JURNAL KAJIAN BALI
Hlm. 01­—

Journal of Bali Studies

...

p-ISSN 2088-4443 # e-ISSN 2580-0698 Volume 15, Number 01, April 2025

Duplication, Fragmentation, and Overlapping:
Linguistic Landscape Dynamics of Tourist
Attractions in Gianyar, Bali
Sang Ayu Isnu Maharani1* , Ketut Artawa2 ,
Ida Ayu Made Puspani3 , Ketut Widya Purnawati4
1,2,3,4
Universitas Udayana, Indonesia
DOI: https://doi.org/10.24843/JKB.2025.v15.i01.p14

Abstract: With its rich array of tourist attractions, the Gianyar region in Bali features
numerous outdoor signs that contribute to its complex linguistic landscape. This
study investigates linguistic landscape patterns and text typologies using a qualitative
research method based on observation, note-taking, and photography. The analysis
follows the linguistic landscape framework by Landry and Bourhis (1997) and the
multilingual text typology by Reh (2004). Findings reveal that the linguistic landscape
of Gianyar’s tourist sites falls into cultural, village, museum, nature, and man-made
categories. Outdoor signage patterns are classified as top-down and bottom-up. Topdown signs predominantly feature duplicating and fragmentary text typologies,
while bottom-up signs incorporate duplicating, fragmentary, and overlapping
structures. These findings enhance the understanding of the linguistic landscape in
Gianyar, providing insights into its multilingual environment, particularly within
public spaces and tourist destinations.
Keywords: linguistic landscape; linguistic landscape pattern; multilingual text
typology; tourist attraction; Gianyar; Bali

1. Introduction
he key aspect of Linguistic Landscape (LL) is language visibility, which may
indicate status, powers, and identities within a social group in multilingual
surroundings (Plessis, 2011). The visibility of language is affected by the language
choice of a community, whether the choice is to maintain the mother tongue,
apply the national language, use foreign languages, or a combination of those
languages. It also provides insights into the discrepancies and conflicts between
official language policies, identities, and social changes (Backhaus, 2007; Woo

T

*

Corresponding author’s email: isnu_maharani@unud.ac.id
Submitted: 3 February 2025; Accepted: 5 April 2025; Published: April 2025
Copyright © 2025 by the author (s). This article is published by Jurnal Kajian Bali (Journal of Bali Studies),
University of Udayana, Bali, Indonesia, under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
(http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

http://ojs.unud.ac.id/index.php/kajianbali

377

Sang Ayu Isnu Maharani, Ketut Artawa, Ida Ayu Made Puspani, Ketut Widya Purnawati

Pp. 377—406

& Riget, 2022). Language visibility can be easily identified through the writing
form or various texts that showcase informative and specific intentions in public
spaces; it commonly referred to as multilingualism texts.
The choice of language on signs depends on the ‘presumed reader’, which
refers to writing a sign in the language that can be read by the public you expect
to read it. It prefers to write signs in the language or languages that intended
readers are assumed to read and interpret. This condition has an economic
motivation and informative function (Spolsky & Cooper, 1991).
Linguistic landscape has urged the attention of many scholars and
researchers from across the globe to explore how language is used in public
spaces and how words and images are displayed in outdoor signs. It has
provided a wide variety of multidiscipline research to find out meaning,
messages, identities, ideologies, functions, economic purposes, geographical
mapping, language policy, power status, and other related elements. This
is in line with Puzey’s statement which mentioned the position of linguistic
landscape as an interdisciplinary study of the presence of various language
issues that interact with other languages in public spaces (Puzey & Kostanski,
2016). It is interrelated with various fields of study, such as sociolinguistics,
globalization, anthropological linguistics, and ethnography linguistics (Goebel,
2020). Other studies may include cultural geography, semiotics, literature,
education, social psychology, multilingualism, etc. The various interactions in
public spaces enable us to trace how language as a symbolic construction of a
space can mediate social, cultural, and political relations.
Linguistic landscape concerns with street names, place names,
advertisements, traffic signs, offices, information boards, shop signs, and
others, as well as everything related to urban information. According to Landry
and Bourhis (1997), Linguistic Landscape terminology refers to the visibility
and salience of language in public and commercial signs in a given territory
or region. It is proposed that the linguistic landscape serves as important
informational and symbolic functions as a marker of the relative power and
status of the linguistic communities inhabiting the territory.
There are two significant dimensions of linguistic landscape as a
theoretical framework for analyzing public signs. First, linguistic landscape is
a development of Sociolinguistics and Ethnolinguistic studies that highlight
the use of a written language in public spaces or certain specific areas. Second,
linguistic landscape is a multilingual approach that innovatively seeks to
examine, study, and describe the linguistic situation or landscape in an area,
whether monolingual, bilingual, or multilingual (Artawa et al., 2020; Mulyawan,
2021).
378

JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

Pp. 377—406

Duplication, Fragmentation, and Overlapping: Linguistic Landscape ...

The exploration of linguistic landscape in Indonesia has been carried
out by some linguists, such as Syamsurijal (2023), Pramadhani, et al. (2022),
Purnawati et al. (2022), Paramarta (2022), Puspani et al. (2021), Artawa and
Sartini (2018), and Mulyawan (2019).
The exploration of linguistic landscape above mentioned reflects the
visibility and importance of language in a community; not only in providing
information, but also the power and status of the language used in public
spaces, such as shopping centre, heritage area, virtual space, coastal island, and
tourism areas.
The existing research concerning linguistic landscape in Bali have
discovered Kuta area, Sanur area, Nusa Penida Island, and Tabanan regency,
which featured temples. The fact that no research has been conducted in the
art regency of Bali becomes a prominent consideration why this research was
conducted in the realm of Linguistic Landscape. Gianyar Regency known as one
of the heritage regencies in Indonesia, and it is considered one of the leading
tourist destinations which comprises two tourist areas, they are Ubud and
Lebih. This tourist area consists of sixty-on tourist attractions, which positioned
Gianyar as a place with the most tourist attractions.
This research aims to examine and provide an overview of the linguistic
landscape in public spaces, with a particular focus on tourist attractions in
Gianyar, Bali. In these tourism-centric areas, they appears to be a preference
among the local Balinese population for using foreign languages over the
Balinese language. This phenomenon is influenced by Indonesia’s, and
particularly Bali’s reliance on developed countries, especially within the
context of the tourism industry (Beratha et al., 2017). Therefore, this study seeks
to investigate language preferences in public spaces. In addition, it aims to
contribute to the development of linguistic research, particularly in the areas
of Sociolinguistics, Linguistic Landscape studies, and multilingualism. The
findings are expected to offer practical insights, serving as a reference and point
of reflection not only for academics but also for tourism destination managers.
Moreover, the research is anticipated to be of value to tourism policymakers
and the local government of Gianyar.
2. Literature Review
There are ample studies that concern with Linguistic Landscape in
Indonesia and also outside of Indonesia. Mulyawan (2019), Artawa and
Sartini (2018), Purnawati (2022), Paramarta (2022), and Puspani et al. (2021)
are Indonesian linguists whom Bali-based researchers that concern with LL in
Bali. Syamsurizal (2023) examined LL in the public space of Makasar, South
Sulawesi. Mubarok et al. (2024) investigated LL in a tourist area in Lembang,
JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

379

Sang Ayu Isnu Maharani, Ketut Artawa, Ida Ayu Made Puspani, Ketut Widya Purnawati

