{"id":16155,"date":"2021-01-16T15:49:46","date_gmt":"2021-01-16T06:49:46","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.tesl-ej.org\/wordpress\/?page_id=16155"},"modified":"2021-05-01T17:19:04","modified_gmt":"2021-05-01T08:19:04","slug":"ej96int","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/tesl-ej.org\/wordpress\/issues\/volume24\/ej96\/ej96int\/","title":{"rendered":"Evidence for Second Language Socialization in Multiplayer Online Game Play"},"content":{"rendered":"

* * * On the Internet * * *<\/h4>\n

February 2021 — Volume 24, Number 4<\/h3>\n

Seyed Abdollah Shahrokni<\/strong>
\nWestern Oregon University
\n<shahroknis\"atmark\"wou.edu><\/p>\n

\n

Abstract<\/h3>\n

This ethnographic case study aims to examine second language socialization (SLS) in a massively multiplayer online game (MMOG) called Stronghold Kingdoms (SK). To explore the affordances of this community for SLS, the social dynamics in a Faction community during four life-time periods, namely, war, post-war peace and life in exile, end of the world, and immigration to a new world were investigated using three methods: observation, analysis of records (in-game forum exchanges), and interview. The results suggested that the norms of the Faction community, that is, communication, collaboration, skills, support, rules, closeness, trust, status, and shared experiences provided a supportive environment for SLS. Moreover, the results of an in-depth interview conducted with one of the Faction non-native English speakers (NNES) revealed that the affordances of SK were important in the development and improvement of second language skills. Therefore, this study offers implications for second language pedagogy and research.
\n<\/a>
\nKeywords<\/em>: second language socialization, SLS, computer assisted language learning, CALL, multiplayer online games, MMOG<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Massively multiplayer online games (MMOGs; see Appendix A<\/a> for a list of abbreviations), which are played by geographically dispersed users, have been the focus of much language education research in recent years (Shen & Williams, 2010; Squire, 2007; Young, 2009<\/span>; Zhang et al.<\/span>, 2017). These games seem to be versatile tools in supporting task engagement, social dynamics, feedback, and collaboration (Peterson, 2016; Squire, 2008; Sykes et al., 2010), with research suggesting that playing MMOGs alongside face-to-face classes supports students\u2019 motivation, vocabulary learning, and acculturation (e.g., Bytheway, 2011; Rankin et al. 2009; Sykes et al. 2008; Thorne, 2008). However, one of the gaps in research on language learning in MMOGs is a frequent reliance on cognitivist theories of language learning (e.g., Chapelle, 2003, 2009; Palmer, 2010; Watson-Gegeo, 2004), whereas social environments such as MMOGs need to be explored through a sociocultural approach to language development as well.<\/span><\/p>\n

Second language socialization (SLS) aims to understand \u201chow persons become competent members of social groups and the role of language in this process\u201d (Schieffelin & Ochs, 1986, p. 167). SLS, then, as a sociocultural approach to second language acquisition, can provide useful information about language learning in MMOGs (Duff & Talmy, 2011; Ellis, 2008; Kasper & Rose, 2002; Watson-Gegeo, 2004; Watson-Gegeo & Nielson, 2003).<\/span><\/p>\n

The purpose of this study, accordingly, was to explore the affordances of an MMOG for SLS. By doing so, this study also answered Lam\u2019s (2004) call for more global research on SLS in virtual social spaces, Palmer\u2019s (2010) call for more studies on SLS in MMOGs, Chappelle\u2019s (2009) call for diversifying the theoretical base of SLA research through sociocultural approaches, and Reinhardt & Sykes\u2019s (2012) and Peterson\u2019s (2016) calls for further sociocultural studies on the affordances of MMOGs. The results of this study suggest that the norms of the MMOG community explored here provide a supportive environment for SLS and second language development. More specifically, this study tried to answer the following research questions:<\/span><\/p>\n

    \n
  1. What are the sociocultural affordances of the Faction community for SLS?<\/span><\/li>\n
  2. How does the Faction community shape and support the NNES\u2019 development of linguistic skills?<\/span><\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

    Literature Review<\/h3>\n

    Research in SLS has generally followed two tracks (Duff, 2007; Ochs, 1992, 2002): indexicality and communities of practice (CoP). The first orientation, indexicality, has taken a linguistic-semiotic-anthropological approach to analyzing the language produced by participants new to a community by identifying the discourse markers showing that a language learner indexes him\/herself as a member of a certain sociolinguistic context. For instance, Lam (2004) found that two Chinese immigrant student participants in Canada used the Cantonese particles <\/span>ar<\/span><\/i> (indicating softening of tone) and <\/span>la <\/span><\/i>(indicating requests) at the end of their English utterances in a bilingual chatroom environment to mark their Chinese background and affiliation with the group. The indexicality track, then, has relied on micro-analysis of sociocultural knowledge and practices in interactions to identify socialization patterns. <\/span><\/p>\n

    The latter orientation, communities of practice (CoP), however, has focused on a macro-social analysis of the process through which a newcomer in a community of practice gains membership and legitimacy in that sociocultural setting (Lave & Wenger, 1991). For instance, Black (2006) investigated how a Chinese immigrant student in the US was able to designate herself as a legitimate member of a fanfiction community by actively participating in the group activities and using the shared resources while receiving support from other members in the process. <\/span><\/p>\n

    SLS in Online Participatory Communities<\/h4>\n

    The first group of studies in this review explore the potential of online communities in supporting SLS. The ethnographies of these environments and discourse analyses of the exchanged messages show that the participants developed the identities of legitimate and respected members of the community (Black, 2005, 2006; Lam, 2004), with this status further leading to the participants\u2019 increased confidence and handling the linguistic and pragmatic problems they had in their face-to-face (F2F) classes (Nguyen & Kellogg, 2005). <\/span><\/p>\n

    For instance, Black (2006), as mentioned earlier, explored how a teenage Chinese girl in the US, resorted to a fanfiction online community where she actively read and wrote anime stories in English to compensate for her low English proficiency in real-life situations. Her sustained participation in the community and the support and scaffolding she received from fellow writers ultimately enabled her to establish herself as a successful bilingual Asian writer. For instance, in one of the comments she received on her character, <\/span>Meiling<\/span><\/i>, from a more experienced community member, she was humorously, and with reference to the plot of the story, encouraged to continue her writing:<\/span><\/p>\n

    Meiling is so evil! Ha!<\/span>
    \nDon\u2019t stop<\/span>
    \nif you do I\u2019ll strangle you!<\/span>
    \nHaha! (p. 180)<\/span><\/p>\n

