,
92.8%) are bottom-up signs. The stores’ names usually
appear at the bottom. The preponderance of bottom-
up signs indicates the active role of local businesses
in promoting health and safety. Their initiative is
probably motivated by commercial reasons; these signs
aim to reassure customers that it is safe to patronize
their stores. Only 21 signs (7.2%) are top-down signs
issued by various local and central government bodies.
These signs are not commonly seen in public spaces.
Moreover, multilingual top-down signs are rare; only
five of the 21 top-down signs contain other languages.
Some of them are English-only or Chinese-only signs
displayed next to the original Japanese version.
Sign 2: A top-down sign conveying staff-related
COVID-19 policy.
Several Japanese top-down signs are government-
issued notices that certify an establishment’s adherence
to specific COVID-19 preventive measures. Sign 2
is a top-down sign that the Kanagawa Prefectural
Government issued for a café in Yokohama. This
type of text-only notice is usually displayed in front
of a business establishment to inform customers of
its preventive measures. Sign 2 contains 10 staff-
related policies numbered according to the message
87
Asia-Pacific Social Science Review | Vol. 22 No. 3 | September 2022
types listed in Table 1. The two unnumbered items
concern the business’ adherence to industry guidelines
and disclosure of COVID-19 infection. The highly
textual content suggests that the primary purpose of
Sign 2 is to confirm that adequate measures are in
place; customers are not expected to give more than
a glance at it. Also, the preventive measures listed in
these signs vary from one establishment to another.
Sign 2 contains 12 preventive measures, but the same
kind of government-issued sign at other places may
contain different types of items. Also, given that we
could not find similar signs in front of every store we
surveyed, a storefront display may not be mandatory.
The differences in the display and content of these top-
down signs reflect the largely non-mandatory nature
of COVID-19 policy in Japan.
Modality
Many signs (N=246, 84%) are text-and-image
signs. They include images and symbols to make
text messages more salient to readers. For example,
a picture of a thermometer signals that a body
temperature check is required. The prolonged
pandemic may make COVID-19 symbols as common
as the standardized information symbols widely used
in Japan since the 2002 Japan-Korea World Cup.
Some signs rely almost completely on images. Sign
3 uses pictograms to convey multiple COVID-19
preventive measures (i.e., masking, hand sanitization,
body temperature check, social distancing, periodic
disinfection and ventilation, and self-isolation). The
number inserted on each pictogram corresponds to
the message type in Table 1. The text at the top of the
sign only mentions that it is intended for customers
and asks for their understanding and cooperation.
The pictograms in Sign 3 appear straightforward,
but they could be either part of a customer-related
or staff-related policy. It is uncertain whether the
thermometer picture signals a temperature check
requirement for employees or customers. Likewise,
the bottom left-hand pictogram related to ventilation
and disinfection is probably a staff-related preventive
measure. Still, some customers may wonder if it is a
requirement; some Japanese supermarkets and trains
request customers to disinfect shopping baskets and
open train carriage windows. Unlike multimodal
signs with textual explanation and clear segregation
of customer-related and staff-related policies (e.g.,
Sign 1), the lack of textual explanations and the mix
of customer-related and staff-related policies make
Sign 3 potentially hard to understand.
Sign 3: A sign using pictograms to convey COVID-19
preventive measures.
Although multimodality enhances the saliency of
a COVID-19-related sign, the choice of images and
symbols may not be necessarily clear to non-Japanese
people. For instance, Sign 4 is a top-down sign created
by the Tokyo Metropolitan Government to remind
people to keep social distance. The pictograms used
in this sign are a creative take on the kanji character
, which means “person” in English. Two of these
characters depict people. Between these two kanji
characters is another kanji character, , which means
“gap” or “space in-between” in English. Although
readers who can read kanji characters will understand
the social distancing message, those who are not
familiar will not know what it is supposed to mean.
In addition, 16% (N = 47) are text-only signs.
Although they represent a minority, the lack of symbols
and images makes it harder to decipher their meaning.