Pp. 377—406

Bandung, West Java. Their research is relevant to the present study, which seeks
to explore the dynamics of the linguistic landscape in a tourism destination in
Bali.
The previous research conducted by Mulyawan (2019) and Artawa and
Sartini (2018) were both concerned with the linguistic landscape in one of the
well-known tourism destinations, Kuta. On the other hand, Purnawati et al.
(2022) examined the heritage area of Jalan Gajah Mada in Denpasar, which is
characterized by a more tranquil and classic atmosphere. Although this setting
presents a stark contrast to the vibrant ambiance of Kuta, both locations share
a similar status as prominent and must-visit tourism destinations in Bali.
Paramarta’s work emphasized more on the mapping of the linguistic landscape
in educational areas and how it was perceived virtually. The other scholars,
Syamsurizal (2023) and Mubarok et al. (2024), both are current scholars who
analyzed how linguistic landscape is seen in Makasar through its shopping
centers and Lembang tourist area in Bandung, West of Java.
The previous studies were taken into the review for this research due
to the fact that those research have similar highlight that concern commonly
with tourism areas. The use of English as international language was found
dominant from the findings of Mulyawan (2019), Artawa and Sartini (2018), and
Puspani et al. (2021).
On the other hand, some scholars from outside of Indonesia can be seen
in the writing of Huebner (2006), who examined the linguistic landscapes of
15 Bangkok neighborhoods, and Rafael et al. (2006) examined and compared
patterns of linguistic landscape in a variety of homogeneous and mixed Israeli
cities and East, Jerusalem Kasanga (2012) examined linguistic landscape
in Central Phnom Pen, Xia & Lisheng (2016) they examined languages in
the linguistic landscape of Lijiang old town, Shang & Guo (2017) explored
the display of multiple languages in shop names presented in Singapore’s
neighborhood centers.
The foreign scholars above mentioned were also taken as a review of
literature for this research because their research give contribution to a better
understanding of the linguistic landscape in foreign countries. Their research
highlighted the visibility and the usage of language in society, not only their local
language but also the use of English as the globalized language. Both Huebner
and Ben Rafael et al. (2006) examined the linguistic landscape in big cities,
namely Bangkok and Israel. The findings in Bangkok fostered a comprehensive
understanding of codemixing and information regarding the position of
English. Meanwhile, the findings in Israel give insight into the discrepancies
between the linguistic landscape of public and private sectors of the Israeli
community. Kasanga’s work (2012), which focused on a neighborhood in the
380

JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

Pp. 377—406

Duplication, Fragmentation, and Overlapping: Linguistic Landscape ...

commercial district of Phnom Pen, Cambodia gives contribution to the writing
of this article. Not only did his work preview how multilingualism flourishes,
but also mapped the language choice or visibility of the locus of research. Xia
& Lisheng (2016), Shang & Guo (2017), their writings give insight into how
prominent language use is in a multilingual area.
Both Indonesian and foreign scholars above mentioned portrayed the
language visibility and societal conditions of how the communities use their
language. This research tries to analyze how the linguistic landscape dynamic
in tourism areas of Gianyar Regency of Bali is presented. The dynamic of the
linguistic landscape is seen from the pattern distribution and the text typology,
which has not been found in other research.
3. Method and Theory
The methodological basis of this research is elucidated in the following
lines. First, the focus of this research is bilingual texts (Indonesian into English
or English into Indonesian) of outdoor signs of tourist attractions in Gianyar
Regency. Second, the focus of this research is part of linguistic landscape
paradigm which examines the representation of language as a sign system in
public spaces.
The location of this research was in Gianyar Regency of Bali Province,
based on several considerations:
(a) The results of a research concerning bilingual texts in outdoor signs in
tourist attractions of Gianyar Regency have not been found;
(b) Gianyar is entitled to its position as a unified geographical and administrative
area that is a tourism destination area, including all elements that establish
the tourism system within it. It is one of eight regencies in Bali that has the
greatest number of tourist attractions compared to other regencies. There
are sixty-one (61) tourist attractions in this area (Tourism Office of Bali
Province, 2022).
(c) Tourist attractions in Gianyar Regency exhibit relatively complex
characteristics, encompassing natural, rural, cultural, museum-based, and
man-made tourism. As a result, the region presents a rich and diverse array
of outdoor signage, contributing to a particularly dynamic and intriguing
linguistic landscape.
3.1 Method
The research approach is a design that describes the research process that
will be conducted. Research design is needed to determine various possibilities
and other necessary completeness (Moleong, 2005). Based on the statement, it
can be defined that this research is designed with a qualitative approach that
JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

381

Sang Ayu Isnu Maharani, Ketut Artawa, Ida Ayu Made Puspani, Ketut Widya Purnawati

Pp. 377—406

applies field research in a naturalistic setting. The natural setting is not only a
primary place for observing subject interaction but also allows the observer to
incorporate field outcomes into the study itself (Bogdan & Biklen, 2007).
This research also applies non-participatory observation and note taking,
image capture commonly known as photography techniques. Observation is a
method of collecting data by collecting materials obtained through careful and
systematic observation of the target object being studied (Sugiyono, 2006). The
observation focuses on bilingual outdoor signs of Gianyar’s tourist attractions.
The image capture was conducted for two months; June-July 2024. The outdoor
signs were photographed based on the categories of the linguistic landscape
dynamics.
Note-taking involved to highlight the important notes that are necessary to
be written during the whole process of collecting data and analysis. Meanwhile,
photography technique is a way of collecting relevant data for visual objects.
Even though this technique can be used simultaneously with observation, the
photography technique cannot be done alone. The photography technique can be
done and followed up with cropping and focusing the necessary part to present
photos that are considered to have important meaning in data analysis. There
were 415 data were collected from the tourist attractions. The photographs were
taken based on categories reflecting the dynamics of the linguistic landscape.
This categorization was made to demonstrate various aspects of the region’s
identity and social values being represented in public space. The result of the
photographs taken was listed, compiled, and categorized, further analyzed
based on the applied theory.
The data collected by finding linguistic landscape of outdoor signs in
tourist attractions in Gianyar, Bali. The data limited into bilingual (Indonesian
into English or English into Indonesian) outdoor signs, and the outdoor signs not
include political pamphlet, or unnecessary banners. The unnecessary banners
refer to advertisement of various products, which not relate to data collection.
Data reduction is the process of sorting and selecting, focusing on
simplifying, validating, and transforming raw or rough data obtained in the
field. The collected images or photos were sorted and selected. Selfie photos,
tourist attraction board names, unclear photos, and repetitive photos that were
being taken were carefully selected and moved aside. There were fifty data
taken to be analyzed and expected to be able to represent the whole data. The
data was sorted according to the linguistic patterns. Later, they grouped into
top-down or bottom-up patterns. The data were also classified into types of
multilingual texts typology. The presentation of data aims at finding meaningful
patterns and providing possibilities for conclusions and action. Drawing
conclusions or verification is based on the reduction and presentation of data
382

JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

Pp. 377—406

Duplication, Fragmentation, and Overlapping: Linguistic Landscape ...