    Lam (2004), in a seminal study, explored how group dynamics and affiliation could lead to a member\u2019s socialization in a bilingual chatroom. In her study, two immigrant Chinese girls, Yu Qing and Tsu Ying, feeling isolated in the new community, joined a bilingual Chinese-English chatroom where they interacted with other bilingual interlocutors. The researcher found that the participants were initially inclined to use the Internet for playing games and downloading music, but, as they participated in the chat community and interacted with others, they gradually overcame their fear and started practicing their English and making friends. The results of this eight-month study showed that Yu and Tsu developed the identities of legitimate members of the community, code-switching between Cantonese and English whenever necessary, which designated them as bilingual-immigrants. For instance, the participants employed Cantonese particles <\/span>ar <\/span><\/i>and <\/span>la<\/span><\/i>, indicating respectively the softening of the tone and requests, in their writing to affiliate with the bilingual community in which they were participating:<\/span><\/p>\n

    A. can\u2019t send mail to u ar<\/b>
    \nB. next time give my (sic: me) your add la<\/b> (p. 55)<\/p>\n

    Furthermore, the results of the interview suggested that the participants\u2019 virtual identity transferred to real-world situations where they could confidently handle the communicative problems they had once encountered in their F2F interactions. Yu, for instance, said that her participation in the chatroom made her realize that \u201cmaking mistakes\u201d and producing \u201ca lot of wrong words\u201d was \u201cno big deal\u201d (p. 51). Finally, calling for more globalized research into language socialization, the researcher stated that local contexts tend to marginalize people while new technologies and participatory discourses such as chat could be liberating.<\/span><\/p>\n

    SLS in MMOGs<\/h4>\n

    The second group of studies reviewed here examined the potential of MMOGs for SLS. Virtual worlds (VWs) have been found effective in encouraging the process of SLS and, by extension, developing language skills. For instance, <\/span>Zheng et al. <\/span>(2009) found that the interactions between NNES and NES (native English speakers) in Quest Atlantis (QA), an educational problem-solving MMOG for teenagers, resulted in language development, enhancing the appropriateness of the language the participants produced both at utterance and discourse levels. For instance, in the interview, a participant said, \u201cQA helped me with my learning English, especially in language use and communication. My spoken English has improved, so has my ability to act according to circumstances” (p. 504), which indicates that participation in the CoP while solving game-based quests has the potential to improve the language learners\u2019 linguistic and pragmatic skills. The researchers coined the term \u201cnegotiations for action\u201d (p. 489), a reference to Long\u2019s (1985, 1996) negotiation for meaning, to capture the essence of group participation and coordination towards the accomplishment of communal goals in an MMOG CoP.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Likewise, Palmer (2010) conducted a study on L2 pragmatic socialization in the MMOG World of Warcraft (WoW). Through ethnography and discourse analysis, she investigated the use of general speech acts (e.g., greetings), pragmatic moves (e.g., negotiation for loot allocation), and pragmatic situations (e.g., refusals and gendered interactions) that the participants engaged in while playing the game. There were two main participants in the study: the researcher herself and a Spanish-speaking Faction member, Hector. The researcher, a skilled WoW gamer and NES, decided to learn Spanish by playing in a Spanish game world, which she found to be a rich supportive environment for language development. As she was a skilled gamer in English worlds, she soon established herself as a competent player, someone to whom other community members turned for support. This condition brought her new obligations and required her to be responsive to fellow gamers who spoke Spanish. Initially, her responses were low-risk, but, as time passed, she was able to make more complex sentences in a variety of contexts:<\/span><\/p>\n

    By appropriating the pragmatic moves\u2026 we not only helped create our player identities in Spanish, but also gave ourselves the power to exercise our agency and initiate group activities and the linguistic finesse to adhere to cultural norms during loot allocation. (p. 238)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    This study showed that active participation in the game CoP could lead to a player\u2019s identity development, exactly in the way that the researcher in the study was able to gain membership and legitimacy among Spanish-speaking players, being able to appropriate a host of speech acts and pragmatic moves required of a competent player.<\/span><\/p>\n

    In yet another study, Shahrokni et al. (2020) explored the process of SLS in Stronghold Kingdoms (SK). Using a case study methodology and three data collection measures, records of gamer\u2019s conversational forum exchanges, focus group, and interview, the researchers found that success in the game was mainly dependent on communication and coordination (32.95%), gaming skills (22.88%), dedication (14.66%), conduct (16.59%), and real-life conversations (12.89%). In addition, the results showed that group participation and assumption of social responsibilities in the game allowed the main participant, Emil, a Serbian skilled gamer in an English-speaking game world, to develop the linguistic skills required to play the game legitimately and be known as a competent member of the community. For instance, answering a question on why he kept playing the game for 5 years, he showed his zeal in being part of a multicultural community by saying <\/span>(incorrect spellings and grammatical forms are intentionally left intact):<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

    Emil<\/strong>: I think the most interesting part was a feeling that I comunicaet and play with people that are all over the wourld but in game at the same time with me! I also start to participate in TS [TeamSpeak] activities, I was comunication with people from USA, G Britain, China, Holand, France…I was talking to theese people, geting to know them, see how they react and think about situations in game and problems in game…one player told me on TS that when we talk about some things from past, how we make war back in past that he feels like “war veteran“…well, probably is the close filing must say\u201d (Emil means to say it\u2019s probably the closest feeling to vicariously being a war veteran; Shahrokni et al., 2020, Quote 8, p. 62)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    The results further suggested that the focus of all the participants on accomplishing the group\u2019s shared goals prioritized actions over linguistic skills, allowing Emil to appropriate his language in a supportive environment where he shared his gaming skills and apprenticed (socialized) into the linguistic norms of the group in the process. For example, when Jack, one of Emil\u2019s NES members of the Faction, was asked about Emil\u2019s leadership skills, he provided the following about his lack of a native-like English proficiency:<\/span><\/p>\n

    Jack<\/b>: Playing online games means interaction with people of other languages. And i figured out that just asking for the meaning if you don\u2019t understand the meaning is the best way to communicate. You always find a way to speak together. (Shahrokni et al., 2020, Quote 17, p. 63)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    The studies reviewed above generally provide positive evidence concerning the affordances of online communities and MMOGs for SLS. Based on the literature, it appears that being a member of a virtual community and interacting with the members towards the accomplishment of the shared goals while accessing the community\u2019s shared resources tend to provide the participants with a host of opportunities for learning, identity development, and socialization.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Methodology<\/h3>\n

    Research into SLS has traditionally been conducted through ethnographies (Duff & Talmy, 2011) to \u201cincorporate the relevant macro- and micro-dimensions of context\u201d (Watson-Gegeo, 2004, p. 341). Ethnography is one of the oldest qualitative methodologies which provides detailed, emic, and holistic descriptions of cultural behaviors (D\u00f6rnyei, 2007). In its most basic form, according to Hammersley and Atkinson (1995), ethnography:<\/span><\/p>\n

