So both things brought me here to talk about that’

Like speaker IO_2, speaker IC_4 exhibits communicative competence as he not only introduces himself through his association with this community but also through the introduction of discourse-specific vernaculars, such as 'sensors', 'data' and 'device', and their network relationships. In line 3, we can observe how the subject, in the present continuous tense, assigns the linguistic agency to a ‘project’ that has some relationship in the present perfect with Pachube, away from the subject. The object marker ‘it’ points towards ‘Pachube’ as an instrument or repository, the passive ‘recipient’ of active ‘data’ that moves toward the instrument or container ‘Pachube’. Thus ‘data’ here is both in a domain of object and action. As an object, it is ‘created’ (in the present continuous) by the subject using his ‘sensors’ – the instrument, while in relation to the recipient, it is in action as it is being created and thus received in the continuous mode. It is unclear here what type of ‘sensors’ the speaker has in mind, other than they are the sensors that belong to him.

The second part of this sentence (line 4) is an example of a spatial indicator pointing in the direction of other aspects in a sociocultural context, such as the surrounding space and another place. Here we can observe the movement that is most likely that of data from the (unknown) sensor (which is most likely a technical device equipped with sensing capabilities) to a speaker/subject, from the speaker/subject to data, and

then to a data recipient. As can be observed in the linguistic composition, data does move through the subject, i.e. the speaker, while in the technological system, it is m o s t l i k e l y t h a t i t t r a v e l s i n t h e f o l l o w i n g o r d e r : s e n s o r device>router>network>repository, crossing many other switches in between. I will return to the closer analyses of device/data relations later. At this point, if we look at lines 3 and 4, there is another peculiarity. There is an on-going tense to this sentence, and it is not clear if the subject is working on this ‘here’ or if the project the speaker refers to is purely for setting the background.

However, the following lines 5 and 10 correct this uncertainty. They do so by continuing an account of his involvement with the use of the sentence connector ‘then’ (or subsequently) followed by the subject indexical ‘I’ and present perfect verb ‘have been involved’, immediately followed by line 6 with the use of the preposition ‘(working) with’ and then stating two named actors within the group. This not only indicates his past participation ‘in creating the air quality network’ (line 7), but also his current involvement with the members of the group (line 6). Line 10 reiterates his involvement in both his and group’s projects as a reason for being ‘here’. The use of the preposition ‘at’ in relation to Pachube also signals his perception of Pachube as something that resembles a place of work, thus expanding the space of Pachube not only as a repository of data but also as a social enterprise. The short pause made between the ‘air quality network’ and ‘air quality egg device’ indicates the speaker’s readjustment of terms. Initially referencing the network as in line 7 - ‘I have been involved in creating the air quality network’, after a short pause, the speaker corrects himself by replacing the word 'network' with the word 'device', thus creating a correct meaning that would sound, if uttered, the same as in line 8: ‘I have been involved in (developing) the air quality egg device’.

The initial utterance in line 7 (‘the air quality network’) is a much more abstract and ungrounded concept as it does not resemble any real or material phenomenon. However, the members of this group of developers often evoke a vision of a network that they are attempting to build between the air quality sensor devices and their social counterparts. Recognising that the sentence ‘the air quality network’ does not make grounded sense, the speaker corrects himself by confirming his involvement with the development of the Air Quality Egg device. The device named here

specifically references a particular design of technological and design solutions this group of developers are working on. However, this often-observed confusion, between the device and the vision of its distribution that would determine the subsequent establishment of a network between numerous such devices and possibly their owners, affirms not only this group's identity, but also forms part of its heteroglossia.

The insight into the development process of this device is offered in line 9, in which the speaker firstly, distances himself from the involvement in this particular action, which is taking place at this event and space in time, by use of the markers ‘they’ and ‘here’; and secondly, chooses to characterise the process taking place ‘here’ as ‘playing and hacking’. This on and off mode of being involved and then not being involved, or being able to step aside when ‘they’ might be ‘playing and hacking’ something one has contributed to, could be characteristic of individual power and free will within the group setting, as well as an attitude many geeks express due to the nature of trial and fail processes involved in developing technological systems (Coleman, 2008).

While the above examples illustrate the two most commonly expressed reasons for being at the event and joining this group - a) the belief in a common good and a need to organise, and b) the technological use of Pachube or the technical know-how and ability to contribute to the development - there was a third distinct line of motivation, illustrated by Example:3. On the question of why the participant came to the Air Quality Egg challenge workshop, participant (ICI_6) responded:

Example:3