Even Japanese customers would probably not read the
lengthy text in Sign 2 before entering a store. Text-
only Japanese signs are challenging for people who
cannot read Japanese well (i.e., children and foreign
88
Asia-Pacific Social Science Review | Vol. 22 No. 3 | September 2022
residents). One way to address reading difficulties is to
use Yasashii Nihon-go, or Easy Japanese, a simplified
variant that is easier to understand. It emerged after the
1995 Great Hanshin Earthquake in Kobe, where critical
disaster-related information did not reach non-Japanese
people with difficulty understanding Japanese. Easy
Japanese features include basic vocabulary, short
sentences, and furigana (syllabic katakana or hiragana
glosses) above difficult kanji characters to indicate
their pronunciation (Ito & Tokarev, 2021).
Sign 4: A text-and-image social distancing sign using
kanji characters as images.
In our sample, there is one COVID-19 sign that
contains furigana. However, it does not include other
Easy Japanese improvisations, such as avoiding
ambiguous or complex expressions. Special training
is needed to rephrase difficult expressions in Easy
Japanese (Nagano & Ito, 2015). However, stores may
not have the skills to prepare Easy Japanese signs or be
willing to display them in addition to or as a substitute
for the original Japanese one. Therefore, apart from
the one furigana sign we sighted, there is a complete
lack of Japanese monolingual COVID-19 signs that
display Easy Japanese features for readers with limited
Japanese ability. Without any symbols, images, or
even furigana, readers who lack Japanese reading
proficiency will have to rely solely on the positioning
of Japanese text-only signs to guess their meaning (to
be discussed below).
Language
Previous research indicates that monolingual
Japanese signs pervade the linguistic landscape in
Japan. This study demonstrates that the situation is no
different in a pandemic. As Table 2 shows, monolingual
Japanese (J) signs are the majority of the sample
(N=217, 74.1%). The results also concur with studies in
other countries that show that COVID-19-related signs
are usually displayed in the dominant societal language
(Kalocsányiová et al., 2021; Marshall, 2021). Only a
quarter of the signs (N=76) are multilingual signs. Most
of them (N=63) are Japanese-English bilingual signs.
This is followed by six English-only signs. Japanese-
English-Chinese and Japanese-English-Chinese-
Korean signs each make up 1% or less of all signs in
the sample. There is only one Chinese-only sign and
one Japanese-English-Chinese-Korean-Spanish sign.
These results reveal a pattern in language use: the more
languages added to the sign, the less common it is in
the public space. The only exception is English-only
signs, which are slightly more common than Japanese-
English-Chinese or Japanese-English-Chinese-Korean
signs.
These results are not unlike previous research on
general public signs in Japan (e.g., Backhaus, 2010),
which established that multilingual signs tend to be
bilingual in Japanese and English. The presence of only
a few Japanese-English-Chinese-Korean signs shows
that not enough attention is given to the languages
spoken by the majority of foreign residents who come
from Asian or Latin American countries. Japanese-
English-Chinese-Korean signs are probably more
common in Tokyo districts like Akihabara, where Asian
tourists commonly shop for electronic goods and other
duty-free items (Jiang, 2009), or Shin-Okubo, where
many Korean people live or work (Backhaus, 2007).
However, it is uncertain if multilingual COVID-19
signs are more visible in popular tourist spots, given
Japan’s tight border restrictions since early 2020.
Signs containing two or more languages were
analyzed into translation types. A duplicating
translation is a complete reproduction of a Japanese
text. A sign with fragmentary translation only has part
of its message translated. Table 2 shows that many of
89
Asia-Pacific Social Science Review | Vol. 22 No. 3 | September 2022
these signs provide duplicating content in two or more
languages (N=43, 62.3% of the 69 signs containing
two or more languages). However, 24 (34.8%) signs
provide only a fragmentary translation. Without a full
translation, a non-Japanese reader would understand
only part of the message, so we performed a qualitative
analysis to understand the characteristics of these signs.
A closer look at signs with fragmentary translation
reveals several features, including the tendency to
provide an English translation only for the most
important preventive measure. In Sign 5, masking
(message type No. 19 in Table 1) occupies the
most space at the top of the sign and has an English
translation. However, other messages, for example,
sanitizing hands (No. 1) and social distancing (No.
20), are in Japanese only. The partial translation
suggests that mask-wearing is considered the
primary COVID-19 preventive measure by the store
management. It is critical enough that non-Japanese
readers must abide by it even when they may not
follow other precautions for the lack of an English
explanation.