    … involves the ethnographer participating, overtly or covertly, in people’s daily lives for an extended period of time, watching what happens, listening to what is said, asking questions – in fact, collecting whatever data are available to throw light on the issues that are the focus of the research. (p.1) <\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    Hence, ethnographic research primarily involves \u201cintensive, detailed observations of a setting over a long period of time\u201d (Watson-Gegeo, 1988, p. 583) as well as in-depth interviews with participants to develop an insider perspective and a thick description of the patterns within that particular cultural setting (Geertz, 2005; Glesne, 2016). However, there are mixed views regarding the use of ethnographic methods in virtual world (VW) research. Although ethnographic research is potentially not specific to real-world contexts, as virtual spaces espouse their own unique culture (Boellstorff, 2008), it\u2019s a bone of contention that a virtual space cannot physically be attended, with researchers observing the setting and communicating with real people (Hine, 2000, 2008). Nonetheless, some researchers (e.g., Boellstorff, 2008; <\/span>Boellstorff et al.<\/span>, 2012; Guimar\u00e3es, 2005; Hine, 2008; Kolo & Baur, 2004) believe that ethnographic work can suitably be transformed to VW settings, as VWs are \u201clegitimate sites of culture\u201d (Boellstorff, 2008, p. 61) and represent a dynamic cultural setting as authentically real as real life (Kolo & Baur, 2004). This study, likewise, considered an MMOG a legitimate site of culture and employed ethnographic methods to research it. In other words, this study is a virtual ethnography (Hine, 2000; Rheingold, 1993).<\/span><\/p>\n

    The role of researcher in a virtual ethnography is also unique. As with real-life fields, a VW field needs to be attended, but not in a conventional manner–virtual ethnographers do not travel to (distant) places and embark upon observing the other (Hine, 2000); rather, it is necessary to have a virtual identity, an avatar, and live in that community (Pearce, 2009). In an imaginative three-dimensional (3D) terrain, somewhere on the hard disk of a server, avatars live among other unreal personae, embodied as humans (or other creatures), dressed in special attires, and possibly carrying special gear. It is both unreal and, at the same time, very real. The avatars do not reveal any clues about a player’s real-life characteristics (e.g., whereabouts and occupation), but the ethnographer may not need these pieces of information to be able to write field notes and conduct interviews; rather, the goal is to be part of that community and see the interaction patterns in their unreality (Palmer, 2010), hoping, throughout the course of the game, that somehow one is granted access to hidden layers of the culture. <\/span><\/p>\n

    For instance, when I first joined a Faction in SK, I only knew players by their avatars. The avatar revealed information about the players\u2019 ranks, gender, assets, achievements, quests, indicating their gaming prowess. However, when our Faction came under attack by House 16, and our ability to coordinate became vital to our survival, my Faction members shared more than game-related issues, as they considered the group a safe zone. I became one of them and, in the words of Geertz (2005) when raided by the police while watching a Balinese cockfight, the \u201cvillage was a completely different world for us\u201d (p. 58). For instance, I learned that some of the Faction players had many alternative accounts (alts) which helped them reinforce each other. Interestingly, I gathered that a female player whom I had supplied with weapons in the past was in fact a male player with a female alt!<\/span><\/p>\n

    Therefore, I chose ethnography as the methodology for this study because it meshed well with both a tradition of SLS research and the exploration of emergent cultures of VW communities. Ethnographic methods (please see below) would enable me to be immersed as a participant-observer in a dynamic culture, be part of the life events of a community, develop a profound understanding of what it was like to be in different communal terms with both Faction members and other competing Factions and Houses (e.g., belligerent, friendly, or neutral), follow my participants, and develop insights into their feelings and socialization experiences.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Setting\/Field<\/h4>\n

    This study was conducted in the context of SK, a strategic MMOG featuring a 3D simulation of a hierarchical society of medieval times. SK had a population of five million active players based on the most recent estimates at the time (Kingdoms Mobile Gameplay | Firefly Studios, 2016), one roughly similar to that of a real-world country such as Norway with a population of 5,258,317 (Population – SSB, 2017). The players joined the game by creating a free account on the game website, downloading the client (for PC, Mac, Android, or iOS), and choosing a server\/world from among 77 worlds in English (15), German (11), Russian (11), French (7), Polish (8), Spanish (8), Italian (6), Turkish (7), and Portuguese (4). I played an English world for five years until it ended in August 2017. The game gathered players speaking English as a native language or using it as a means of communication.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Gameplay. <\/b>Starting the game, participants are <\/span>spawned in<\/span><\/i> (join for the first time) as a \u201cVillage Idiot,\u201d the lowest rank, and provided with a small unpopulated village to run. This idle village requires immediate action, both economic and military. Economically, the player needs to create the village industries to produce resources (wood, stone, iron, and tar), food (apple, cheese, meat, fish, bread, and ale), weapons (pike, sword, shield, bow, and catapult), and banqueting goods (venison, salt, wine, clothes, furniture). Along with these, town buildings, such as housing, entertainment, etc. should be constructed to help attract people to come and live in the castle.<\/span><\/p>\n

    When there are enough food, shelter, and jobs, and people are happy (see Figure 1), the player still needs to conduct \u201cresearch\u201d in the areas of industry, farming, education, and military to enhance the quality of life for the people of the village. Through strategic completion of research tasks, the players gain skills and experience in the game, and they will get access to new skills, leading to popularity and honor points.<\/span><\/p>\n

    \"A
    \nFigure 1.<\/b> A Fully-Built Village<\/b><\/p>\n

    After overcoming the economic challenges, the military development begins\u2014the player now has to deal with the many enemy artificial intelligence (AI) targets on the map (see <\/span>https:\/\/strongholdkingdoms.gamepedia.com\/Enemy_AI<\/span><\/a> and Figure 2), which destabilize the parish by sporadically attacking, ransacking, and pillaging the village. In addition to this important task, the player also needs to perform several quests to harness his\/her gaming prowess, achieve medals, and rise through the ranks, from a Village Idiot (1) to Crown Prince (23), which will enable the player to have more villages and vassals.<\/span><\/p>\n

    \"Attacking
    \nFigure 2. Attacking an AI Castle<\/b><\/p>\n

    This description, however, merely reflects the individualistic aspect of SK; the world is home to thousands of players owning multiple villages and being in communal relations (e.g., trading) with each other (see Figure 3).<\/span><\/p>\n

    \"Part
    \nFigure 3.<\/b> Part of the UK World Map<\/b><\/p>\n

    Clicking\/tapping on each village on the map displays the profile (see Figure 4) of the player owning that village. The profile reveals the player\u2019s avatar, coat of arms, achievements, quests, number and location of villages, and Faction and House affiliation, if any. Moreover, there is a \u201csend a message\u201d icon at the bottom of the interface which can be used to contact the player.<\/span><\/p>\n

    \"The
    \nFigure 4.<\/b> The Author\u2019s Game Profile<\/b><\/p>\n

    The social life of players, however, starts with their joining a Faction, a group of 40 players, participating in elections, serving as liege lords or vassals, and affiliating to one of the 20 competing Houses. As dominating the world is a challenging shared goal, the Factions banded under a House are required to participate actively among themselves and with others, following Faction and House regulations\u2014a government. For this purpose, a host of communication channels (e.g., the in-game textual mail interface and\/or third-party text\/audio applications such as Discord and TeamSpeak) and roles (e.g., marshalls, generals, officers, diplomats) are required to ascertain that there is coordination among all the parties in an alliance (see Figure 5). The game ends with one House emerging victorious through five ages (rounds) of gameplay, each with new challenges and rules.<\/span><\/p>\n

