Language as a marker of national identity is usually acknowledged, but only occasionally has it been the subject of empirical analysis. This article makes the case for grounding analysis of nations and nationalism in the language spoken by a group. Cases include language politics in Canada and the United States, and those in the newly independent states emerging from the Soviet Union. Mixed civic-ethnic approaches to language use and citizenship offer the most realistic and equitable resolutions of conflicts in a state between majority and minority groups. A principle reason is that communal leaders, armed with irreconcilable agendas, prefer avoiding real negotiations, unless they promise to achieve what otherwise might be imposed through military victory.
Meaningful negotiations require substantive political discourse.
The logical place to begin deciding 'who rules what' is to have the participants determine whether they can live together or only apart. For more information on this journal, including subscription details, future contents and how to request sample copies please visit the Nationalism and Ethnic Politics home page .