Polite requests in Japanese are also usually
not translated into English. These requests typically
appear at the top or bottom of the sign. The title at the
top of Sign 5 translates as “a request for customers’
cooperation.” The last line at the bottom of the sign
means, “while inconveniences arise, we ask for your
understanding.” There are no translations of these polite
requests, possibly because they are perceived as less
important. Moreover, although the literal translation
of the Japanese message is “please wear a mask,” the
English message is written slightly differently. By
asking customers to “please cover your mouth and
nose properly with the mask,” the English message is
explicit about its expected standard of mask-wearing.
The English text also contains a grammatical mistake;
instead of “your mask,” the message reads as “the
mask.” It is unlikely that a non-Japanese person would
think that a specific mask should be worn. However,
such an error indicates the stores’ reliance on lay
translation for their COVID-19 signs, an observation
also shared by Lees (2021). The intention for non-
Table 2
Languages Used in COVID-19 Signs
Monolingual Duplicating
translation
Fragmentary
translation
Complementary
translation
Total
Japanese only 217 – – – 217
Japanese-English – 38 23 2 63
Japanese-English-Chinese –2– – 2
Japanese-English-Chinese-Korean – 3 – – 3
Japanese-English-Chinese-Korean-Spanish – 0 1 – 1
English only 6 – – – 6
Chinese only 1 – – – 1
Total 224 43 24 2 293
Sign 5: A Japanese-English bilingual sign with
fragmentary English translation.
90
Asia-Pacific Social Science Review | Vol. 22 No. 3 | September 2022
Japanese readers to understand and adhere to key
preventive measures is also evident in some signs
where customer-related policies were translated into
English, but staff-related practices were not.
There are two multilingual signs that provide
complementary translation (i.e., the English text
conveys a different content from the Japanese text).
Backhaus (2010) pointed out that such complementary
Japanese-English bilingual signs are likely intended
for Japanese readers. Likewise, in this study, an all-
capped “SOCIAL DISTANCE” English text inserted
into an otherwise Japanese sign is probably intended
for Japanese readers. Similarly, English-only signs on
the shop floor which read “PLEASE STAND HERE”
likely serve Japanese customers. Although previous
research showed that English is usually directed at
Japanese readers for status-enhancing purposes (e.g.,
MacGregor, 2003), this is probably not the reason
for the use of English in COVID-19 signs. The
English term “social distance” is used in COVID-19
signs likely because the katakana equivalent, that is,
(sosharu deisutansu), was
adapted from English and popularized in Japan at the
start of the pandemic. Given that the English term
“social distance” is also synonymous with COVID-19
globally, there is probably an assumption that Japanese
readers would recognize it too.
Positioning
The majority of COVID-19 signs are located at
the entrance to stores and restaurants. Other areas
include payment counters, escalator landings,
elevator halls, and lounges within these facilities.
The placement of a COVID-19 sign can help the
reader to guess the meaning of its message even
when he or she cannot read the Japanese text. A
social distancing sign on a chair indicates that no
one should sit on it. Likewise, a sign stuck to a hand
dryer in a washroom suggests that it is out of use.
However, positioning by itself can be misleading at
times. Sign 6 is pasted above a storefront automatic
hand sanitizer. Without reading the text, one may
assume that the sign reminds people to use hand
sanitizer upon entering the store. However, the
message actually informs customers that a hand
sanitizer with a high amount of alcohol is used,
and it may discolor their bags and clothing. This
finding suggests that readers may be able to guess the
meaning of conventional messages, but less common
ones would be impossible to decipher based on the
sign’s positioning alone.
Sign 6: A text-only monolingual Japanese sign placed
on top of a hand sanitizer dispenser.
Discussion
COVID-19 has drastically changed Japan’s
linguistic landscape. As the pandemic prolongs,
COVID-19 signs seem to be an almost permanent
addition to the country’s public spaces. This study
shows that COVID-19 signs convey various messages,
with masking, social distancing, and hand sanitizing
messages the most common. Although the majority of
COVID-19 signs request customers to take precautions,
stores also display staff-related policies to reassure
customers that preventive measures are in place. Most
of the signs are bottom-up signs prepared by the stores.
Top-down signs prepared by governmental bodies are
only a minority in our sample. Although businesses
drive the change in the linguistic landscape of Tokyo
and Kanagawa, the COVID-19 signs they prepared
are nevertheless influenced by the government’s
COVID-19 campaign (i.e., avoiding the three Cs).