    \"In-Game
    \nFigure 5. In-Game Mail Between Players (IDs Redacted to Preserve Privacy)<\/b><\/p>\n

    Participants<\/h4>\n

    The participants were a community of 8 NES and 2 NNES. The NES group were from English-speaking countries, two male participants from England, and 1 female and 5 male participants from the US. The NNES group comprised a female participant from Sweden and a male participant from Egypt. All participants were considered experienced, as they had played more than two years together, although joining the Faction at varying degrees of competence (see Table 1). These players were together throughout four gameplay stages. <\/span><\/p>\n

    First, over a political issue, they were dragged into an all-out war with the dominant House. Next, having lost their territory, they had to separate for a period of time. Then, they reunited and formed a neutral House which gathered all the non-warring players. Finally, the world ended, and they immigrated to a new world, where they are, at this writing, still playing.<\/span><\/p>\n

    I, likewise, was part of this community for more than three years, and this study focused on my three-year journey with them. The participants were aware that I was collecting data for the purpose of this study. All names are pseudonyms (including that of the present researcher, Vahid). <\/span><\/p>\n

    Table 1. Participants\u2019 Ranks at the Time of My Entry into the Faction<\/b><\/p>\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n
    No.<\/span><\/td>\nName<\/b><\/td>\nFrom<\/b><\/td>\nRank<\/b><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    1<\/span><\/td>\nMorning Destroyer<\/span><\/td>\nEngland<\/span><\/td>\nCrown Prince (23)<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    2<\/span><\/td>\nMire<\/span><\/td>\nEngland<\/span><\/td>\nPrince (22)<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    3<\/span><\/td>\nMiddo<\/span><\/td>\nEgypt<\/span><\/td>\nMarquis (20)<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    4<\/span><\/td>\nTikeno<\/span><\/td>\nSweden<\/span><\/td>\nCountess (19)<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    5<\/span><\/td>\nJennifer<\/span><\/td>\nUS<\/span><\/td>\nDame (16)<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    6<\/span><\/td>\nTreld<\/span><\/td>\nUS<\/span><\/td>\nKnight (16)<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    7<\/span><\/td>\nBear<\/span><\/td>\nUS<\/span><\/td>\nKnight (16)<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    8<\/span><\/td>\nJustin<\/span><\/td>\nUS<\/span><\/td>\nDuke (21)<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    9<\/span><\/td>\nKing<\/span><\/td>\nUS<\/span><\/td>\nPrince (22)<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    10<\/span><\/td>\nGolden<\/span><\/td>\nUS<\/span><\/td>\nViscount (18)<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n
    11<\/span><\/td>\nVahid (researcher)<\/span><\/td>\nIran<\/span><\/td>\nEarl (19)<\/span><\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n

    Data Sources<\/h4>\n

    This study was informed by three data sources: observation, records\/artefacts, and interview.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Observation.<\/b> As a research method, observation refers to the \u201csystematic recording of observable phenomena or behavior in a natural setting\u201d (Gorman, & Clayton, 2005, p. 40). This method is employed by various methodologies. Ethnographic research, specifically, relies heavily on observation which enables researchers to devote attention to the setting, use their senses, take field notes, and write thick descriptions of the culture into which they enter. Therefore, in this study, I conducted observations of the field, looking for exploratory data on the community cultural norms, and participant behaviors in various stages of the game.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Being a participant-observer, and having been with the Faction for three years, I was well included in the community and in rapport with all members, that is, I was a full-time resident of this community (Schensul et al., 1999). This was advantageous because I had access to naturalistic data\u2014nobody acted differently in my presence\u2014I was one of them. They also knew that I was researching and were responsive to my occasional questions. On the other hand, there was a risk that I was so immersed in the culture that I might be blind to the data that an outsider might perceive as valuable. To take heed of my bias, then, as Bernard (1994) suggests, I needed to remove myself from the field to be able to write about it. Furthermore, as I included other data sources in the study, I was able to diversify the knowledge base of the study through data triangulation.<\/span><\/p>\n

    As to the procedure of data collection, I relied on what Angrosino et al. (2000) consider a \u201cselective observation\u201d in which the ethnographer focuses on select activities in the community (p. 677). Framed in SLS, my observation attended to the sociocultural norms of the community which allowed a NNES to develop his\/her linguistic skills.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Records\/artefacts.<\/b> In MMOGs, players interact over forums and chat servers to coordinate their actions. As these social venues store valuable data on community participation, I analyzed the discourse in community threads through the ATLAS.ti<\/span> qualitative data analysis software. The rationale for this phase of research was to develop a formal survey of the field, looking for patterns related to SLS. The combination of observation and analysis of records helped the design process of the interview protocol as well.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Interview.<\/b> After identifying possible SLS themes based on the results of observations and analysis of records, I created a semi-structured interview protocol to tap the identified themes and inquire into more information about the SLS process, with specific reference to the participants\u2019 (game) life journey. To cover all areas, the protocol included items corresponding to six groups of questions: structural, experiential, comparison, hypothetical, behavioral, and phenomenological items (Glesne, 2016, see Appendix A<\/a>).<\/span><\/p>\n

    Data Analysis<\/h4>\n

    As mentioned above, I used ATLAS.ti<\/span> (ver. 8.2) to organize the data for coding. At the beginning stages of the research, I came up with codes based on the title of chat threads (e.g., activity thread), but, as the research progressed, especially through analyzing the records, I refined my codes and came up with more representative codes and categories for the data. In other words, through grouping and renaming in ATLAS.ti, the codes evolved as each phase of data collection was completed.<\/span><\/p>\n

    In order to analyze the records, I conducted two levels of coding\u2014open and axial (Salda\u00f1a, 2015). First, I conducted the open coding of the in-game Faction messages. Through this phase of analysis, the transcripts of data served as primary documents in ATLAS.ti as I developed codes. Next, I tried to find relationships between the generated codes and transform them into categories and concepts. The purpose of this stage of data analysis was to discover the sociocultural norms of the community, aiming at answering the first research question, and later using this information to answer the second research question through the interview.<\/span><\/p>\n

    In this article, all references to Records (2015 and 2016) derive from data from the forum exchanges informing this analysis.<\/span><\/i><\/p>\n

    Credibility and Trustworthiness\/ Potential Limitations<\/h4>\n

    The first credibility measure was my five-year gaming experience. I had been playing the game for a long time and knew the setting very well. Furthermore, over these years, I had risen through the ranks and positioned myself as a high-ranking player who could enter closed circles and be trusted. Therefore, it was easy for me to be both a \u201cfly on the wall\u201d (Howe & Eisenhart, 1990) and a participant-researcher. However, despite the benefits of this stance, there was a limitation to assuming both roles\u2014being biased in interpretation. To address this limitation, I tried to minimize this risk through member checks and peer debriefing (Lincoln & Guba, 1985) throughout the study. I had about 10% of my data inter-coded by a colleague. I also presented my participants with my data analysis to ascertain that our accounts did not differ. <\/span><\/p>\n

