In this study we investigated how people using different languages interact and communicate in an internet-based virtual environment, Active Worlds. The focus was on situations where a new language is introduced in a conversation held in another language. With this we wanted to establish an understanding of: (1) the intentions of introducing a new language; (2) the response to this language introduction; (3) the consequences of language introduction; and (4) the factors influencing rejection or acceptance of language introduction. We found that the response to language introduction depends mainly on: (1) type of language; (2) character of the setting; and (3) perceived intention of language introducers. We found that non-English speakers and regular English-speaking users in less public, ‘themed’ settings are most tolerant to other languages. Apart from national languages, we also studied encounters between users familiar with ‘insider’ jargon - as against users not familiar with it.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Allwood, J. (1995) ‘Language Communication and Social Activity’ , in K. Junefelt (ed.) special session on Activity Theory, Proceedings of the XIVth Scandinavian Conference of Linguistics and the VIIIth Conference of Nordic and General Linguistics in Gothenburg, Papers in Theoretical Linguistics 73, Dept. of Linguistics, University of Göteborg, Gothenburg, Sweden, 16-21 August 1993.
2.
Allwood, J. (2000) ‘An Activity Based Approach to Pragmatics’, in H. Bunt and B. Black (eds) Abduction, Belief and Context in Dialogue: Studies in Computational Pragmatics, pp. 47-80. Philadelphia: John Benjamins .
3.
Allwood, J. and R. Schroeder (2000) ‘Intercultural Communication in Virtual Environments’ , Intercultural Communication3 (April), URL (consulted 9 October,2003): http://www.immi.se/intercultural/nr3/allwood.htm
4.
Becker, B. and G. Mark (2002) ‘Social Conventions in Computer-mediated Communication: a Comparison of Three Online Shared Virtual Environments’, in R. Schroeder (ed.) The Social Life of Avatars: Presence and Interaction in Shared Virtual Environments, pp. 19-39. London: Springer .
5.
Cherny, L. (1999) Conversation and Community: Chat in a Virtual World. Stanford, CA: CSLI .
6.
Crystal, D. (1997) English as a Global Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press .
7.
Crystal, D. (2001) Language and the Internet. New York: Cambridge University Press .
8.
Danet, B., L. Ruedenberg and Y. Rosenbaum Tamari (1998) ‘Hmmm... Where’s that Smoke Coming From? Writing, Play and Performance on Internet Relay Chat’, in F. Sudweeks, M. McLaughlin and S.Rafaeli (eds) Network and Netplay: Virtual Groups on the Internet, pp. 41-76. Menlo Park, CA: AAAI Press/MIT Press .
9.
Du Bartell, D. (1995) ‘Discourse Features of Computer-mediated Communication: “Spoken-like” and “Written-like”’, in B. Wårvik, S.-K. Tanskanen and R. Hiltunen (eds) Organization in Discourse, Anglicana Turkuensia 14, pp. 231-239. Turku: University of Turku .
10.
Fishman, J. (1998-9) ‘The New Linguistic Order’ , Foreign Policy113 (Winter): 26-40 .
11.
Goffman, E. (1959) The Presentation of Self in Everyday Life. New York: Doubleday .
12.
Graddol, D. (1997) The Future of English? A Guide to Forecasting the Popularity of the English Language in the 21st Century. London: British Council .
13.
Hiltz, R.S., K. Johnson and M. Turoff (1986) ‘Experiments in Group Decision-making: Communication Process and Outcome in Face-to-face Versus Computerized Conferences’ , Human Communication Research13: 225-252 .
14.
Jeffrey, P. and G. Mark (1999) ‘Navigating the Virtual Landscape: Co-ordinating the Shared Use of Space’, in A. Munro, K. Höök and D. Benyon (eds) Social Navigation of Information Space, pp. 112-131. London: Springer Verlag .
15.
Johansen, R., J. Vallee and K. Spangler (1979) Electronic Meetings: Technical Alternatives and Social Choices. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley .
16.
Kiesler, S., J. Siegel and T.W. McGuire (1984) ‘Social-Psychological Aspects of Computer-mediated Communication’ , American Psychologist39(10): 1123-1134 .
17.
Misztal, B.A. (2000) Informality: Social Theory and Contemporary Practice. London: Routledge .
18.
Phillipson, R. (1992) Linguistic Imperialism. Oxford: Oxford University Press .
19.
Salem, B. and N. Earle (2000) ‘Designing a Non-Verbal Language for Expressive Avatars’ , in E. Churchill and M. Reddy (eds), Proceedings: Collaborative Virtual Environments CVE ‘2000, San Francisco, 10-12 September, pp. 93-101 .
20.
Schiffman, H.F. (1996) Linguistic Culture and Language Policy. London: Routledge .
Schroeder, R. (ed.) (2002) The Social Life of Avatars: Presence and Interaction in Shared Virtual Environments. London: Springer .
23.
Schroeder, R., N. Heather and R. Lee (1998) ‘The Sacred and the Virtual: Religion in Multi-User Virtual Reality’ , Journal of Computer-mediated Communication4(2), available online: http://www.ascusc.org/jcmc/vol4/issue2/schroeder.html
24.
Short, J., E. Williams and B. Christie (1976) The Social Psychology of Telecommunications. London: John Wiley .
25.
Smith, M., S. Farnham and S. Drucker (2002) ‘The Social Life of Small Graphical Chat Spaces’, in R. Schroeder (ed.) The Social Life of Avatars: Presence and Interaction in Shared Virtual Environments, pp. 205-220. London: Springer .
26.
Tsuda, Y. (2000) ‘Envisioning a Democratic Linguistic Order’ , TESL Reporter33(1): 32-38 .
27.
Werry, C.C. (1996) ‘Linguistic and Interactional Features of Internet Relay Chat’, in S.C. Herring (ed.) Computer-mediated Communication: Linguistic, Social, and Cross-cultural Perspectives, pp. 47-63. Amsterdam, PA: J. Benjamins .
28.
Yates, S.J. (1996) ‘Oral and Written Linguistic Aspects of Computer Conferencing: A Corpus Based Study’, in S.C. Herring (ed.) Computer-mediated Communication: Linguistic, Social, and Cross-cultural Perspectives, pp. 29-46. Amsterdam, PA: J. Benjamins .