Social distancing messages, the second most common
message in our sample (cf. Table 1), are very likely
the stores’ response to the government’s call for
91
Asia-Pacific Social Science Review | Vol. 22 No. 3 | September 2022
people to avoid closed spaces, crowded places, and
close-contact settings. Frequently-occurring requests
for customers to limit their time on the premises and
the number of accompanying persons and the store’s
common policy to restrict the number of customers and
regularly ventilate their premises also indicate their
voluntary compliance to the three Cs.
However, these messages are presented differently
in COVID-19 signs, depending on the store (c.f. image-
only Sign 3 and Japanese-English bilingual Sign 5) or
even the governmental body (c.f. text-and-image Sign
4). These variations arise because of the need to respond
quickly to the rapid change brought by the pandemic
and the largely non-mandatory nature of Japan’s public
health policy. However, given the influence of the
government’s public health policy, there is probably
no clear distinction between top-down and bottom-up
COVID-19 signs. Many of these signs can perhaps be
described as hybrid notices as in Lees (2021), that is,
they convey government COVID-19 policy in a way
that fits the stores’ operations. However, a difference
between Lees’ hybrid signs in Greece and ours is
that they disseminate government-imposed safety
rules of which a breach would lead to a fine, whereas
ours tend to be guidelines and pleas for compliance.
It is uncertain whether the diversity of these signs
would remain in a post-COVID era or whether their
standardization would occur in a new normal (e.g.,
the use of standardized symbols for masking or hand
sanitization). The changes in COVID-9 signs over time
would be a topic for investigation in future research.
Our results also show that many COVID-19 signs
contain Japanese only, concurring with previous
Japanese linguistic landscape research on the
dominance of Japanese monolingual signs. The lack
of foreign tourists during the pandemic probably
contributes to their prevalence. These findings
concur with the multimodality and monolingualism
of COVID-19 signs elsewhere, for example, Canada
(Marshall, 2021). Only about a quarter of the signs in
our sample display a foreign language. Like earlier
research on public signs in Tokyo (e.g., Backhaus,
2007), we found that multilingual COVID-19 signs
are mainly Japanese-English bilingual signs. The
prevalence of Japanese-English bilingual signs
suggests an underlying assumption that foreigners who
cannot read Japanese would be able to read English.
Filipinos, who make up the fourth-largest minority
group in Japan in 2021 (Table 1-1, Immigration
Services Agency of Japan, 2021), may find English
and Japanese-English signs useful. However, Chinese,
Vietnamese, or Korean people, who make up the
first, second, and third largest groups of foreigners
in 2021, may have difficulty understanding them.
Long-term Chinese and Korean residents who have
lived in Japan for generations would be able to read
Japanese well. However, this is probably not the case
for the many work and student visa holders who have
recently arrived from China, Vietnam, Korea, and
other non-English speaking countries. They probably
have trouble reading English signs and have not yet
developed a functional use of the Japanese language.
Some local authorities provide guidelines for
multilingual signs. For instance, Tokyo’s Chiyoda
Ward (2022) considered the use of Japanese-English
bilingual signs to be desirable and further recommended
Chinese, Korean, or other languages to be added for
specific types of facilities. However, private authors
can still opt to display monolingual Japanese signs
should too many multilingual explanations affect the
sign’s overall readability. Businesses may not follow
these guidelines in a pandemic because Japanese
monolingual signs are their easiest and quickest
option. Consequently, we find a lack of multilingual
signs, which potentially makes many non-Japanese
residents linguistically disadvantaged when navigating
a linguistic landscape transformed by COVID-19.
Multilingual COVID-19 signs are likely to be even
fewer in less urban areas, so monolingual Japanese
signs may pose a greater challenge for foreign residents
living there.