carried out previously. These three stages occur continuously in the qualitative
cycle (Miles & Huberman, 1992). The stages include ten elements, they are: the
focus of research, the appropriateness of paradigm with the research focus, the
appropriateness of paradigm with substantive theory, research subject, research
stages, research technique, the procedure of collecting data, data analysis,
research instrument, and data validity checking (Lincoln & Guba, 1985).
The data later being classified and analyzed based on the theory applied.
The theory applied to this research is the Linguistic Landscape theory by Landry
& Bourhis (1997). It also applied multilingual text typology by Reh (2005). The data
is presented descriptively and supported by static descriptive to give elaboration of
the found data. Static descriptive is statistics that summarize or describe features of
a data set, such as its central tendency or dispersion. It helps to explain the features
of a specific data set by giving short summaries about the sample or measures of the
data, which can be presented by histogram or bar diagram.
3.2 Theory
The theory of Landry & Bourhis (1997) is applied to this Linguistic
Landscape research. Landry & Bourhis (1997) defined Linguistic Landscape as
the language of public road signs, advertising billboards, street names, place
names, commercial shop signs, and public signs on government buildings
combined to form the linguistic landscape of a given territory, region, or urban
agglomeration. Meanwhile, Gorter & Cenoz (2008) added that the study of
linguistic landscape focuses on the analysis of written information available on
language signs in a specific area.
Landry & Bourhis (1997) show the strong relation between community,
space, and language. It states that the most basic informational function of the
linguistic landscape is that it serves as a distinct marker of the geographical
territory inhabited by a given language community, [...] inform[ing] in-group
and out-group members of the linguistic characteristics, territorial limits, and
language boundaries of the region where they have entered. The meaning that
can be understood from this statement is that LL has an important function to
inform the linguistic status of a community that inhabits a certain area, as well
as informing other communities or groups that enter that area that they are
in a different geographical area and linguistic landscape. Furthermore, Landry
& Bourhis (1997) also emphasized that writing in the linguistic landscape is a
symbolic marker that shows community relationships with their relative power
and status. Thus, linguistic landscapes has two main functions, the informative
function and the symbolic function.
Linguistic landscape emphasizes how a space is managed and negotiated
together. It provides a source and significant reference point where people
JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

383

Sang Ayu Isnu Maharani, Ketut Artawa, Ida Ayu Made Puspani, Ketut Widya Purnawati

Pp. 377—406

understand themselves and their connection to other people in one place. Within
this context, language plays significant role in negotiating the in-group and outgroup community to realize solidarity awareness about the space where they
do their activity, interaction, and communicating each other (Peck et al., 2019).
The presence of outdoor signs becomes the source and preference to realize
sociocultural negotiation to effectively occur through language media.
The use of language in the community does not have a partial position in
social life because there is always a language that being prioritized, based on
several factors such as language policy, commercialism, or the close relationship
of a language with the certain community (Lotherington, 2013)
Other linguists, Gorter (2006) defined linguistic landscape as the exact
study of language as it appears on the signage, and from the other side of
the language portrayal, which is extremely important, it connects to identity,
cultural globalization, the growth of the English language, and the revitalization
of minority languages. All the writings seen in public commonly deliver
specific meanings and also messages. They can be featured as in commercial
or non-commercial signs. To differentiate the signs, it is represented in ‘topdown’ and ‘bottom-up’ classifications (Shohamy and Gorter, 2009; Backhaus,
2007; Blommaert & Maly, 2014; Cenoz & Gorter, 2007). Top-down terminology
is intended for authorities and public bureaucracies, and covers public places,
public announcements, and street names.
Meanwhile, bottom-up terminology is intended for private parties,
individuals, and social actors, such as shop owners, company signs,
advertisements, personal announcements, and private companies. For topdown features, usually, there are certain concepts or procedures that need to
be followed, such as rules/instruction as it is instructed from the top (national
level) to down (grass-root level). However, this must not be applied when it
concerns with bottom-up linguistic landscape classification. The majority of the
signs or outdoor signs will have no certain concept or procedures; they usually
performed with various creative ideas, types of writing, colors, and designs.
Rafael et al. (2006) defined the primary distinction between the two
categories as that the top-down is considered to signify a general commitment to
the dominant culture, for example, the local language. Whereas, the bottom-up
is more flexible since it is produced by individuals to follow recent phenomena.
Thus, it can be said that the main difference between top-down, and bottom-up
is the actors who issued the sign.
The above statements have clearly highlighted the differences in the
linguistic landscape pattern. Besides the actor who issued the signs, it can also
be seen that the target audience of both the top-down and bottom-up categories
is dedicated to the society of certain areas. The top-down pattern usually
384

JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

Pp. 377—406

Duplication, Fragmentation, and Overlapping: Linguistic Landscape ...

conveys rules or regulations that needed to be paid attention to or followed,
presented with a formal written style and completed with the logo of the local
government because it is provided by authorities or public bureaucracies. It is
dedicated to society in general and particularly to specific communities; within
this context, the signs are dedicated to visitors. On the other hand, the bottomup pattern tends to use a less formal written style, free color, and creative ideas
are welcome, and within this context, it is intended for tourists (domestic or
foreign tourists).
The need for multilingual written texts of all types in the community due
to the fact of the growth of societal and individual multilingualism. The type of
texts depends on a variety of factors, such as the number of languages present,
language policy, the status of speakers, the self-esteem of speakers, the reader
orientation of text suppliers, etc. Thus, the number and type of these texts reflect
the social layering within a community (Reh, 2005).
Reh (2005) analyzes multilingual writings, and there are four types of
multilingual information that can be arranged on signs. They are:
1. Complementary multilingual information: The text is composed in
multiple languages. To understand the message fully, the speaker must
possess knowledge of all languages presented. By doing so, particular
information cannot be accessed by a monolingual speaker (Reh, 2005).
2. Fragmentary multilingualism: The text is given in one language but
selected information is translated into another. The purpose is to draw the
attention of a speaker with limited knowledge of the translated language.
This type of information arrangement also addresses speakers focusing on
keywords (Reh, 2005).
3. Duplicating multilingual information: The exact same text is presented
in more than one language. Here, the information is presented to a target
speaker, which cannot be reached by one language only (Reh, 2005). It can
also be used for educational purposes.
4. Overlapping multilingual information: There are two types of texts:
One text offers additional and/or similar information to another text.
Monolingual speakers can derive information from only one text, while
multilingual speakers receive additional information from both texts.
The Linguistic Landscape theory applied to this research is to investigate
the linguistic dynamics in tourist’ attractions of Gianyar Regency. The dynamics
of the linguistic landscape can be seen through the pattern distribution of the
outdoor signs in tourist attractions of Gianyar Regency as formulated in the first
problem and also to the text typology of the outdoor signs in tourist attractions
of Gianyar Regency as the second formulated problem.
JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

385

Sang Ayu Isnu Maharani, Ketut Artawa, Ida Ayu Made Puspani, Ketut Widya Purnawati

Pp. 377—406

4. Result and Discussion
4.1 Result
This part elucidates the findings of the research and analyzes the findings
based on the underlying theories applied. The linguistic landscape dynamics
are represented in the pattern distribution of the outdoor signs and also the text
typology of the found outdoor signs in tourist attractions in Gianyar, Bali.
According to the Bali Tourism Office Statistic (2022), there are sixtyone (61) places that included as tourist attractions in Gianyar Regency. Those
tourist attractions are categorized into five linguistic landscape dynamics, they
are: (1) Nature, (2) Culture, (3) Village, (4) Museum, and (5) Man-made. This
categorization was made to demonstrate various aspects of the region’s identity
and social values being represented in public space. Each of those categories
symbolizes a specific culture and social value that influences the linguistic and
visual representation found in the tourist attraction.
Table 1. Linguistic Landscape categorization of tourist attractions in Gianyar
Number Categorization of Linguistic
Landscape dynamics

Outdoor signs

Tourist attractions
in Gianyar

1
2
3
4
5

Nature
6
20
Culture
14
12
Village
27
8
Museum
34
6
Man-made
335
15
Total
415
61
Sources: Bali Tourism Office Statistic (2022) and Research Result (2025).