    The second credibility measure was to triangulate three data sources. The sequence of data collection progressively developed into a more representative picture of SLS in SK. In addition, throughout different phases, I relied upon inter-coder checks to ascertain the accuracy of the data I was coding. Finally, in writing the report, I drew from my experiences in understanding what was taking place and strove for clarity in my thick description while relating the findings of each data source, allowing the readers to judge for themselves the credibility of the findings.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Theoretical Framework<\/h4>\n

    Second language socialization (SLS)<\/b>. This study is framed in a tradition of research on SLS (e.g., Duff, 2007; Duff & Talmy, 2011; Ochs, 2002; Ochs & Schieffelin, 2001, 2012; Schieffelin & Ochs, 1986). Essentially, SLS is a first language (L1) acquisition theory that explores how children, as newcomers in their societies, socialize into the norms of their cultures (Schieffelin & Ochs, 1986). In SLA research, likewise, language socialization (LS) research explores the process through which an L2 learner socializes into the norms of the L2 community, gaining membership, legitimacy, and linguistic competence (Duff & Talmy, 2011). <\/span><\/p>\n

    Similarly, MMOGs have a dynamic culture, with many geographically-scattered players coming together as teammates. Furthermore, these multicultural communities have their own norms to which the players, if they wish to affiliate with a particular Faction, should affiliate. There are social responsibilities to be assumed by community members so that the coordinated play of the team leads to the accomplishment of the shared goals. For instance, in SK, when a new player joins a Faction, s\/he needs to abide by the norms and regulations of the community. Some of these norms are considered general knowledge and veteran players know them. For instance, a veteran player knows that \u201cscouting\u201d another player\u2019s village is a hostile act which can lead to conflict. However, some of the norms are specific to Factions. For example, our Faction had a rule that each member needed to login to the game at least three times a week, repair possible damages caused by AIs, vote, and station 400 troops (250 archers and 150 pikemen) in the castle so that it cannot be scouted or captured in a surprise attack when they were offline. In order to socialize into the norms of this community, it is imperative to communicate with the Faction members, learn the rules, and serve the communal goals. Therefore, SLS could provide a useful theoretical framework for this study, examining how language skills could shape and, simultaneously, be shaped by one\u2019s socialization.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Communities of practice (CoP)<\/b>. Wenger\u2019s (1998) CoP theory meshes well with the tenets of SLS. Simply put, a CoP is a group of people (i.e., community) who gather around a shared interest (i.e., domain) and participate in communal activities (i.e., practice). Similarly, the players in an MMOG come from different backgrounds, but they form groups, and collaborate towards the accomplishment of shared goals. This requires the players\u2019 active participation in a community that has shared goals and threats, uniting them in the face of challenges. <\/span><\/p>\n

    Furthermore, a CoP supports members\u2019 learning and development through social interactions between novice (less proficient) and legitimate (more proficient) members of the community. Through this interaction, accordingly, novices will apprentice to the norms of the community, and \u201cgradually assemble a general idea of what constitutes the practice of the community\u201d (p. 95), and pass on this knowledge to other novices. In other words, a new member (a novice), due to his\/her low competence, is initially peripheral in a community; however, they will gradually evolve to fill a central position in that community, a process which is referred to as legitimate peripheral participation (LPP). Researchers (e.g., Delwiche, 2006; Palmer, 2010) argue that MMOGs provide many opportunities for LLP. For instance, when players join SK, they are spawned in the game as a low-ranking player who is in control of a small unpopulated village. Gradually, however, they learn the strategies to develop the village, defend it, acquire more villages, join Factions, assume group responsibilities, and be team players. Therefore, MMOGs can be considered instances of a CoP where participants have \u201cshared experience over time, and a commitment to shared understanding\u201d (Eckert, 2006, p. 1).<\/span><\/p>\n

    Results<\/h3>\n

    In this section, I first present the results from four phases of the study: 1) War against the world, 2) Post-war peace and life in exile, 3) End of the world, and 4) Immigration to a new world. Then, I present the results of the in-depth interview with a NNES of the Faction, Middo. However, before I delve into the results, I need to provide some context. <\/span><\/p>\n

    The war started when House 16, Lionheart, a coalition of several Factions, defeated House 2, the High Castle. House 2 members were known for corruption, alting (that is, using alternate accounts to influence votes and elections), and making the game a \u201cdead\u201d world–a place where nobody could progress or develop through hard work. Therefore, people of the world, including us, were happy that the tyranny of House 2 had ended.<\/span><\/p>\n

    \"Territories
    \nFigure 6.<\/b> Territories Owned by House 2<\/b><\/p>\n

    The new leaders of the world called for unity, but by that, they meant for players to abandon their voices, and abide by the rules set by the \u201calliance.\u201d It actually worked for some time, but eventually, some key players, feeling betrayed, left the alliance and became neutral. When one is neutral, they neither support nor oppose causes championed by the active political parties in the game. One of these players was Morning Destroyer. Before he broke his allegiance to Texan, the leader of the revolution and now the king of the world, he led a Faction of veteran players who were key in the alliance’s victory. However, he was now considered an enemy of the state, ruling over a small county, Devon, in South West England, where my villages were located as well. It was obvious that the alliance could not tolerate this transgression.<\/span><\/p>\n

    At the time, I was a farmer in Devon–I was not involved in any conflict–I was just developing my economic and military prowess to survive the game\u2019s internal challenges, such as feeding my people and removing AIs from my parishes. However, it was short-lived and I was dragged into this conflict by accepting an invitation from<\/span> Morning Destroyer. Upon accepting that invitation, I found myself surrounded by enemies all around me. It was scary, but inclusion in the Faction\u2019s communication thread gave a reason to stay with them and get to know them, realizing that the game was more than individualistic play–it was alive with non-stop conversation, small talk, jokes, friendships, fun, and hard times.<\/span><\/p>\n

    One day, a Faction member, Treld, decided to capture a village owned by another Faction member, Chino, who was inactive. Inactive players, and by extension their villages, are potentially very dangerous to a Faction, especially if the player is a steward who needs to constantly attend to the parish\u2019s everyday affairs such as removing AIs and disease points from the parish. As the player had been inactive for a long time, his parish showed 300 disease points. Therefore, Treld<\/span> decided to capture Chino\u2019s villages because they were a source of vulnerability\u2014the disease points could signal to the enemy that the player was inactive and they could capture his villages and expand into our territory. <\/span><\/p>\n