The difficulty non-Japanese people potentially
face in deciphering monolingual Japanese signs can
be analyzed at several levels. Symbols and images in
a Japanese sign arguably offer the most clues about its
meaning. Fortunately, many of the signs in our sample
are multimodal, which enhances their intelligibility to
non-readers of Japanese. Positioning also offers useful
clues, but this only applies to signs placed near actual
objects such as a hand sanitizer, a bench, or a thermal
scanner. However, the meaning of decontextualized
messages (e.g., stay home if unwell) cannot be inferred
from where a sign is placed. Giving less assistance
than multimodality and positioning is the use of Easy
Japanese because basic Japanese reading ability is still
needed. Without either multimodality, positioning, or
even Easy Japanese, a monolingual Japanese sign (e.g.,
Sign 2) is incomprehensible to people who cannot read
92
Asia-Pacific Social Science Review | Vol. 22 No. 3 | September 2022
the language. In addition, a single COVID-19 sign
can carry multiple customer-related and staff-related
messages, which makes it harder for a non-Japanese
person to understand the preventive measures that
need to be followed when entering a store (cf. Sign
1). The inability to read COVID-19 signs can lead to
misunderstanding and potentially affects the health
and safety of the individual and society. At the very
least, a non-Japanese person may be baffled when he
or she is refused service at a half-empty restaurant or
told not to touch the store’s merchandise. Interviews
with non-Japanese residents about their understanding
and interpretation of COVID-19 signs would be a new
direction in this research.
Although multimodality and positioning may
make it easier to guess the meaning of a monolingual
Japanese COVID-19 sign, we cannot rely on them
entirely to decipher the sign’s message. Sign 4 includes
logographic kanji characters in its images, so one needs
some Japanese reading ability to understand it. Sign
7 is positioned right above a hand sanitizer. However,
the message is not a request for hand sanitization but
a warning about how one’s clothing might be stained.
Therefore, as much as multimodality and positioning
may help foreigners to interpret the meaning of
COVID-19 signs, they are by no means an adequate
substitute for a multilingual sign.
From the store’s perspective, displaying multilingual
signs may be difficult because these signs generally
take up more space at their entrances and on their
windows. Already, many signs carry multiple messages
in the Japanese language alone (cf. Sign 1). Adding
full translations in multiple languages would reduce
the readability of a sign. Sign 5 contains a fragmentary
translation, possibly because of this concern. Moreover,
English-Japanese bilingual signs are probably the most
common multilingual signs because store employees
can prepare them. Japanese people know English
because it is the de facto foreign language taught in
Japanese schools. However, many Japanese people
probably do not know other foreign languages well
enough to write them. Such practical limitations need
to be overcome for multilingual signs to become
more common in Japan’s linguistic landscape. Further
research involving interviews with private authors
is necessary to gain deeper insights into the lack of
multilingual COVID-19 signs.
Many multilingual signs provide duplicating
information in two languages, indicating that they are
also intended for non-Japanese readers. Signs partially
translated into English are meant for foreign readers
too. These partial English translations seem to have
been provided selectively and strategically for the
COVID-19 preventive measure deemed most important.
The English message in Sign 5, which reads “please
cover your mouth and nose properly with the mask,” is
more explicit than the Japanese message “please wear a
mask.” The longer English text with its more stringent
mask-wearing standards indicates a cautious approach
that does not assume that non-Japanese readers are on the
same page as Japanese readers as far as mask-wearing
is concerned. In giving a slightly different translation,
the way the English text interacts with the non-Japanese
reader differs from how the Japanese text interacts
with the Japanese reader. The polite and subtle appeal
for customers’ cooperation and understanding in the
Japanese text reflects Japanese socio-cultural norms.
However, the mask-wearing instruction embedded
in the English request may even offend some non-
Japanese readers of the sign. The difference in the
discursive function of English and Japanese messages
was previously noted by Saruhashi (2016) in her study
of bilingual signs in Tokyo’s Meiji Shrine. She observed
that English explanations are intended for one-off
foreign visitors, whereas Japanese messages invite
Japanese visitors to revisit the shrine for christenings,
weddings, and other ceremonies.
Conclusion
Although this study is limited in terms of its
sample, it provides insights into how COVID-19 has
transformed the linguistic landscape of Tokyo and
Kanagawa. It answers the first research question on the
types of COVID-19 signs in public spaces by finding
that they tend to display multiple messages related to
customer-related and staff-related policies. The stores
generally prepare these signs, but the government’s
COVID-19 policy influences their messages. In
answer to the second question about the extent to
which COVID-19 signs cater to foreign residents,
the results show that most signs are in Japanese only.
