These reflections do not constitute a full-fledged theory of LL as they do not regarding how far and in what manner the four present any expectations structuring principles impact on L and its various flows. There is here no a priori assumption regarding which of those four principles prevail in what circumstances, nor is there any assumption regarding the precise possi- bilities of their intermingling. Moreover, these reflections take for granted that all four principles are compatible with each other and do, by no means, exclude each other.All in all, we propose here a theoretical approach from which can be drawn both general and empirically researchable hypotheses directly deriving from the very definitions of our structuration principles. These principles, indeed, suggest that they might carry special significance in given character regarding one or the other flow or some sub-flows. To istic circumstances illustrate this point, one may say that as far as the bottom-up flow is con- cerned, and especially its more prestigious sub-flows, the presentation-of- self principle is expected to gain in saliency where competition increases. In the same circumstances, one may also expect the good-reasons principle to grow in importance. The principle should be expressed collective-identity with more vigor-both in the top-down flow in general and in the sub-flows of LL items of daily and local services or goods where multiculturalism is taken for granted. It would be absent, at least from the top-down flow, where principle is bound to the absence or subordination the power-relation of expressions of particularisms in LL items attached to minority groups. On the other hand, LL items associated with a minority may rather be more asserted in top-down items which express, from a stand of superiority, public bodies' readiness to show tolerance for the minority group than in role-both bottom-up flow wherever the latter plays a restricted commercial among actors and in the public at large. Furthermore, the Bourdieusard hypothesis should be more relevant especially in bottom-up LL items where acute conflictual feelings nourish the minority's resolution-includ- ing minority-group LL actors to underrate linguistic symbols tied up to the dominant culture at the benefit of its own.On the other hand, and this perspective, some patterns might still be utilized relates to the good-reasons instrumental in bottom-up items to safeguard communication additionally to the emphasis on minority's symbols and the ignorance of all-societal ones. We think here, for instance, of the of neutral symbols in a con- text where the use of a dominant language is opposed against the back- ground of political dissent. An illustration of this is provided by the role of English in both Flemish and Francophone areas in Belgium where the use of French and Dutch, respectively, are barred by a conflictual system of official regional (Color Figures 3.4 and 3.5). monolingualism Another example is provided in Eastern Jerusalem where Hebrew is ignored