Digital Linguistic Landscapes: A Systematic Review of Language Education, Change, Identity, and Visibility

Digitalisation has extended linguistic landscape research beyond physical signage to social media, messaging applications, virtual learning environments, and online commercial spaces. However, scholarship on digital linguistic landscapes remains fragmented across educational, sociolinguistic, cultural, and policy-oriented perspectives. This systematic literature review synthesises current knowledge concerning the relationships between digital linguistic landscapes and language education, language change, identity construction, and language visibility. Guided by the PRISMA framework, relevant peer-reviewed journal articles published between 2018 and 2026 were identified through Scopus and Web of Science, screened against pre-defined eligibility criteria, and subjected to quality appraisal and integrative thematic analysis. Twenty studies were retained for the final synthesis. The quality assessment indicated a moderate level of overall quality, with a mean score of 4.15 out of 6, equivalent to 69.2%. Four themes emerged: Language Education, Digital Language Change, Language and Identity, and Language Visibility. The findings demonstrate that digital linguistic landscapes support reflective learning, intercultural competence, and critical language awareness, while facilitating multimodal communication, lexical innovation, grammatical variation, code-mixing, and culturally situated meaning-making. Linguistic and semiotic choices also contribute to the construction of personal, cultural, and commercial identities by indexing belonging, authenticity, prestige, and global orientation. At the same time, unequal language visibility reflects broader relationships involving institutional authority, language policy, and ethnolinguistic vitality, with English frequently occupying a dominant position over regional and indigenous languages. The review highlights the need to integrate digital linguistic landscapes into language education and promote more equitable multilingual representation online. Future research should adopt longitudinal, comparative, and mixed-method approaches to examine under-represented languages, platform algorithms, audience participation, and the relationship between online visibility and everyday language practices.

Digital linguistics landscape; language education; digital language change; language identity, language visibility

1. Alkhalil, S. F. A. (2025). Virtual linguistic landscape in Saudi Arabia: A sociosemiotic analysis of three entertainment events. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 15(2), 527–535. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1502.23 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

2. Alyeksyeyeva, I. O., Chaiuk, T. A., Kovalchuk, I. V., & Galitska, E. A. (2022). Making sense of texts: EFL students’ intercultural competence and interpretation depth. Arab World English Journal, 13(1), 104–116. https://doi.org/10.24093/awej/vol13no1.7 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

3. Biró, E. (2021). Speak global, sell local? Digital linguistic landscape of local small businesses in social media. Acta Universitatis Sapientiae, Philologica, 13(2), 177–193. https://doi.org/10.2478/ausp-2021-0020 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

4. Bisilki, A. K. (2025). Online linguistic landscaping and indigenous languages in multilingual Ghana. International Journal of Multilingualism, 22(3), 1794–1819. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2025.2465601 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

5. Bucholtz, M., & Hall, K. (2005). Identity and interaction: A sociocultural linguistic approach. Discourse Studies, 7(4–5), 585–614. https://doi.org/10.1177/1461445605054407 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

6. Cao, F. (2026). ‘Yo! Yo! Welcome to 茂名特产秀’: Identity construction of a new farmer on the online linguistic landscape of Douyin in China. International Journal of Multilingualism, 23(3), 1777–1803. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2025.2555717 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

7. Chew, M. E., Ng, L. S., Jaafar, N. M., & Yeap, C. K. (2024). Understanding Oriental and Western dragons in a globalised world: A cross-linguistic study of dragon-based metaphorical expressions in Chinese and English. 3L: Language, Linguistics, Literature, 30(4), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.17576/3L-2024-3004-01 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

8. Dunn, J., & Wong, S. (2025). Language contact and population contact as sources of dialect similarity. Languages, 10(8), 1-30. https://doi.org/10.3390/languages10080188 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

9. Herring, S. C. (2004). Computer-mediated discourse analysis: An approach to researching online behavior. In S. A. Barab, R. Kling, & J. H. Gray (Eds.), Designing for virtual communities in the service of learning (pp. 338–376). Cambridge University Press. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511805080.016 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

10. Hnatyuk, M., Diakiv, V., Sopina, O., Slobodzyanyk, O., & Nedashkivska, T. (2026). Virtual space and new language practices: Memes, slang, and lexical transformations. Lengua y Habla, 31, 115–127. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

11. Kamalova, A. (2025). Resemiotising globalisation and elitism: English-written neon signs in Kazakhstani coffee shops and on social media. International Journal of the Sociology of Language, 69–97. https://doi.org/10.1515/ijsl-2024-0089 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

