Is Language a Barometer for Nationalism?
It seems like, at some point there was a popular saying in Indonesia; “Bahasamu adalah Bangsamu” which literally translates to “Your Language is Your Nation” (there is some variation to the precise saying, but more or less this is the geist). For us (Mr. & Mrs.B), it seems like an interesting point to discuss of whether language, can indeed, become a barometer of how “nationalist” a person is. This started out from our reflection of the choice of language both of us “automatically” opt for in this blog. Some of the key questions that we seek to look at throughout this post:
- What is nationalism? What are its indicators?
- Why do people prefer to speak in one language over the other?
- In relation to the above; is there then a quantifiable relationship to a person’s sense of nationalism?
So we tried to understand this concept of “nationalism” and whether there is a way to quantify it. We looked at the main Indonesian dictionary (KBBI) site, where it told us that “nationalism” is an act of loving one’s own nation and country. Furthermore, it added it is a state where one realise one’s affiliation to a nation that (in cooperation with peers) achieve and sustain a sense of identity, integrity, welfare, and strength of such nation. We then looked at Oxford dictionary to see what it had to say, and it told us that “nationalism” is an identification with one’s own nation and support for its interests, especially to the exclusion or detriment of the interests of other nation. That second passage is slightly worrying, but the important bit is the part about identifying one’s affinity and support towards a nation.
From the above review of very limited literature (mostly exclusively from a linguistics point of view), nationalism is one; about how a person feels as a part of a nation, and two; tangible actions that a person actually takes that contribute to their nation’s interest. We would like to hypothesise at this point that while language may be a symbol of unity, a lack (thereof) may not necessarily mean un-unity.

On the other end of the spectrum in this discussion, what is language? To us, at least, language seems to primarily be about a method of communication. This is so that we humans, as a social creature in nature, is able to understand and understood by other members of the human race. Throughout the hundreds or even thousands of years that has seen human civilisation grow into unprecedented complexity, so has language. This is mainly driven by the ease of modern machinery and infrastructure that allow for interaction that previously were not possible. Social groups have become larger and thus local languages that is only know, for example, among members of a clan may not be the most effective way to communicate with the larger section of the human social group. And thus some language become more universal than others; mainly (it seems) driven by matters of practicality (the more people are able to use a language, the more universal it becomes).
while language may be a symbol of unity, a lack (thereof) may not necessarily mean un-unity
So, to move the discussion forward; is there a direct (and consistent) relation between nation (and its nationalism derivative) and language? Perhaps the argument of direct linkage between language and nationalism is more convincing if indeed every single country that exist has precisely one unique national language. An example of this would be Bahasa Indonesia for Indonesians, French for Frenchmen, English for the Brits, and so on. But sociolinguistic fact seems to show the contrary; there are several countries in this world that either 1) Has no unique national language, and 2) Has several national languages. An example of the former would be some Latin American countries speaking Spanish or Portuguese as their national language, and an example of the latter is Canada’s national language is both English and French. If the argument is that language = nationalism; how are things quantified for countries like those?
Furthermore, we also believe every person is unique to the extent of his/her background which entails education, family history, surrounding environment, even norms and values each individual uphold. What we try to imply is that even a twin is two independent entities that despite the similarity of nurture pattern and school placement, they likely to immerse exposures differently. So is other individual. Mr.B live in Adelaide for several years during primary education years, this meant that his basic education was delivered, and thus his vocabulary bank is richer in english. This was even more propelled by the fact that he took up english debating during senior high school and enrolled in a bachelor program that was fully conducted and examined in english.
Whilst Mr.B had a perk living abroad during his childhood, Mrs.B has slightly different story. She had been in english course for the longest time at her very early age but that’s not the only explanation of why she religiously speak english more actively in daily basis. Thanks to Walt Disney and his genius masterpiece Walt Disney Studios, the young and little Mrs.B was overjoyed. She sang The three little pigs as her lullaby, she dreamed too many times to become cinderella, and she know little bit too much of every moves and songs at Mickey Mouse Club back then. They say children are like sponges and apparently it’s all true thus exactly what happened to Mrs.B.
Even in the workforce, as a result of booming industrialisation, growth of transportation infrastructure, and rapid development of information communication technology, the need to communicate and interact with people that do not speak your native language is even more unavoidable. One of the country’s economic major source of income are receivables from export products, in fact one of the ways we can promote Indonesian art and mastery of handicraft skills is by tapping into consumers out there. How can we do so if we could not speak the universal language? And thus as a byproduct of that we see current generation parents investing more in schools for their children that would acclimatise them in speaking english. Yet does that mean they have no love for Indonesia? We think those two are apples and oranges.
So we’ve established above that from both sociolinguistic patterns and context of the present, there are many other factors that drive the use of language. We can’t say this is true for everyone, but for us in some context using english is preferable. Especially in the context of writing, we find it somehow easier to express ourselves in english (and, of course, there is a certain economic consideration that if we write in english there is a bigger chance of a bigger audience beyond our peer Indonesians LOL). Verbal use of language outside Indonesian is mostly on a needs basis, although there are times where english is also a bit easier to express things. This may be an influence from our surrounding environment.
At this point we’d like to quote Nolan’s Batman when he said “it’s not who you are underneath, but it’s what you do that defines you”. Departing from this quote, what we tend to think is that especially considering where the world is at right now, it may be highly inaccurate to quantify nationalism or any sense of patriotism based on someone’s personal preference or even “the journey that life has taken them”. It’s rather similar to cases where Indonesians work abroad. Some criticise that this is not a form of “giving to your country”, but we beg to differ; we think you can build your country even when you are not physically in your country.
it may be highly inaccurate to quantify nationalism or any sense of patriotism based on someone’s personal preference or even “the journey that life has taken them
By being used to speaking the universal and global language, one would be able to tell the story of Indonesia to an audience that goes beyond our own countrymen. And we think it’s important. If there is something that we can learn from several major wars throughout the course of the human history is that conflicts tend to start from a misunderstanding; a failure from both side to communicate and comprehend one another and thus is interpreted wrongly. We think that even more so today, language is most definitely not a barometer of nationalism. So, what do you guys think?