    There was a problem, though–one cannot capture an ally\u2019s village; therefore, the Faction leader (or officers) needed to drop him from the Faction so that Treld<\/span> could launch the attack. This operation was very risky because, if a player is not aligned with a Faction, as the rules dictate, they are considered \u201cloners” and, hence, they may be attacked, whereas an aligned player, someone who is part of a Faction, has the backing of the Faction and cannot be attacked. After a lot of speculations, we decided that it was safe to start the attack, as we had not recorded any activity from alliance villages around the targeted area. Due to the time-sensitivity of this operation, we had also mobilized multiple players to attack at the same time. The zero hour for the operation arrived, everyone was ready, and Morning Destroyer dropped Chino. However, to our surprise, instead of Treld<\/span> or anyone of us, a player from the alliance, Black Dog, attacked the village on a fast-army strategy card and captured the village in less than a minute. This incident led to an all-out war, which ultimately led to our defeat and banishment.<\/span><\/p>\n

    War Against the World<\/h4>\n

    Collaboration. <\/b>The members were from the US, Britain, Egypt, Sweden, and Iran, and their being in different time zones prevented them from logging on to the game server all at the same time. Besides, some worked at regular jobs and had their own non-game responsibilities (although Treld<\/span> and Morning Destroyer played from their work computers as well). Therefore, we created a system of login hours at which we connected to the server and engaged in collaborative tasks. One of the most important tasks during the war was \u201ctimed attacks\u201d where two or more players coordinated their attacks to inflict maximum destruction to the enemy’s castles (see Figure 7). For instance, the first player would act as a \u201cbreaker,\u201d breaking the castle defenses, and the second player, who had a captain in his army (and was slower), would capture, or raze the \u201copen\u201d village just seconds after the first attack. At this point, if the operation had not been intercepted by the enemy, the player who had captured the village, supported by other group members, would use the newly owned village as a base to initiate other attacks and expand into the enemy\u2019s territory. This would usually take more than two hours, and it would end in the players\u2019 interdicting the newly captured villages against other attacks. There were a total of 162 timed attacks involving 2 players, and 43 timed attacks with more than 2 players involved during the war. The following conversation shows a timed attack plan to topple the sheriff of Cornwall:<\/span><\/p>\n

    Morning Destroyer<\/b>: Perhaps we should perform a strike, take out the sheriff with about 20 well timed, simultaneous attacks?<\/span>
    \nMire<\/b>: hm…. wonder how well that will go over. :stuck_out_tongue<\/span>
    \nMorning Destroyer<\/b>: Very few people in H6 know how to run or handle time attacks (Records, 2015)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    \"A
    \nFigure 7. A Typical Timed Attack<\/b><\/p>\n

    (Three Breakers Hit the Castle Seconds Before the Captain Captures or Razes the Village)<\/b><\/p>\n

    Skill.<\/b> Besides collaboration, running timed attacks required skills. It was necessary for the members to know how to survive a conflict, especially one against the whole world. Therefore, a large amount of data in my data set highlighted skills, tactics, and strategies to survive during the war. The players in my Faction, Brown Eagle, were not used to fighting–only the leader was. Also, what exacerbated the situation was the unexpected pace at which an all-out war had erupted. For instance, the following message, a report from Mire, shows how the map colors, representing territory ownership, changed due to power struggles:<\/span><\/p>\n

    Mire<\/b>: Awwww\u2026 This morning Cornwall was orange as now, then neutral, then orange again- because \u201cPrince Binomia\u201d got in H6 for a moment – because of the Black Dog, then neutral again and now back to orange\u2026<\/span>
    \nPrairie is declared enemy by Killer and Mystic.<\/span>
    \nPlano was rest by Typhoon [he means reset] last night in Devon and got shelter by Prairie in \u201cThe Lizard,\u201d got a village of Earth1423, developed by Prairie before \u2026. so Sphinx got Redruth back by monking and Prairie sent his monks\u2026 then Sphinx attacked as per advise of H6\u2019s Faction \u201cKiller\u201d but IDed himself first for 4 hours\u2026<\/span>
    \nPlano should be razed according to Mystic\u2026 but now all villages of Prairie and one of Plano\u2019s are under ID for about 16 hours\u2026. (Records, 2015)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    Therefore, a lot of information in my data set was on how players needed to supply arms or goods to other players, strengthen their castles, build up defenses, attack, and a host of other war-related skills. For instance, in the following conversation, Morning Destroyer explains how to set up pitch monsters:<\/span><\/p>\n

    Morning Destroyer<\/b>: Pitch monsters stand up very well against attacks, but you have to maintain them religiously. In other words, you cant log off for 2-3 days and come back. You have to repair everyday or your castles strength will falter. (Records, 2015)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    <\/a>
    \nSupport.<\/b> Faction members supported each other throughout the war. This support ranged from an early welcome, supplying of goods, and advice on skills development to collaborations on Faction defense and attack. In other words, in the Faction community, shared activities were performed through supports provided by the community members in many forms. For example, military campaigns required \u201cmonk\u201d support as either a prerequisite or complement. Before a timed attack, the players usually needed to excommunicate the targets so that they did not interdict themselves    1<\/a><\/sup><\/span>, and, after the attack, the players needed monk support to be protected against counterattacks. Even when there was no active military campaign, the players needed to influence elections and have one of their members take control of parishes, counties, regions, or countries, which would provide them with the power to use bigger armies to \u201cbreak\u201d their opponents\u2019 castles. Figure 8 shows a monk support activity removing the sheriff of Norwich and installing another player through votes. Each monk (shown below in blue and red) is travelling towards Norwich. Upon arrival, each monk influences the election by one vote.<\/span><\/p>\n

    \"Monk
    \nFigure 8.<\/b> Monk Support<\/b><\/p>\n

    Rules. <\/b>The Faction community valued rules, which were explicitly announced every time a new Faction thread was created. Generally, the domestic rules of the Faction were negotiated in a panel composed of the Faction general (FG) and other officers, and later shared with other members through regular proclamations. The organization and level of detail included in regulations depended on the person and situation; however, they all laid out rules for members to follow (in fact, the pretext for war was our alleged violation of the rules set by the alliance). For instance, the following message shows how monk-voting a parish, Waddesdon, was considered a hostile act:<\/span><\/p>\n

    P-Jazz<\/b>: Any voting against the Alliance in Waddesdon will be considered a hostile act. Be warned! <\/span>
    \nVahid<\/b>: You may forward this to my faction leader. <\/span>
    \nP-Jazz<\/b>: Your faction leader has already been warned about interfering with the Alliance. <\/span>
    \nVahid<\/b>: You\u2019re well aware that you\u2019re taking the parish from a Brown Eagle member, that is an act of war. <\/span>
    \nP-Jazz<\/b>: I am taking the parish from a neutral. This is none of your business and you would do well to stay out of it. I have warned you and you can pass it on to the entire faction. (Records, 2015)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    Closeness.<\/b> The members, albeit at war, knew each other very well, checked on each other, made jokes, and felt responsible for  their friends\u2019 assets. The following message shows how humorously the Faction members interacted with each other, although what happened to Justin, that is, his army being destroyed on an arranged capture, was a frustrating incident:<\/span><\/p>\n

