Language and Nationhood

Nation: According to Oxford Dictionary 2008, A country considered as a

group of people with the same language, culture and history, who live in a
particular under one government.

Nationhood is the state of being a nation, or a large group of people united

by common language, culture or economic life. An example of nationhood is
the U.S., with a large group of people united by shared politics and culture.

Language : is a system of communication used by a particular country or

community.
Importance of language:

Selection: A very difficult decision is to select the variety which is to be

selected as a standard language. Usually the language of those people is
selected who are politically and financially strong, as we know that the
present English was once a dialect spoken in only one region and French was
once a dialect spoken in Paris.

Codification: Once a variety is selected, some agency or academy is made

in order to make dictionaries and grammar books to fix the variety, so that
everyone agrees on what is correct. Such academies are present in every
country like Pakistan, France etc.

Elaboration of function: It means that the chosen variety is used in all the
functions associated with central government and with writing: for example,
in parliament and law courts, educational and scientific documents and of
course in various forms of literature.

Acceptance: The last step is important in the sense that once a variety is
accepted as a national language it serves as a strong unifying force for the
state, as a symbol of its independence.

Nation State: A group of people with the same culture, language etc. who have
formed an independent country.

Criteria of nation state:

Geography : It looks very logical. For instance, Iceland and Japan are very clearly
nation states. The island nature of these nations provides clear national boundaries.
However, take an island like Ireland. Irish nationalists would argue that the island of
Ireland should constitute a single nation state, but one million Protestants in

Northern Ireland would argue that they are religiously and culturally so different
from the four million Irish citizens that unification is unthinkable.

Ethnicity: A powerful case for nationhood can be mounted when there is a

common ethnicity at stake. Historically China has often comprised several
(usually warring) states, but there is strong sense that the Chinese constitute
a single nation. In 1947, one could make the same case for what was then
India, but Muslim leaders felt that religion was paramount and forced the
creation of a separate nation called Pakistan which was geographically
peculiar because it consisted at the time of two units some 1,000 miles
(1,600 km) apart. Then again, if ethnicity is a prime determinant of
nationhood, why is there no nation state called Kurdistan? Instead the Kurds
are (predominately) in the nations of Iraq, Iran, Turkey and Syria.

Language: The language that people speak has been a strong force for the
creation of nations. France, Germany and Italy are large, prosperous states
that are defined in the main by language. Brazil is defined in part by its use of
the Portuguese language, the only Latin American country to use the
language. When people in different states speak the same language such as
Romania and Moldova, Albania and Kosovo, The Netherlands and Flemish
Belgium there are those who argue for a bringing together of those people
into a common state. There are many people in Hungary who lament the
Treaty of Trianon of 1920 and would like all Hungarian-speaking peoples in
surrounding countries to be reunited with mother Hungary. The problem is
that, in countless states, there is no single dominant language but many
different languages, so that language alone is often a poor determinant of
statehood. For instance, India has no less than 23 official languages, while
South Africa has 11.

Religion: Religious belief has been the building block of many countries. Many
European countries to this day see themselves as essentially Catholic or Protestant.
Most Middle Eastern countries see themselves as Sunni Muslim or Shi'ite Muslim.
Countries like Nepal and Bhutan see Bhuddism as a defining characteristic. Perhaps
the most radical case of a religion distinguishing a nation is Israel which defines
itself as a Jewish state. But, if religion is so important, what do we do about states
that are sharply divided by religion such as Nigeria or the Sudan? And, if religion is
the defining feature of a state, do those of a different religion have the same rights
as other citizens? A Catholic could not become King in Britain; could a Muslim
become President of Israel?

A case Study of Pakistan and Bangladesh

Solutions

accept that people can and will have multiple identities and not define people
simply by nationality.

address the issues causing the divisions by providing a fair distribution of

national resources and equality of rights for different ethnic, religious and
language groups

consider power-sharing arrangements in government and administration

between major groupings as is the case in Lebanon or Switzerland

devolve power for a range of political issues and responsibilities to more local
levels so that all groups feel a sense of belonging and ownership

create a sense of pan-nationalism by maximising co-operation with other

nation states as the Europeans have done so effectively with the building of
the European Union

solve territorial disputes by peaceful means that make appropriate use of

global bodies like the International Court and the United Nations

Second
Language
Acquisition
It is not just the learning of a subsequent language to be learnt in childhood but also
the study of the processes involved and of those who are learning it.
The Main Theories in SLA

Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (CAH)

Error Analysis (EA) and Inter-language (IL)

Monitor Model Hypothesis

Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (CAH)

Gass and Selinker
Contrastive Analysis Hypothesis (CAH)

Gass and Selinker (1994)

It is a way of comparing languages in order to determine potential errors for

the ultimate purpose of isolating what needs to be learned and what does not
need to be learned in a second language learning situation.

It focuses on the differences and similarities between the L1 and the Second
Language (L2).

This means that the similarities and differences between L1 and L2 play a
crucial role in learners production.

Saville-Troike (2006) also points out that there will be a transfer of elements
acquired in the L1 to the target L2

This transfer is considered positive if the same structure exists in both

languages and the transfer results in the correct production of language in
the L2.

However, it can also be negative if a language structure from the L1 does not
exist in the L2 but the structure is transferred leading to the production of
incorrect language.

Mitchell and Myles (1998: 30) say that the predictions of CAH, that all the
errors made in learning the L2 are due to interface from L1, were shown to be
unfounded. They claim that many studies and research explain convincingly
that the majority of errors could not be attributed to the L1. In other words,
CAH might not predict learning difficulties, and was only useful in the
retrospective explanation of errors. This point considerably weakened its
appeal. However, the heightened interest in this area did lead to the origin of
Error Analysis.