Only a quarter of the signs are multilingual, and most
multilingual signs contain Japanese and English
only. Therefore, COVID-19 signs are intended for
Japanese and non-Japanese people who can read either
Japanese or English. However, the majority of the
93
Asia-Pacific Social Science Review | Vol. 22 No. 3 | September 2022
foreign population are not English speakers and have
varying levels of Japanese reading ability, so even the
limited number of Japanese-English bilingual signs
may not help them navigate a linguistic landscape
altered by COVID-19. They may need to rely on
the symbols/images and positioning of monolingual
Japanese COVID-19 signs to decipher their meanings,
but neither is an adequate substitute for signage in a
familiar language. Even if most non-Japanese residents
can understand monolingual Japanese COVID-19
signs, multilingual signs are still necessary because
they have other positive effects, including building
trust and increasing adherence (Piller et al., 2020).
The display of multilingual signs is not only for
communication but also for social inclusion. Greater
visibility of multilingual signs to promote social
inclusivity would be an important consideration for
Japan as its society continues to diversify.
Acknowledgments
My sincere thanks go out to Mahiro Koito, Nanoha
Mitani, Ryunosuke Mochizuki, Ryo Moriichi, Hazuki
Sato, Yumeno Sekiguchi, Masaru Sotozono, Kiyomi
Tamura, Kai Watanabe, Yuto Yamaura, and Naoki
Yamazaki for their kind help in collecting the data. I am
also deeply grateful to the three anonymous reviewers
for their invaluable feedback on an earlier version of
this paper.
Declaration of ownership
This research article is my original work.
Conflict of interest
None.
Ethical clearance
My research institution does not require ethics
committee approval because this study is observational
and does not involve human participation.
References
Backhaus, P. (2007). Linguistic landscapes: A comparative
study of urban multilingualism in Tokyo. Multilingual
Matters.
Backhaus, P. (2010). Multilingualism in Japanese public
space - Reading the signs. Japanese Studies, 30(3),
359–372. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10371397.2010.5
18598
Ben-Rafael, E., Shohamy, E. Amara, M. H., & Trumper-
Hecht, N. (2006). Linguistic landscape and symbolic
construction of the public space: The case of Israel.
International Journal of Multilingualism, 3(1), 7–30.
https://doi.org/10.1080/14790710608668383
Blackwood, R., Lanza, E., & Woldemariam, H. (2016).
Negotiating and contesting identities in linguistic
landscapes. Bloomsbury.
Blommaert, J., & Maly, I. (2014). Ethnographic linguistic
landscape analysis and social change: A case study.
Tilburg Papers in Culture Studies, (100), 1-27. Retrieved
from https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?d
oi=10.1.1.938.66&rep=rep1&type=pdf
Chiyoda Ward. (2022). Chiyodaku koukyou sain gaidorain
[Chiyoda Ward’s public sign guideline]. Retrieved
April 4, 2022, from https://www.city.chiyoda.lg.jp/
documents/14544/signdesign-3.pdf
Immigration Services Agency of Japan. (2021). Zairyu
gaikokujin tokei [Statistics on foreign residents].
Retrieved January 3, 2022, from https://www.moj.go.jp/
isa/policies/statistics/toukei_ichiran_touroku.html
Inoue, F. (2016). Orinpikku no keizaigengogaku: Guuguru
kensaku to gengo keikan [The econolinguistics of the
Olympics: Google searches and linguistic landscape].
Journal of Japanese Language Teaching, 165, 3–17.
Retrieved April 10, 2022, from https://www.jstage.jst.
go.jp/article/nihongokyoiku/165/0/165_3/_pdf/-char/ja
Ito, H., & Tokarev A. (2021). From Yasashii Nihongo in
non-disaster times towards a plurilingual language
education approach: An outlook from the perspective
of “reasonable accommodation” [version 2; peer
review: 2 approved]. F1000Research, 10(52) https://
doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.36372.2
Japan National Tourism Organization. (2021). Visitor
arrivals, Japanese overseas travelers. Retrieved January
6, 2021, from https://www.jnto.go.jp/jpn/statistics/
marketingdata_outbound.pdf
Jiang, Y. (2009). Gengo keikan kenkyuu no genjou ni tsuite
[The current research situations of linguistic landscape].