    Mire<\/b>: i asked you 4 times not to attack and you did it anyway<\/span>
    \nJustin<\/b>: You asked me to capture your village. I told you to open your village. You killed my army. You still wanted my help with your village. I am not going to waste another 35k gold on a failed capture. Do you want me to fix your village or not?<\/span>
    \nBear<\/b>: I know a man that knows a pub where a man sits in it that owns a greyhound and drinks vodka and can get it fixed for a price for you \ud83d\ude09<\/span>
    \nJustin<\/b>: HA HA two Greyhounds…my attacks are on route to your villa now…let that be a lesson boy :joy and Rum and whisky.<\/span>
    \nBear<\/b>: you got the patience of a saint:innocent: (Records, 2015)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    The Faction conversations, in abundant numbers, showed that the members were very close, and valued this connection through a knowledge of their personal lives and humor. <\/span><\/p>\n

    Trust.<\/b> Co-player members needed to trust each other. Despite continuous psychological and physical warfare, the members stayed together and defended their territory until they were defeated. Although trust was the glue of all players\u2019 activities within the boundaries of the Faction at this specific time, there were times during the war when they specifically shared their dedication to the cause. For instance, the following exchange shows how the players expressed their support for the Faction and its leadership when the alliance gave them an ultimatum to decide if they wanted to fight or surrender:<\/span><\/p>\n

    Justin<\/b>: I\u2019m all for war. I can also help with monking\/excomm. Would be nice to get Morning Destroyer into buckingham. How many votes does Black Dog have?<\/span>
    \nMiddo<\/b>: I\u2019m in.<\/span>
    \nJennifer<\/b>: It sounds like a total war. I\u2019m just thinking of heavy defense :-??<\/span>
    \nTreld<\/b>: Very much defense (probably I overmonk my villages :-D) <\/span>
    \n<\/span>(Records, 2015)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    Communication.<\/b> Communication runs across all themes in an MMOG where players do not physically interact. For instance, the invitation that I received from<\/span> Morning Destroyer to join their Faction was a form of communication that was prevalent in the game–recruiting. The language that players used to advance a threat, devalue a player, make a request, position oneself as a competent player, etc. were all part of communication. <\/span><\/p>\n

    Status.<\/b> During the war, players specifically showed their status to opponents in different ways, such as referencing the history and names, showing confidence, signing their messages with their ranks and positions, boasting about or hinting at their skills, using commands or capital letters, or a mix of them. For instance, in the following message, Black Dog, showing his skills, orders Morning Destroyer in capital letters to look at the time on the attack and scout reports to understand who is to blame:<\/span><\/p>\n

    Black Dog<\/strong>: LOOK AT THE TIME THE ATTACK ON ISAACU HIT THEN LOOK AT THE TIMES WE SCOUTED AND ATTACKED YOUR GUY are you blind orjust ingoring the fact that your players braught this on. (Records, 2015)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    I conclude this section with Morning Destroyer\u2019s words on winning a war, briefing his Faction members on what was expected of them during a military conflict, showing his status as an experienced player:<\/span><\/p>\n

    Morning Destroyer<\/b>: There is a lot more to war than “element of surprise.” There is also “skill” -The ability to launch effective breaker armies, the ability to create an effective captain army, the ability to launch timed attacked (to name a few skills). There is also cooperation and communication. If you lack either, then your war is going to go down hill. Plus activity but that\u2019s obvious. (Records, 2015)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    Post-war Peace and Life in Exile<\/h4>\n

    After the war was lost, the players in our Faction all went into vacation mode (VM). The conflict had been so intense, with both sides inflicting damages on each other. However, as the alliance had more forces and players, this unbalanced battle would eventually have to end in favor of House 16. All the gold was spent, faith points (FP) used, and most of our villages were captured or razed. There was no point in continuing this war:<\/span><\/p>\n

    Morning Destroyer<\/b>: Guys I want you to leave this faction and go to a neutral one. It looks like it is a lost battle. This is now a lose-lose battle, we can\u2019t win against so many with so few. <\/span>
    \nTreld<\/b>: Sadly you are right Morning…<\/span>
    \nMorning Destroyer<\/b>: My respect goes out to you all in this thread\u2026 disappointing isn\u2019t the word for the rest. Those of you that have lost villas I will open all mine at the front door take them, I will be leaving this world, there is nothing left but the alliance and a bunch of farmers. This world is dead. Good luck and take care all of you. (Records, 2015)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    With Morning Destroyer gone, we decided to activate the VM to at least keep some assets that had been left while restoring our gold, honor, and FP sources. In other words, it was a \u201ctactical retreat.\u201d Furthermore, Morning Destroyer\u2019s unexpected abandonment of the Faction in this manner left us somehow irate and feeling betrayed. At any rate, we needed to leave. For about one month, a great deal of communication and collaboration had drained everyone both in real- and virtual lives. After two weeks, we all deactivated VM and logged back to the game. I was so excited that I was seeing everyone again. All of us except Treld logged back to the game at the same time. A week later, Treld also joined. Things had calmed down and nobody was after us. Also, to avoid confrontation, we left the Faction and stayed neutral, but we were still communicating. The whole world was now orange and controlled by House 16.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Shared experiences.<\/b> We could not help but to reflect on what happened during the war: Why did it happen, why did we act the way we did, why did Morning Destroyer have to leave, and so many other questions. Reflecting on these occurrences, we shared memories of the war and discussed them. We also planned for the future, whether we would create a Faction and join a different House, go rogue, or go separate ways given our daily-life responsibilities. Ultimately, we decided to farm. We created a new Faction with a different name, Rainbow of Chaos. Furthermore, we decided to join a House, as being neutral could lead to conflict. Upon the advice of a friend, we finally joined House 20, which, in a nationwide vote, had been reserved for players who want peace.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Support.<\/b> Now, as part of House 20, we needed to support each other economically. The war had officially ended and we needed supplies (stone, wood, iron, and tar) to build up the remainder of our villages which had been pillaged and ransacked multiple times during the war. Therefore, we needed to develop our economic industries (e.g., stone quarries, woodcutter\u2019s huts, iron mines, pitch rigs, and farms) along with carts and markets to trade goods. Furthermore, we needed to charter new villages, and, as we had lost almost all of our gold and honor, we needed to sell our goods in the markets and hold banquets to rank up. Therefore, we created a support thread and posted our needs and offered help. Everyone tried hard to rise and help others to rise as well:<\/span><\/p>\n

    Middo<\/b>: Wood and Stone for 112049 and 26216 Village pleaseeee<\/span>
    \nMire<\/b>: Sending loads landing in an hr to 2 hurs (Records, 2015)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    To sum up this section, most of the activities in this phase of the Faction life revolved around shared experiences and support, although there were codes which could be placed under trust, closeness, collaboration, skills, rules, and communication. This phase, which lasted about 16 months in real life time, saw the other nine players pulling together and living peacefully as they interacted towards development both with each other and other players in the House. By the end of this phase, everyone was a Crown Prince, and, I can say, they were all seasoned in the workings of the game, although they did not engage in any war. In terms of social responsibilities, all my nine co-players had stewardship roles in different parishes, Mire was the FG of Rainbow of Chaos, King, Treld, Middo, and Tikeno were officers, and the other members were players. Also, the number of players in our Faction had risen to 17. Also, most of us had the experience of playing different worlds in SK.<\/span><\/p>\n

