Punctum, 2(2): 24-65, 2016 DOI: 10.18680/hss.2016.0013 Copyright © 2016 Costas Canakis. Licenced under the Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives (by-nc-nd). Available at https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Snapshots of the Balkans through Ethnographic Investigation of the Linguistic Landscape Costas Canakis This paper investigates the linguistic landscape of Dubrovnik and Kotor on the Southeastern Adriatic coast, and Mytilene in the north Aegean attempting a theorization of its fndings at the intersection of (socio)linguistics, ethnography, and semiotics, which has gained ground as the platform of choice in linguistic landscape (LL) research. I argue that the infux of both tourists and refugees, despite the obvious diferences between the two groups, has had radical consequences for the LL which have so far attracted virtually no attention in the relevant literature. And yet, tourism and the arrival of new populations have considerable and lasting efects on the LL which can only be adequately investigated by systematic ethno- graphic studies of the semiotic means employed in inscribing it. Nevertheless, ethnography, as a methodological sociolinguistic tool, cannot substitute or supersede cognitive aspects of language. If doing LL research means doing semiotic landscape research, then we also have to consider semiosis and higher-order indexicality qua categorization. I understand ethno- graphic LL research as contributing to a better comprehension of the dynamic indexical re- lation between language and physical space (turned into place through human agency). Just as a certain accent and particular morphosyntactic choices may index the place of origin of a speaker, a specifc LL may index populations and their socioeconomic relations at a certain historical moment. Focusing on these dynamic indexical relations may have far-reaching consequences for superdiversity as a way of making sense of language-in-society. KEYWORDS Linguistic landscape (LL), ethnography, Balkans, tourism, refugees Introduction By focusing on the linguistic landscape (LL) of Dubrovnik and Kotor, and Mytilene, this pa-