12. Kitchenham, B. (2007). Guidelines for performing systematic literature reviews in software engineering. Technical Report, Ver. 2.3 EBSE Technical Report. EBSE. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

13. Kappassova, A. S., Adilova, A. S., Zeinulina, A. F., Khamzina, K. M., Umirbekova, A., & Zhaldybayeva, A. Z. (2024). Intertextuality in Kazakh, Russian, and English-language media. Eurasian Journal of Applied Linguistics, 10(3), 22–32. https://doi.org/10.32601/ejal.10303 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

14. Khilkhanova, E. V., & Khilkhanov, D. L. (2025). People and (linguistic) landscapes in the theory and practice of sociolinguistics (the case of Ulaanbaatar). Mongolian Studies, 17(2), 275–293. https://doi.org/10.22162/2500-1523-2025-2-275-293 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

15. 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 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

16. Lee, H. (2019). Konglish? Or multilingual practice? An investigation of subtitles in Korean TV shows. Korean Language in America, 23(1), 27–52. https://doi.org/10.5325/korelangamer.23.1.0027 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

17. Lockwood, C., Munn, Z., & Porritt, K. (2015). Qualitative research synthesis: Methodological guidance for systematic reviewers utilizing meta-aggregation. International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare, 13(3), 179–187. https://doi.org/10.1097/XEB.0000000000000062 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

18. Lomicka, L., & Ducate, L. (2021). Using technology, reflection, and noticing to promote intercultural learning during short-term study abroad. Computer Assisted Language Learning, 34(1–2), 35–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/09588221.2019.1640746 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

19. Lopriore, L. (2023). Revisiting language teacher education in an ELF aware perspective: Responses to innovations. Journal of English as a Lingua Franca, 12(2), 243–266. https://doi.org/10.1515/jelf-2023-2008 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

20. Lytvynska, S., Sabadosh, Y., Bahatska, O., Kovalenko, A., & Khomenko, T. (2026). Language dimensions of digital communication in the context of global integration. Lengua y Habla, 31, 20–32. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

21. Page, M. J., McKenzie, J. E., Bossuyt, P., Boutron, I., Hoffmann, T. C., Mulrow, C. D., Shamseer, L., Tetzlaff, J. M., Akl, E., Brennan, S. E., Chou, R., Glanville, J., Grimshaw, J. M., Hróbjartsson, A., Lalu, M. M., Li, T., Loder, E. W., Mayo-Wilson, E., McDonald, S., … Moher, D. (2021). The prisma 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. Medicina Fluminensis, 57(4), 444–465. https://doi.org/10.21860/medflum2021_264903 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

22. Penera, L. K. B. (2018). Philippine English: An exploratory mixed-methods inquiry on digital immigrants and digital natives’ variety. Asian EFL Journal, 20(12), 215–233. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

23. Pienimäki, H.-M., Väisänen, T., & Hiippala, T. (2024). Making sense of linguistic diversity in Helsinki, Finland: The timespace of affects in the linguistic landscape. Journal of Sociolinguistics, 28(2), 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1111/josl.12633 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

24. Rangsarittikun, R. (2025). Social media communication and the manifestation of language ideologies: A corpus-based approach. Journal of Research in Applied Linguistics, 16(1), 125–136. https://doi.org/10.22055/rals.2024.47185.3316 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

25. Schram, F. (2026). From enregisterment to commodification: Low German in the virtual linguistic landscape of commercial Instagram posts. Linguistic Landscape, 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1075/ll.25044.sch [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

26. Šliachtenko, J. (2025). Linguistic landscape and social media discourse of Russian-speaking schools in Visaginas (Lithuania). Slavistica Vilnensis, 70(2), 81–100. https://doi.org/10.15388/SLAVVILN.2025.70(2).6 [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

27. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes (M. Cole, V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner, & E. Souberman, Eds.). Harvard University Press. [Google Scholar] [Crossref]

• Assessment of the Role of Artificial Intelligence in Repositioning TVET for Economic Development in Nigeria
• Teachers’ Use of Assure Model Instructional Design on Learners’ Problem Solving Efficacy in Secondary Schools in Bungoma County, Kenya
• “E-Booksan Ang Kaalaman”: Development, Validation, and Utilization of Electronic Book in Academic Performance of Grade 9 Students in Social Studies
• Analyzing EFL University Students’ Academic Speaking Skills Through Self-Recorded Video Presentation
• Major Findings of The Study on Total Quality Management in Teachers’ Education Institutions (TEIs) In Assam – An Evaluative Study