    End of the World<\/h4>\n

    After several rounds of glory race (whereby players competed over holding key positions in the game) and global wars, the world was close to an end. Based on the rules, all active players received strategy card packs, with higher ranked players and those in the winning House receiving more perks and \u201cdiamond\u201d cards. This phase of data analysis sees a great deal of planning for the next world to which players needed to migrate. Here we also see all the themes mentioned above in place, with the following being more outstanding.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Rules.<\/b> The world was coming to an end and players wanted to know what would happen next, who would win the race, how would the world end, what were the prizes, how would they be given to players, who would get them, and many other inquiries of this sort. We had never finished a world, so this would be a new experience for all of us. Therefore, the players inquired about the end of the world:<\/span><\/p>\n

    Bear<\/b>: So what happens when the world ends? Who gets what prizes? Or a free for all, and all out war, which I can’t see happening on this server!<\/span>
    \nMire<\/b>: By default, all players get bronze prizes if they are at or above prince level and have one village. For the players in the top 5 houses, their bronze prizes are upgraded to silver. For the top house, their silver prize is upgraded to gold. This might be an easier way to look at things. (Records, 2016)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    Despite frequent answers to questions regarding the end of the world, Wild-Lion, the marshal of House 20, issued a proclamation and laid out the rules of the game and the future of our journey. We continued the path of peace and decided to immigrate to a new world called USA 1.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Closeness.<\/b> Here we see many attempts for the Faction members to be together in the next world. Some were planning to quit the game, because it had been almost one year and a half of gameplay:<\/span><\/p>\n

    Jennifer<\/b>: I tried to leave the game, but I can\u2019t.<\/span>
    \nBear<\/b>: I keep wanting to leave the game, but never get around to it, so i might as well stock up on as much as possible, and help the ones that want to continue, get theirs. (Records, 2016)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    Ultimately, however, we did not quit–we landed in  yet another region, East Washington, and started again.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Excitement.<\/b> We were so excited that the game was ending. This gaming journey had been filled with happy and sad memories for all of us, and now there was a new world that we hoped we would start together again. One month before the world ended, Treld and Bear joined USA 1, which had just started, to help accommodate the Faction there. They reported back to the Faction about the area, the neighbors, and what Factions and Houses existed in USA 1. In other words, they were scouting the area, making sure that we would enter a safe place:<\/span><\/p>\n

    Jennifer<\/b>: How is life in the new world?<\/span>
    \nMire<\/b>: Yes, so what precisely are you buggers up to on USA1?<\/span>
    \nTreld<\/b>: Not much, boss. Kinda waiting it out, I guess. Everything peaceful there. No siege camps yet. Looking for the Honour. I have 3 villages in USA 1 and producing more resources than some people with 8. (Records, 2016)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    Communication.<\/b> There was a lot of communication over team-making in USA 1. We were part of House 20, the peace-loving House, so we were mostly in contact with other Faction members of House 20, and we hoped that they would join us. Therefore, we started communicating with other members to see if they were interested in joining the House:<\/span><\/p>\n

    Treld<\/b>: Hey Seeker, long time no see! How have you been?<\/span>
    \nSeeker<\/b>: good how about you?<\/span>
    \nTreld<\/b>: Good, you playing any worlds at the moment?<\/span>
    \nSeeker<\/b>: World 1 and 2 but not that much 1-2 villages max \ud83d\ude42<\/span>
    \nTreld<\/b>: A lot of us are on USA 1 if you’d like to join \ud83d\ude42<\/span>
    \n<\/span>(Records, 2016)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    Immigration to a New World<\/h4>\n

    Finally, the world ended on day 1,555 11:02:24 PM game time when House 16 pressed the \u201cEnd the World\u201d button. For a few days logging in to the game would show us fireworks (in a gaming manner) on a frozen world (see Figure 9). After a few days, the world got deactivated and no login was possible. Therefore, as planned, we immigrated to USA 1. <\/span><\/p>\n

    \"Fireworks\"
    \nFigure 9. Fireworks<\/b><\/p>\n

    The hardest part with a new world is that one needs to start from the very lowest rank, and, when one is used to a full repository, it is not easy. Therefore, we needed support, which was the reason why Bear and Treld had settled down in East Washington before us. Upon the entry in the world, we messaged each other and created our communication channels.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Support. <\/b>Mire, as the FG of Rainbow of Havoc, had already created a new Faction with the same name; however, we could not join it until we reached Rank 7 (Bondsman). A support channel, therefore, was created, helping us rise to that level as fast as we could. Through this thread, we requested what we needed and all the Faction members helped:<\/span><\/p>\n

    Vahid<\/b>: Can you LL [Liege Lord] me at 49310 (Peace)? Thanks! I got a new villa–yay! <\/span>
    \nJustin<\/b>: Yep and request sent Vahid: Thank you \ud83d\ude09 (Records, 2016)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    Since we were neutral, not affiliated to any House, other players could attack us under different pretexts. Therefore, we also created a security thread to help us against possible aggression by other neighboring players from non-aligned Houses.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Rules.<\/b> A new world has many rules to follow, most of them similar to what we were used to in our previous world. As new settlers, we needed to be briefed on the new land\u2019s rules so that we did not cross any lines that could potentially lead to a new unwanted conflict. In other words, our experience of the previous world made us cautious at the beginning. In that respect, Halo, the marshal of House 20, issued the following proclamation:<\/span><\/p>\n

    Halo<\/b>: Nothing is really going on, right now, but I would just like to send a reminder to my fellow players. Check with your Sheriff for county rules–although most are just common-sense. Still, the willingness to communicate goes a long way to showing the local power-in-charge that H20 is not a threat. Expansion can be misinterpreted as a threat. So, once again, communicate with your sheriff (for taking stewardship of a parish), and your steward (for starting a new village). I know I’m stating the obvious, so forgive me… It’s just a reminder \ud83d\ude09 (Records, 2016)<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

    Quite related to this category was the politics of the new world. In order to survive a new world with its own dynamics and power struggles, we needed to make certain that we showed a friendly picture to the rest of the world. Therefore, we also regularly embarked on humanitarian actions, such as making donations and healing diseases.<\/span><\/p>\n

    Interview<\/h4>\n

    <\/a> <\/a>
    \nIn order to investigate the affordances of the Faction community for language development, I created an interview protocol (see     Appendix B<\/a>) comprising six main questions and many probes around them. The interview (see Appendix C<\/a> for the interview text) was conducted via the text mode of Discord where I approached Middo and asked him if he would allow me to do an  interview (I originally had plans to interview Tikeno<\/span> as well; however, she was not available for an interview while the study was in progress). <\/span><\/p>\n

    The interview was conducted on three occasions, with the participant being open to my questions. The first two sessions were during my data analysis, while the third session was a follow-up conducted after the data analysis was finished.<\/span><\/p>\n

    The following components \/ purposes were investigated:<\/span><\/p>\n