Table 1 shows the 415 data found in 61 tourist attractions in Gianyar.
It was found that there are twenty (20) places categorized as nature, twelve
(12) places included as culture, eight (8) places categorized into villages, six
(6) places of museum category, and fifteen (15) places included as man-made
attraction.
Nature includes beaches, rice paddy, river valley, cliff temple, natural
cave, and waterfall. The nature shows there were six (6) outdoor signs found.
Culture includes temples and palaces. There were fourteen (14) outdoor signs
found in the culture category. Village categorization shows six (6) villages and
two (2) urban villages; the villages are Batubulan, Celuk, Batuan, Bona, Mas,
and Peliatan, and the other two (2) urban villages are Ubud and Gianyar. There
were found twenty-seven (27) outdoor signs. Museums that are included as
tourist attractions in Gianyar are Museum Arma, Neka, Puri Lukisan, Rudana,

386

JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

Pp. 377—406

Duplication, Fragmentation, and Overlapping: Linguistic Landscape ...

Blanco, and Purbakala. There were thirty-four (34) outdoor signs in this
category. Man-made attraction exposes fifteen (15) places, such as Bali Bird
Park, Reptile Park, Bali Safari Marine Park, Elephant Park and others. It includes
the biggest number of outdoor signs of tourist attractions; there were 335 signs
found in this category. The finding shows that there was a significant difference
in number between the nature and man-made categories.
4.1.1 Linguistic Landscape Pattern of Tourist Attractions in Gianyar
Referring to Ben-Rafael’s theory, this sub-section elucidates the findings
of linguistic landscape patterns found in the outdoor signs of tourist attractions
of Gianyar, Bali. The distinctions made are the top-down category and the
bottom-up category. The top-down category is considered to signify a general
commitment to the dominant culture, for example, the local language. Whereas,
the bottom-up is more flexible since it is produced by individuals to follow
recent phenomena.
The top-down patterns found in the locus of research showed information
and instruction that need to be paid attention by local or foreign visitors, such
as regulation and retribution. The top-down patterns can be identified by the
government’s official logo or the picture of the regent and vice-regent displayed
on many of the outdoor signs. It also can be identified by the use of common
and basic colors like black and white materials for notice board or banner. This
is the prominent feature that can easily and obviously seen in the found outdoor
signs. The commitment of applying the national language before the foreign
language was also shown in major outdoor signs of this pattern. Unlike topdown patterns, bottom-up patterns showed major information about outdoor
signs. They are displayed in more free and creative writings and also applied
to the variation of colors. There are no certain rules for bottom-up patterns
outdoor signs. It can be displayed in varied fonts, writing styles, colors, and
materials. The language used tends to put foreign language and then followed
by Indonesian. The orientation of outdoor signs of this pattern is dedicated to
foreign visitors as seen in a major display that prioritizes the use of English,
and then followed by Indonesian. The outdoor signs mostly provided by the
management of the tourism attractions or the private sector.
Figure 1 describes the Linguistic Landscape pattern of outdoor signs in
tourist attractions in Gianyar, Bali. The blue bar represents a top-down pattern
and the orange bar represents a bottom-up pattern. The figure shows the spread
of the LL pattern of outdoor signs in tourist attractions in Gianyar Bali. It was
found that all categories applied bottom-up and top-down categories.

JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

387

Sang Ayu Isnu Maharani, Ketut Artawa, Ida Ayu Made Puspani, Ketut Widya Purnawati

Pp. 377—406

Figure 1. Linguistic Landscape pattern of outdoor signs in tourist attractions in
Gianyar, Bali
The figure shows that culture category has 15 % of top-down pattern and
85 % of bottom-up pattern. Village category shows 19% of top-down pattern
and 81% of bottom-up pattern. A total of 41% of top-down category is shown
in museum category, and it features 59% of bottom-up pattern. The nature
category features 33% of top-down pattern and 67% of bottom-up pattern. In
man-made, the top-down pattern can be seen only 2% and 98% were bottom-up
pattern. The top-down outdoor sign patterns showed that the museum category
reached the highest application compared to other categories. The museum
category is followed by the category of nature, village, culture, and man-made
category.
The bottom-up outdoor signs pattern shows that the man-made
category becomes the highest application of outdoor signs compared to the
other categories. This category is followed by the category of culture, village,
museums and nature. To have a closer look at the distinction of both patterns,
the instances of both signs are presented in the following.
Photo 1 and Photo 2 both show examples of bottom-up, and top-down
patterns found in the culture category, which exposed informative functions.
Photo 1 was taken in Tirta Empul temple and Photo 2 was taken in Gunung
Kawi temple. Photo 1 was provided by the management of the temple, while
the outdoor sign of Photo 2 was provided by the government, it can be seen
through the logo of the regency in the upper left of the board.

388

JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

Pp. 377—406

Duplication, Fragmentation, and Overlapping: Linguistic Landscape ...

Photo 1. Information-bottom up pattern (Photo: Sang Ayu Isnu Maharani)

Photo 2. Instruction- top-down pattern (Photo: Sang Ayu Isnu Maharani)
The outdoor sign of Photo 1 gives information about the open hours
of the temple. It also includes information for people not to enter the temple
when the time has closed. Unlike Photo 1, the above top-down pattern features
JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

389

Sang Ayu Isnu Maharani, Ketut Artawa, Ida Ayu Made Puspani, Ketut Widya Purnawati

Pp. 377—406

things that need to be done before entering the temple; the outdoor sign was
provided during the Corona period and still can be found until the period when
the photograph was taken. The outdoor sign features instructions to (a) wear a
mask, (b) wash hands, and (c) keep distance.
The pattern instances shown above have met the criteria stated by Rafael
et al., (2006). The top-down pattern as shown in Photo 2 was issued by the
authority, the local government of Gianyar, it can be seen that the logo of the
local government is included in the display of the above outdoor signs. The
writing of the outdoor signs is shown in Indonesian (upper part) and has the
English version (below the Indonesian part). The color of the outdoor sign was
presented in black color as the base color, with white color below; it showed
the very basic color of a standardized outdoor sign. The instruction displayed
on the outdoor signs is dedicated not only to the local community of the
surrounding area but also dedicated for visitors (local or foreign who visit this
place, Gunung Kawi temple).
The bottom-up outdoor sign pattern shown in Photo 1 was provided by
the management of Tirta Empul temple (private/ community). The writing of
the outdoor sign is similar to the top-down pattern, it showed that Indonesian
is used in the upper part of the outdoor signs and has the English version below
that. The color of the outdoor signs was presented in a more attractive color, a
combination of blue (upper part) and black (below part), completed with red
(the square list) and also the highlighted information which features the open
hour of the place. The white color is applied to show the ‘notice’ part and the
other information on the outdoor signs was presented in yellow color. In a
bottom-up pattern, writing style, and creative ideas are welcome and there is no
limitation on color usage.
Althusser (2008, in Beratha et al., 2017) stated that there is a certain purpose
in using language. The purpose of people using language in such a way is to get
noticed and to be followed by others. Within the context of linguistic landscape,
the use of language in the written form of the outdoor signs has a similar
purpose to what Althusser mentioned. It aims to get noticed and to be followed
by others. The outdoor signs provided aim to give information, prohibition,
warning, and instruction for the society. The existence of the outdoor signs is
also aimed to be followed by others, particularly the visitors who come to the
tourism destinations; not only the local or domestic visitors but also foreign
visitors.
The difference use of language as mentioned above can be seen in
the linguistic pattern as they are displayed in the outdoor signs. The use of
Indonesian followed by English can be seen mostly in the top-down category.
390

JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

Pp. 377—406

Duplication, Fragmentation, and Overlapping: Linguistic Landscape ...

