‘Together, soon enough’

Abstract

Orienting to theoretical descriptions of ‘affective-discursive practices’ (Wetherell, 2012) and linguistic/semiotic landscapes as ‘affective regimes’ (Wee, 2016), this paper accounts for (some of) the complex ways in which the experience of pandemic and lockdown was articulated and felt across the landscape of Melbourne. I employ a novel combination of autoethnographic and citizen sociolinguistic approaches as self-reflexive research techniques. Working more-or-less chronologically, from the lowest ebbs to feelings of (relative) joy, importantly, this paper does not focus solely on negative articulations such as sadness or anxiety. Rather, it examines the affective resonance of expressions of love, kindness, and resilience in the landscape, and these affects’ intersection with chronotopes during and since isolation; from being locked down, to keeping spirits up, from top-down to bottom-up. This paper concludes with an orientation to hope: to Melburnians’ rejoicing in what they’ve achieved, and the belief that there can be an end to crisis.

A tale of three global cities: A comparative account of Dubai, Kuala Lumpur and Hong Kong’s multilingual repertoires evidenced in their Covidscapes as part of Covid-19 crisis and public health communication

“…In a North American setting, Marshall (2023) scrutinised COVID-related linguistic landscapes in Vancouver, Canada. Specially focusing on the affective-discursive aspect, Comer (2022) explored Melbourne’s pandemic linguistic landscape in Australia. In a middle east context, Hopkyns and van den Hoven (2022) examined Abu Dhabi’s linguistic landscape during the pandemic.…”

Making sense of linguistic diversity in Helsinki, Finland: The timespace of affects in the linguistic landscape

“…Research on affects in the linguistic landscape considers signs as performative (Borba, 2019), that is, as attempts to structure space (Wee & Goh, 2019, p. 8). The material emplacements of language can manage or regulate the public display of affect (Wee & Goh, 2019, p. 8), evoke contestation and partake in a political crisis (Borba, 2019, p. 163), as well as resonate hope amidst crises such as a pandemic (Comer, 2022), assign the landscape a rhythm that fluctuates and reflects the national, cultural, and ethnic identities of its inhabitants (Niedt, 2020), and mediate relationships among locals (Stroud and Jegels, 2014). In these studies, the materiality of the landscape, and the analyst's interpretation of it is given primacy, although many of the studies also draw on interviews (e.g., Niedt, 2020; Stroud & Jegels, 2014).…”