The relation between language and nationalism

• Language and Early Nationalism…

The American and French Revolutions are often identified as starting points for early nationalism (1776 and 1789 respectively). The American Revolution can be visualised as anantimetropolitan war between speakers of the same language (English), American states resisting English domination. As a result, vernaculars did not divide the two sides in the conflict but, as Anderson (1991) maintains, it did serve to unify the American community through the circulation of news and newspapers over a wide geographical area. Similarly the French Revolution did not focus on language divisions until after its success was assured.

Then, however, a vast process of language standardization took place in an attempt to unify the nation against outside threats, both perceived and real, culminating in the Académie Française, still the current guardian of a standardized French language.

• …and to the Present Day

Issues of power surrounding language standardization and standard languages continue to affect the modern world. Firstly, the after effects of the age of imperialism continue to be felt. Ethnic groups originating in former imperial powers colonized and settled in the dominions, while continuing to use the prestigious imperial language. Following independence, many have found themselves members of a nationstate that is not truly theirs, and unable to speak the newly chosen/reemerged national language (e.g. the Russian populations of the Baltic states).

Alternatively, in newly independent states, there is the crucial issue of what administrative language to adopt, and whether or not to use this as a national symbol. Often, in multiethnic, postcolonial states the language of the original imperial power is maintained as the language of administration. This both provides an arguably “neutral” standard which does not belong to any one ethnic group within the state, and is already known by the bureaucratic elites who administer the state. That is not to suggest that this is an easy process, given the historical connotations that these languages carry, but nationalism seems not to focus on language as a key issue.

A further legacy of imperialism is the process of immigration from former colonies into the excolonizer. This leads to an influx of nonnativelanguages and speakers, who, in terms of my examination of prestige carry low status. This situation may restrict the access of those whose language is not standardized to state facilities.

The continuing role of language, nationalism, and state formation can also be seen in nonimperial situations. Thus there are increasing differences between what are now known as the standard Czech and Slovakian languages following the division of Czechoslovakia in 1993.

Finally, the insistence on “one nation, one language” continues in many places. Thus the suppression of dissident ethnic groups occurs in conjunction with the suppression of their language, either overtly through coercion or more covertly through education policies

Nationalism and language standardisation

Processes of standardization seem to have benefited the powerful in society, but were not developed with a linguistic, ideological, or state target in mind. Communities were unified by language, also creating an awareness of “others”, but this was not ideologically manipulated. The advent of nationalism changed this.

Nationalism has clear roots in the development of printcapitalism, but takes them one step further. Emerging in the 17 th century and lasting through to the present day, the idea of nations and nationhood highlights difference, using it to create what Anderson calls “imagined communities”.

Ethnic groups (nations) become the focus of legitimacy, controlling their own destiny by governing themselves in their own unique territory. Nations thus become the most effective unit of international politics, and can act at their most efficient if they have internal cohesion. Clearly many factors contribute to this sense of nation the development of a national character, a national culture, a history, and often a national language. national languages are often used consciously as tools, facilitators, and weapons in creating internal unity and external differentiation.

Standard Language is primarily a national symbol, one that can be linked to a permanent past much more easily than often changing geographical boundaries, especially for newer nations. It can also be used as a symbol of formality and solemnity. It replaces the older administrative dialects to provide a more general lingua franca function, helping the internal cohesion of the state, and performs various nationforming functions such as in literature, broadcasting, education, etc. 

Anderson, B. (1991): Imagined Communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. Verso, London. (Revised and extended edition)

Haugen, E. (1966/1972): “Dialect,Language, Nation” reprinted in Pride and Holmes, J.(eds.) Sociolinguistics. Penguin, London.

Joseph, J.E.(1987): Eloquence and Power: the rise of language standards and standard languages. Frances Pinter, London.

Milroy, J. and Milroy, L.(1991): Authority in Language: investigating language standardization and prescription. Routledge, London.

Nairn, T. (1977): The BreakUp of Britain. NLB, London.