This happened due to the fact that the national language usage has been
regulated in Law Number 24 Year 2009 concerning the flag, language, national
symbol, and national anthem. The statement is stipulated in the article 36 as
written in the following:
“Indonesian must be used for the names of buildings or structures,
streets, apartments or residential areas, offices, trade complexes,
trademarks, business institutions, educational institutions,
organizations established or owned by Indonesian citizens or
Indonesian legal entities “(Article 36).
The above article emphasizes the importance of the national language
(Indonesian) to be prioritized use or display in the above-mentioned. The topdown pattern reflects the application of the national law as it is instructed from
the top (national level) to down (grassroots level). Unlike the top-down pattern,
the bottom-up pattern does not follow certain rules or regulations, and how
the language used and displayed is free and creative. The major finding of
this pattern, there were found many outdoor signs featured foreign language
and then followed by Indonesian. The outdoor signs tend to prioritize the use
of English rather than Indonesian. Referring to Althusser’s statement, many
bottom-up outdoor sign patterns are available aimed to get notice from foreign
visitors because the dominant language used is English and completed by the
Indonesian versions. The outdoor signs usually provided by the management
of the tourist attraction, the private sector, or individuals who have concerns
and the right to access those places.
4.1.2 Linguistic Landscape Text Typology in Tourist Attractions of Gianyar
This subsection explains the text typology of outdoor signs in tourist
attractions of Gianyar Bali. Referring to Reh’s, which distinguishes multilingual
text writing, the finding of this research tries to elucidate whether complementary,
fragmentary, duplicating, or overlapping are found and featured in the dynamic
of linguistic landscape in the locus of research. The finding of the research is
presented in the following figure.
Figure 2 shows various text typologies of outdoor signs in the Linguistic
Landscape of tourist attractions in Gianyar, Bali. Figure 2 features four colored
bars which identify each type of outdoor sign writing, they are: (1) the blue bar
represented duplicating, (2) the dark orange bar featured fragmentary, (3) the
grey bar showed overlapping, (4) the light orange showed complimentary.

JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

391

Sang Ayu Isnu Maharani, Ketut Artawa, Ida Ayu Made Puspani, Ketut Widya Purnawati

Pp. 377—406

Figure 2. Linguistic Landscape text typology of outdoor signs in tourist
attractions in Gianyar, Bali
The finding of the research shows that duplicating writing occurs in
all linguistic landscape dynamic categories. Duplicating writing is a type of
multilingual text typology, which features the exact same text that is presented
in more than one language. The information is presented to the target reader,
which cannot be reached by one language only. Duplicating writing occurred
100 % in the museum category, and then followed by 85% in the category of
village, 69% in culture, 65% in man-made, and 50% in nature. The highest
percentage of duplicating is shown in the museum category, it shows the full
application of duplicating. Duplicating is a kind of writing, which features one
piece of information presented in Indonesian and duplicated in English version.
The second major application of duplicating writing can be seen in the category
of village and then followed by culture, man-made, and nature.
Photo 3 shows an example of duplicating multilingual writing found
in museum category, located in Arma Museum. The outdoor sign features
information about plants in the surrounding museum. The English version is
represented into ‘Yellow Frangipani Tree’ and it is duplicated in Indonesian
version into ‘Pohon Kamboja Kuning’. The information also includes its Latin
terminology.

392

JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

Pp. 377—406

Duplication, Fragmentation, and Overlapping: Linguistic Landscape ...

Photo 3. Information - Duplicating multilingual writing (Photo: Sang Ayu Isnu
Maharani)
In regards to fragmentary writing, we may notice that the application of
this text typology is similar to duplicating writing, it is shown in all categories.
However, it displayed in smaller numbers compared to duplicating writing.
Fragmentary is defined as the text is given in one language but selected
information is translated into another. The purpose of this type of text is to draw
the attention of readers with limited knowledge of the translated language. This
type of information arrangement also addresses readers focusing on keywords.
The finding of text typology of fragmentary in outdoor signs in tourist
attractions in Gianyar regency showed that 50% can be seen in the nature
category, followed by 31% in the culture category. In the category of village,
the fragmentary writing is 15%. It can be shown that 6% was found in the manmade category, and none (0%) was found in the museum category.
Photos 4 and 5 are examples of fragmentary writing found in Mas village
and Tirta Empul temple. Photo 4 features outdoor signs of a place for rent, and
photo 5 shows outdoor signs of informative text. Photo 4 was found in Mas
village and featured a multilingual text of Indonesian, English, and Russian.
Within the bilingual framework of this research, the outdoor signs only focused
on the Indonesian lines ‘Dikontrakkan’, and the English version (translation) in
English is ‘For Rent’. This outdoor sign was included in fragmentary writing due
to the fact there was only some part of the information that had been translated
JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

393

Sang Ayu Isnu Maharani, Ketut Artawa, Ida Ayu Made Puspani, Ketut Widya Purnawati

Pp. 377—406

into English. The writing displayed taken Indonesian to be placed in the upper
part of the banner, followed by the use of English and also Russian. Other
information, such as WhatsApp number and email only written in English. The
other information under the phrase ‘For Rent’, was displayed in Russian. The
color of the banner displayed in Photo 4 is yellow, with a contrasting alphabet
color of red.

Photo 4. Information-Fragmentary writing (Photo: Sang Ayu Isnu Maharani)

Photo 5. Information-Fragmentary writing (Photo: Sang Ayu Isnu Maharani)
394

JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

Pp. 377—406

Duplication, Fragmentation, and Overlapping: Linguistic Landscape ...

Photo 5 was found in the surroundings of Tirta Empul temple. It showed
an informative function but also implicitly conveyed a persuasive function. The
information conveyed about throwing the garbage in the appropriate place
and keeping the belongings safe and a strong statement, which mentioned that
the management of Tirta Empul temple will not take any responsibility for
the lost and stolen property. The writing was displayed in Indonesian (three
lines), and the English version was displayed below the Indonesian (two lines).
The outdoor sign was displayed on a blue-colored banner with white-colored
alphabets or writing.
-Buanglah sampah pada tempatnya		
-Jagalah keamanan barang-barang anda		
-Kami tidak bertanggungjawab atas kehilangan
Barang-barang anda 				

No translation/English version
-Watch your belonging
-No responsibility will be taken
for lost and stolen property

The outdoor sign included into fragmentary writing due to the fact that
there are not all lines are being translated or provided into English text; as it
seen in above first line. The phrase of ‘Buanglah sampah pada tempatnya’ does
not feature its English version or translation. The phrases have been featured
fragmentedly.
Overlapping text was also found in the outdoor signs of linguistic
landscape in tourist attractions in Gianyar Bali. This type was found in the manmade category and in the culture category. The overlapping consists of two
types of texts; One text offers additional and/or similar information to another
text. Monolingual speakers can derive information from only one text, while
multilingual speakers receive additional information from both texts.

Photo 6. Information-Overlapping writing (Photo: Sang Ayu Isnu Maharani)
JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

395

Sang Ayu Isnu Maharani, Ketut Artawa, Ida Ayu Made Puspani, Ketut Widya Purnawati

Pp. 377—406

Photo 7. Information-Overlapping writing (Photo: Sang Ayu Isnu Maharani)
Photo 6 and Photo 7 show examples of overlapping in the man-made
category and culture category. Photo 6 shows the outdoor sign of Bali Zoo Park,
which features information text that describes about tiger activities. The writing
was displayed in English and Indonesian. It can be identified into overlapping as
seen in the line ‘roarrrr-ing’ which written in capital. The rest of the information
displayed is duplicated but the additional information of the first line completed
the description of the text, thus it categorized into overlapping. The outdoor
sign displayed in creative writing, design, and color. There are no certain rules
needed for the written of bottom-up type pattern as seen in Photo 6.
Photo 7 also shows overlapping writing in the culture category. The
outdoor signs found in Tirta Empul Temple, which represent information and
also implicitly convey prohibition text. The writing displayed English in the
upper part and Indonesian below. It contains a prohibition to not throwing coin
into the fish pond. The additional word of ‘attention’ makes the text is included
into overlapping because there is no equivalent word of translation or provided
in the Indonesian version.