Meikai Japanese Language Journal, 14, 67–75. http://
urayasu.meikai.ac.jp/japanese/meikainihongo/14/ko.pdf
Kalocsányiová, E., Essex, R., & Poulter, D. (2021). Risk
and health communication during Covid-19: A linguistic
landscape analysis. Health Communication. https://doi.
org/10.1080/10410236.2021.1991639
Landry, R., & Bourhis, R. Y. (1997). Linguistic landscape
and ethnolinguistic vitality: An empirical study. Journal
of Language and Social Psychology, 16(1), 23–49.
https://doi.org/10.1177/0261927X970161002
94
Asia-Pacific Social Science Review | Vol. 22 No. 3 | September 2022
Lees, C. (2021). ‘Please wear mask!’ Covid-19 in
the translation landscape of Thessaloniki: A cross-
disciplinary approach to the English translations of
Greek public notices. The Translator. https://doi.org/1
0.1080/13556509.2021.1926135
MacGregor, L. (2003). The language of shop signs in Tokyo.
English Today, 19(1), 18–23. https://doi.org/10.1017/
S0266078403001020
Marshall, S. (2021). Navigating COVID-19 linguistic
landscapes in Vancouver’s North Shore: Official
signs, grassroots literacy artefacts, monolingualism,
and discursive convergence. International Journal of
Multilingualism. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.20
20.1849225
Masai, Y. (1972). Tokyo no seikatsu chizu [A living map of
Tokyo]. Jiji Tsushinsha.
Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications. (2021).
Reiwa ni nen kokusei chosa jinko to kihon shūkei
[Reiwa 2 census: Summary of population]. Retrieved
September 8, 2022 from https://www.stat.go.jp/data/
kokusei/2020/kekka/pdf/summary_01.pdf
Mulyawan, I. W., & Artawa, K. (2021). Words and images
of Covid-19 prevention (A case study of tourism new
normal protocols signs). Cogent Arts & Humanities,
8(1), https://doi.org/10.1080/23311983.2021.1965713
Nagano, T., & Ito, A. (2015). YANSIS: An “Easy Japanese”
writing support system. [Poster presentation]. International
Conference ICT for Language Learning, Florence, Italy.
Retrieved April 4, 2022, from https://conference.pixel-
online.net/ICT4LL/acceptedabstracts_scheda.php?id_
abs=1295&id_edition=20&mat=ACA&wpage=ped
Piller, I., Zhang, J., & Li, J. (2020). Linguistic diversity in
a time of crisis: Language challenges of the COVID-19
pandemic. Multilingua, 39(5), 503–515. https://doi.
org/10.1515/multi-2020-0136
Reh, M. (2004). Multilingual writing: a reader-oriented
typology — with examples from Lira Municipality
(Uganda). International Journal of the Sociology
of Language, 170, 1–41. https://doi.org/10.1515/
ijsl.2004.2004.170.1
Saruhashi, J. (2016). Gengo keikan no esunogurafi:
Meiji jingu no nichiei keijibutsu hikaku o jirei toshite
[Ethnography of a linguistic landscape: A comparison
of Japanese and English signage at Meiji Jingu]. The
Japanese Journal of Language in Society, 19(1),
174–189.
Scollon, R., & Scollon, S. W. (2003). Discourses in place:
Language in the material world. Routledge.
Shohamy, E. (2006). Language policy: Hidden agendas and
new approaches. Routledge.
Someya, Y. (2002). Kanban no moji hyouki [Writing on
shop signs]. In Y. Hida & T. Sato (Eds.), Gendai nihon-
go kouza dai-6 kan: Moji hyouki [Modern Japanese
course volume 6: Letters and writing] (pp. 221–243).
Meiji Shoten.
Tan, M. S., & Ben-Said, S. (2015). Linguistic landscape and
exclusion: An examination of language representation
in disaster signage in Japan. In R. Rubdy & S. Ben-Said
(Eds.), Conflict, exclusion and dissent in the linguistic
landscape (pp. 145–169). Palgrave Macmillan.
Tanaka, Y., Kamikura, M., Akiyama, S., & Sudo, H. (2007).
Linguistic variability in the Tokyo metropolitan area:
A survey of the linguistic environment of department
stores. The Japanese Journal of Language in Society,
10(1), 5–17. https://doi.org/10.19024/jajls.10.1_5
Uekusa, S. (2019). Disaster linguicism: Linguistic minorities
in disasters. Language in Society, 48(3), 353–375.
https://doi.org/10.1017/S0047404519000150
