ASIAN ETHNICITY 5 advantage to one group over others. Language policy has always been contentious in these cases. In some countries, such as Ukraine, Kazakhstan, Kosovo and Myanmar, tensions have arisen over the selection of a sole national language as part of their nation building process. In the process, minority language rights have been undermined by cultural assimilation of the speakers of the language spoken by the majority. While governments have played a major role in determining which language should count as a national language, and which speakers have the right to choose and speak their languages, there are many other factors that influence language choices by multilingual people to switch between languages, which contributes to the demise of minority languages. Giles et. al., for instance, show that ethnolinguistic vitality (EV) of a linguistic minority group is influenced by status, demographic, institutional support and control factors, and that mother tongues of communities with high EV will be retained, while those with low EV will tend to be replaced by the dominant language.30 Status variables include the economic, social, sociohistorical, and language status of the group within or outside the mainstream community.31 The economic value of a language is measured by richness in language attributes (literary heritage, prestige, standardiza­ tion, etc.) as well as its potential to yield advantage and profit and its ability to enhance cultural or identity status.32 Demographic variables are those related to the number and distributional patterns of ethnolinguistic group members throughout a particular region or national territory. These variables also include the birth rate, the group’s rate of mixed marriages, and the rate of immigration and emigration patterns.33 Group attitudes about itself and its language also influence group members’ choice of languages. Institutional support and control factors refer to the extent to which an ethnolinguistic group receives formal and informal support in various institutions, particularly in relation to mass media, education, government services, industry, religion, culture and politics.34 Other researchers point out the importance of home and community environments in provid­ ing sufficient context for the development of language proficiency.35 These factors have not only influenced the vitality of individual language but also created linguistic hierarchies which favor stronger language groups to exercise extensive social and political influence at the global, regional, state, and community levels.36 Official language policy is a legal manifestation of language ideology which is enacted by ordinary community members (through churches, political parties, and language and literature associations) as well as official institutions and elites, including academic scholars.’37 These ideologies of language are reflected in institutionalized arrangements such as official and secondary languages for the education sector, state media, and legal institutions.38 The enormous transformation brought by information technology over the past two decades shows that the vitality of languages resides not only in the hands of states, but also on the global social media networks. The impact of information technology on linguistic diversity and identity formation and reassertion of ethnolinguistic groups have become noticeable, as they enable ‘the development of electronically linked, “wired” or “networked” communities defined by especial interests including those of language and identity.’39 Most notably, advanced communication through the internet and social media creates proximity for those ‘communities without propinquity’40 by means of virtual communities, which again contributes to the revitalization or extension of linguistic survival for minority groups dispersed across different geographical locations.