396

JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

Pp. 377—406

Duplication, Fragmentation, and Overlapping: Linguistic Landscape ...

Photo 8. Information-Balinese Inscription (Photo: Sang Ayu Isnu Maharani)

Photo 9. Information-Balinese Inscription (Photo: Sang Ayu Isnu Maharani)
4.2 Discussion
The relation of community, space, and language has been shown in the
linguistic landscape dynamics of tourist attractions in Gianyar. The need of
community to introduce tourism in the surrounding area to wider audience
is done in many ways such as by strengthening the city branding and also
increasing the quality service of tourism. It can be seen for instance from the
availability of tourism infrastructures and other supporting elements such as
outdoor signs that provided in many tourism destinations.
Outdoor signs represent language visibility and language choice, which
displayed in the written form. Language visibility concerns with how the
language is represented, whether it is monolingual, bilingual, or multilingual.
JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

397

Sang Ayu Isnu Maharani, Ketut Artawa, Ida Ayu Made Puspani, Ketut Widya Purnawati

Pp. 377—406

The finding of the outdoor signs in Gianyar showed that major language
visibility was using bilingual, the national language (Indonesian) and English.
It was also found in other foreign languages such as Japanese and Russian. The
use of Japanese and Russian reflects that this tourist attraction is popular among
visitors from both countries. The mother tongue, Balinese and its inscription
was also can be seen in several outdoor signs. A few instances can be seen from
the above Photo 8 and Photo 9. Those photos were found in the surroundings
of Monkey Forest. The outdoor signs were included as duplicate writing and
completed by Balinese inscription. Within the spread of all tourist attractions,
the finding of outdoor signs with Balinese inscription was limited because it can
only be found in the Ubud area of Monkey Forest; other tourist attractions do
not include the Balinese inscription. This finding reflects language maintenance
and revitalizing the mother tongue in public spaces.
We may be aware that a public place is an open place that is accessible
and visible for everyone to spend time for recreation, social interaction or
commerce, and other activities. The display of Balinese inscriptions in the
outdoor signs of tourism areas shows identity, positive attitude, strong concern
of the local government to maintain the existence of the mother tongue in the
midst of globalization, and the tendency of people losing their identity, and their
language. This fact shows an implementation of the Regulation of Governor Bali
Number 1 Year 2018, which is concerned with the maintenance, revitalization,
and development of the Balinese language, script, and literature. The presence
of written language displayed through outdoor signs with Balinese inscriptions
describes the tourism capability to participate and take a role in the effort to
maintain the local language.
In both photos, Photo 8 and Photo 9, we can see that the Balinese
inscriptions were placed at the very bottom of the display. The upper text is
in Indonesian, the middle text is written in English, and the bottom part is
written in Balinese inscription. Photo 8 shows information on the location of
Pura Dalem Agung (Indonesian), followed by the Main temple (English), the
bottom part is displayed with Balinese inscriptions duplicating the Indonesian
version. Another piece of information displayed in Photo 8 is the phrase Pintu
Keluar (Indonesian), Exit Gate (English), and Pamedalan (written in Balinese
inscription with Balinese lexical). In addition to Photo 8, Photo 9 also shows five
pieces of information with display concept as seen in Photo 8, they are the use
of Indonesian followed by English and Balinese inscriptions. The information
is about Panggung Terbuka, Conservation Forest, Exhibition Room, Toilet, and
First Aid. Those five texts are written also in duplicate writing of Indonesian,
and Balinese inscriptions with Balinese lexical placed at the bottom of the
display. Regarding the display, there are no particular rules that accommodate
398

JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

Pp. 377—406

Duplication, Fragmentation, and Overlapping: Linguistic Landscape ...

language rules in public space, for that reason, there was a controversial law
established in 2018, it was the Governor Regulation Number 18 Year of 2018.
The regulation obliges all government and private organizations to add Balinese
script transliteration to be placed on outdoor signs above names in other
languages, as stated in Chapter IV, article 6 point 1 (a) to (i). This regulation is
considered a deviation from National Law Number 24 Year 2009 concerning the
flag, language, state symbol, and national anthem. Both Photo 8 and 9 have not
shown the implementation of this governor regulation, Balinese inscriptions in
both photos were placed in the bottom part of those three languages.
Besides the visibility, linguistic landscape can also influence the choice
of the language used, whether the language used is mother tongue, national,
foreign language, or a mix of both and many. The findings showed that the
combination of bilingual, Indonesian and English, were major findings through
the presence of outdoor signs in the surrounding tourist attractions. There
were also found few multilingual outdoor signs that provided in those tourists’
attractions. This circumstance reflects the language situation of Gianyar.
The language situation shows that language maintenance is preserved, the
national language is respected and foreign languages are mastered. The ability
of the Gianyar people to learn, adapt, and try to master foreign languages
demonstrates linguistic capability and the attitude of respecting culture as well
as the awareness to be involved in the economic circle growth that affects the
welfare of the Gianyar people. This is in line with the statement of Yendra &
Artawa, which stated that the linguistic landscape concept is to describe and
analyze the language situation of a community and country (Yendra & Artawa,
2020).
The writing of the outdoor signs functions as a symbolic marker, which
reflects the status and power of a community. The status of Gianyar as one
of the heritage cities in Indonesia provides the opportunity for the society or
community to put more concern and effort in maintaining the historical and
social values through tourism. Tourism has become the vein of the economy
in Indonesia, Bali, in particular Gianyar. It creates jobs, strengthens local
economies, contributes to the development of local infrastructure, and can
help preserve the natural environment as well as cultural assets and traditions,
reducing poverty and inequality. For that reason, tourism has been a major
concern for Bali and its people, including Gianyar.
Gianyar also represents the power to change not only to Balinese people
and the surroundings but also the wider community in Indonesia and even
international. One of the examples can be seen through the spread of written
information of the outdoor signs promoting spiritual tourism. The written
information was eventually able to affect people’s desire to visit to Tirta Empul
JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

399

Sang Ayu Isnu Maharani, Ketut Artawa, Ida Ayu Made Puspani, Ketut Widya Purnawati

Pp. 377—406

temple to do purification (melukat) activity. According to Gianyar’s statistics in
2023, the number of visitors of 45.957 (2021) has increased significantly to 959.322
(2023) to this temple. This shows that the power of language is able to drive
people and become promotive identity. This situation emphasizes Jarworsky’s
statement, which mentioned that outdoor signs also create a sense of place as a
performative and promotive identity display (Jarwosky, 2010). Outdoor signs
not only function as symbolic markers, but can also feature various functions
such as informative, prohibitive, warning, commanding, apologizing, and
welcoming (Susini et al., 2021).
In regards to its function as informative signs, this research found that
the linguistic outdoor sign patterns were dominated by the bottom-up patterns.
The major pattern can be found was in the linguistic landscape of man-made.
This fact implicitly shows that the role of the private sector can be considered
enormous in influencing the language situation in Gianyar. The found outdoor
signs demonstrate the use of foreign language (English) in the upper part of the
display and Indonesian version or the translation, which is placed below. This
shows that the orientation of the outdoor signs is intended for foreign tourists
as the “presumed readers”.
The choice of language to be written on the outdoor signs has the
economic motivation and informative function (Spolsky & Cooper, 1991). The
bottom-up patterns not only have the intention to give information but also
to attract visitors as part of tourism activity to enhance the economic flow of
the place. The dominant use of English into Indonesian texts in the outdoor
signs of many bottom-up patterns in Gianyar relates to the findings of Ben
Rafael et al (2006), Mulyawan (2019), Artawa and Sartini (2018), Puspani et al.
(2021), Xia & Li (2016), and Shang & Guo (2017). All of their findings highlight
the importance of English in big or well-known cities and how English as
the globalized language has taken its prominent position in the public area
of society. The outdoor signs in Gianyar also present the discrepancies of the
private and government roles regarding the language situation in a community.
It portrays societal conditions where the private sector plays a bigger portion
of the language used in the tourism industry. In addition, the minor findings of
other foreign languages that were being used in the outdoor signs signify how
multilingualism flourished in Gianyar.
In regard to the finding of multilingual writing typology, it was found
that top-down outdoor sign patterns feature duplicating and fragmentary
writing. Duplicating is mostly found in the type of descriptive, warning,
commanding, and prohibitive texts. This aims to be able to give exact and whole
information well transferred in the other language. The bottom-up outdoor sign
patterns demonstrate the type of writing, such as duplicating, fragmentary,
400

JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

Pp. 377—406

Duplication, Fragmentation, and Overlapping: Linguistic Landscape ...

and overlapping. These three types are not bound by any pattern or concept
as they become the characteristics of bottom-up patterns. This finding gives
an additional overview of how multilingual writings are portrayed in public
spaces, particularly in tourist attractions of Gianyar, Bali.
5. Conclusion
The Linguistic Landscape of tourist attractions in Gianyar, Bali features
a dynamic landscape which can be identified from the distribution of outdoor
sign pattern and their text typology. The finding of the research shows that there
are five linguistic landscape categorizations, they are culture, nature, village,
museum, and man-made. The linguistic landscape patterns found were bottomup and top-down, they were found in all categories. The top-down pattern
showed that the museum category reached the highest percentage of 41%, and
the man-made category reached the lowest percentage of 2%. The bottom-up
pattern can be found in all categories of Linguistic Landscape dynamics. It can
be found that the man-made category shows the highest application, reaching
98%. The least bottom-up pattern found was in the museum category of 59%.
Top-down outdoor sign patterns have the form of duplicating and
fragmentary text typologies. In duplicating writing, 15% of outdoor signs were
classified into top-down patterns, and 58% were found in bottom-up signs.
Meanwhile, the fragmentary writing showed a 4% of top-down pattern and a
12% of bottom-up pattern. Bottom-up outdoor signs pattern has more variation
in text typology, they are duplicating, fragmentary, and overlapping. The form
of complimentary text typology was not found in this research because there
were no outdoor signs found where the information was conveyed separately
in different languages. The form of duplicating text typology is the one most
often found in both top-down and bottom-up signs.
The language visibility seen in the Linguistic Landscape of tourist
attractions in Gianyar showed bilingual and multilingual conditions. The
mixed-use of Indonesian as the national language, English as the international
language, and other foreign languages represents the societal condition of
Gianyar Regency as a tourism destination. English as the globalized language
that has been dominantly “conquered” public spaces in major parts of the world,
including Gianyar, Bali. At the same time, the mother tongue of Balinese has been
maintained through tourism in this area, not only to comply with government
regulations but also as a way to emphasize Balinese identity through the use of
Balinese script. The availability of top-down outdoor sign patterns should be
taken into consideration by the local government of Gianyar in the future; the
number of outdoor signs provided by the local government should be added
or increased in the Linguistic Landscape of culture and village. Besides, further
JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

401

Sang Ayu Isnu Maharani, Ketut Artawa, Ida Ayu Made Puspani, Ketut Widya Purnawati

Pp. 377—406

research on the Linguistic Landscape in Gianyar awaits to be explored from the
multilingual and semiotic perspectives.
Acknowledgment
I would like to extend my sincere gratitude to the local government of
Gianyar and the Tourism Office of Gianyar, for allowing me to conduct this
research. Doctoral Linguistic Program, Yuna and Guna Winata who have
assisted with data collection. Thank you to Desak Tia and Bu Gung Ambari
who have assisted the field research. Sanjeet, Wahyu, GMK Arisena, Gitayani
for sincere assistance. Prof. Darma Putra who has given valuable critiques for
the betterment of this writing.
Bibliography
Althusser, L. (2008). Tentang Ideologi : Marxisme strukturalis, psikoanalisiss, cultural
studies. Jalasutra.
Artawa, K., Mulyawan, I. W., Satyawati, M. S., & Erawati, N. K. R. (2020).
Balinese in Public Space (A Lingustic Lanscapes Study in Kuta Village).
Journal of Critical Reviews, 7(7), 6–10. https://www.jcreview.com/paper.
php?slug=
Artawa, K., & Sartini, N. W. (2018). Linguistic landscapes: A study of human
mobility and identity change. Urban Studies: Border and Mobility, 165–172.
https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429507410-26
Backhaus, P. (2007). Linguistic Landscapes: A Comparative Study of Urban
Multilingualism in Tokyo. Multilingual Matters.
Beratha, N. L. S., Sukarini, N. W., & Rajeg, I. M. (2017). Balinese language ecology:
Study about language diversity in tourism area at Ubud village. Jurnal
Kajian Bali (Journal of Bali Studies), 7(2), 121–134. https://doi.org/10.24843/
JKB.2017.v07.i02.p07
Blommaert, J., & Maly, I. (2014). Ethnographic Linguistic Landscape Analysis
and social change: case-study from Ghent. In K. Arnaut, J. Blommaert,
B. Rampton, & M. Spotti (Eds.), Language and Superdiversity. Routledge.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264992781_Ethnographic_
Linguistic_Landscape_Analysis_and_social_change_A_case_study
Bogdan, R., & Biklen, S. K. (2007). Qualitative research for education. An introduction
to theories and methods (5th ed.). Pearson Education, Inc.
Cenoz, J., & Gorter, D. (2007). Knowledge about language and linguistic
landscape. In N. H. Hornberger (Ed.), Encyclopedia of Language and
Education (2nd revise, pp. 1–13). Springer Science.
402

JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

Pp. 377—406

Duplication, Fragmentation, and Overlapping: Linguistic Landscape ...

Goebel, Z. (2020). Semiotic Landscapes: Scaling Indonesian Multilingualism.
Jurnal Humaniora, 23(3), 191–205. https://doi.org/10.22146/jh.57647
Gorter, D. (2006). Introduction: The Study of the Linguistic Landscape as a New
Approach to Multilingualism. International Journal of Multilingualism, 3(1),
1–6. https://doi.org/10.21832/9781853599170
Gorter, D., & Cenoz, J. (2008). Knowledge about language and linguistic
landscape. Encyclopedia of Language and Education, 6, 343–355.
Huebner, T. (2006). Bangkok’s Linguistic Landscapes: Environmental Print,
Codemixing and Language Change. In D. Gorter (Ed.), Linguistic
Landscape: A New Approach to Multilingualism (pp. 31–52). Multilingual
Matters. https://doi.org/0.1080/14790710608668384
Kasanga, L. A. (2012). Mapping the linguistic landscape commercial
neighbourhood in Central Phnom Penh. Journal of Multilingual and
Multicultural Development, 33(6), 553–567. https://doi.org/10.1080/014346
32.2012.683529
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
Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic Inquiry. Sage Publications.
Lotherington, H. (2013). Creating Third Spaces in the Linguistically
Heterogeneous Classroom for the Advancement of Plurilingualism”.
TESOL Quarterly, 47(3), 619–625. https://doi.org/10.1002/tesq.117.
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1992). Analsis Data Kualitatif. Qualitative Data
Analysis) Universitas Indonesia.
Moleong, L. J. (2005). Metodologi Penelitian Kualitatif. Qualitative Research
Methodology) Rosdakarya.
Mubarok, Y., Sudana, D., Nurhuda, Z., & Yanti, D. (2024). Linguistic landscape
in the tourist area, Lembang Bandung, Indonesia. World Journal of English
Language, 14(2), 230–243. https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v14n2p230
Mulyawan, I. W. (2019). Chinese in Kuta Bali (A Case Study of Social Cultural
Acculturation). Symposium on Vitalizing and Booming ASEAN-China, People
to People Exchange, 72–76.
Mulyawan, I. W. (2021). Maintaining and revitalising Balinese language in
public space. Indonesia and the Malay World, 49(145), 481–495. https://doi.
org/10.1080/13639811.2021.1910356
Paramarta, I. M. S. (2022). Kontestasi Bahasa pada Tanda Luar Ruang di Daerah
Pariwisata (Language Contestation On The Public Signs In A Touristic
Area). Sawerigading, 28(1), 63–79. https://doi.org/10.26499/sawer.
v28i1.1003
JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

403

Sang Ayu Isnu Maharani, Ketut Artawa, Ida Ayu Made Puspani, Ketut Widya Purnawati

Pp. 377—406

Peck, A., Stroud, C., & WIlliams, Q. (2019). Making Sense of People and Place
in Linguistic Landscapes (A. Peck, C. Stroud, & Q. Williams (eds.)).
Bloomsbury Publishing.
Plessis, T. du. (2011). Language visibility and the transformation of geographical
names in South Africa. Journal of Taylor and Francaise, 40(2), 215–238.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10228190903188542
Pramadhani, A. I., Munawarah, S., Wahyudi, I., & Datang, F. A. (2022).
Lanskap Linguistik di Kawasan Wisata Kota Malang: Studi Kasus di Kawasan
Kayutangan (Landscape Linguistic of Tourism City Malang: Study Case in
Kayutangan area). Makalah dan Kertas Kerja Universitas Indonesia.
Purnawati, K. W., Artawa, K., & Satyawati, M. S. (2022). Linguistic Landscape of
Jalan Gajah Mada Heritage Area in Denpasar City. JURNAL ARBITRER,
9(1), 27–38. https://doi.org/10.25077/ar.9.1.27-38.2022
Puspani, I. A. M., Sosiowati, I. G. A. G., & Indrawati, N. L. K. M. (2021). Purposes
of Writing Signposts: The Case of the Signposts in Nusa Penida. Journal of
Current Science Research and Review, 4(1), 59–69. https://doi.org/10.47191/
ijcsrr/V4-i1-10
Puzey, G., & Kostanski, L. (2016). Names and Naming: People, Places, Perceptions
and Power (G. Puzey & L. Kostanski (eds.)). Multilingual Matters. https://
doi.org/https://doi.org/10.21832/9781783094929
Rafael, E. Ben, Shohamy, E., Amara, M. H., & Hecht, N. T. (2006). Linguistic
Landscape as Symbolic Construction of the Public Space: The Case of
Israel. International Journal of Multilingualism, 3(1), 7–30. https://doi.
org/10.21832/9781853599170-002
Reh, M. (2005). 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
Shang, G., & Guo, L. (2017). Linguistic landscape in Singapore: what shop
names reveal about Singapore’s multilingualism. International Journal of
Multilingualism, 14(2), 183–201. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2016.121
8497
Spolsky, B., & Cooper, R. L. (1991). The languages of Jerusalem. Clarendon. https://
doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780198239086.001.0001
Sugiyono. (2006). Metode Penelitian kuantitatif (R & D. Alfabeta (eds.)).
Susini, M., Ana, I. W., & Sujaya, N. (2021). Function of Verbal Signs in Public
Spaces. In The 3rd Warmadewa Research and Development Seminar, WARDS
2020. Denpasar-Bali, Indonesia. https://doi.org/http://dx.doi.org/10.4108/
eai.21-12-2020.2305854
404

JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

Pp. 377—406

Duplication, Fragmentation, and Overlapping: Linguistic Landscape ...

Syamsurijal, & Iswary, E. (2023). Language Use In Public Space (Linguistic
Landscape Study In Shopping Centers In Makassar City). International
Journal of Social Science, 3(2), 113–122. https://doi.org/10.53625/ijss.
v3i2.6295
Woo, W. S., & Riget, P. N. (2022). Linguistic landscape in Kuala Lumpur international
airport, Malaysia. 45(5), 404–423. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1080/01
434632.2020.1742724
Xia, N., & Lisheng, L. (2016). Studying Languages in the Linguistic Landscape
of Lijiang Old Town. International Journal of English Linguistics, 6(2), 105.
https://doi.org/10.5539/ijel.v6n2p105
Yendra, & Artawa, K. (2020). Lanskap Linguistik: Pengenalan, Pemaparan, dan
Aplikasi. Introduction, Exposure and Application).Deepublish.
Authors’ Profiles
Sang Ayu Isnu Maharani is one of the teaching staffs at the Faculty of Humanities,
Udayana University, Bali Indonesia. She is an assistant professor and a certified
assessor of Public Relation. She is also a public speaking coach, translator &
interpreter. She teaches skills, literature and linguistic. Her research interests
are in sociolinguistic, translation study, & anthropological linguistic. She has
translated legal documents, books and University’s documents. She entrusted
to translate Master Plan of Gianyar 2015-2019 & the book of Gianyar as the
Heritage City. She was elected participant representing Udayana University for
bridging progam in NDHU Taiwan in 2019. Email: isnu_maharani@unud.ac.id
Ketut Artawa is a professor of linguistics at the Faculty of Humanities Udayana
University, Bali Indonesia. He obtained his MA in Linguistics in1992 and PhD
in Linguistics in 1995 from La Trobe University, Melbourne. He was a visiting
Professor at the Research School of Pacific Studies, the Australian National
University (October 2009-January 2010) and a Visiting Professor at the Research
Institute for Languages and Cultures of Asia and Africa (ILCAA/ AA-ken),
Tokyo University of Foreign Studies (TUFS), Japan (2011-2012). His research
interests are in the fields of syntax, semantics, language typology, and linguistic
landscape. Email: ketut_artawa@unud.ac.id
Ida Ayu Made Puspani is a Professor at Bachelor of English Literature Faculty
of Humanities Udayana University, Bali Indonesia. She obtained her post
graduate study in Linguistics in 2003 major in Translation Study and Doctorate
Program in 2010. She joined the Sandwich Program at Flinders University
JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025

405

Sang Ayu Isnu Maharani, Ketut Artawa, Ida Ayu Made Puspani, Ketut Widya Purnawati

Pp. 377—406

Adelaide Australia in 2009 from October up to December. She has published
books Reading Comprehension and Guided Reading. Her research interests
are translation, interpreting, language maintenance and Eco linguistics. Email:
made_puspani@unud.ac.id
Ketut Widya Purnawati has been a lecturer at Udayana University, Bali,
Indonesia, since 2001, and is an associate professor in the Japanese Literature
Study Program. She graduated from the Department of Japanese Literature at
Padjadjaran University in 2000. She graduated from the Master Program in 2009
& Doctoral Program in 2018 from Udayana university. She attended Long-term
Training for Japanese Language Teachers at the Japan Foundation, Saitama,
Japan. In 2015 she was awarded a Research Grant from the Hyogo Overseas
Research Network to conduct joint research at Kobe Women’s University. Her
research interest is in the field of linguistics focusing in syntax, typological
linguistics, & landscape linguistics. Email: tuti@unud.ac.id

406

JURNAL KAJIAN BALI Vol. 15, No. 01, April 2025