Introduction

There is a surprising amount of political, cultural, ethnic, and economic diversity to be

found in the Southeast Asian region. A significant portion of this can be attributed to the influences
of immigration (particularly from India and China), in addition to other factors. remnants of former
colonial powers such as the Dutch, British, French, Portuguese, and Spanish are still present. as
well as American – which have permeated the various developmental paths of nations as well as
the construction of new nations in the area, resulting from the imposition of artificial political
borders, to the regional repercussions of World War II (including but not limited to): despite the
severity of the Cold War). The assertions made by Barker, Harms, and Lindquist (2014) that the
region "does not possess an underlying coherence," and that it is the "host of an extraordinarily
rich assortment of various languages' (Chandler et al. 2005, page 12), with reference to the to the
extent that there is widespread ignorance regarding the histories of nearby neighbours, or the
national leaders of the many countries in the region.Despite their diversity, the countries of
Southeast Asia have in large measure the following, common experiences in the political and
economic spheres Human migration across the region, most frequently for cross-border
commercial and industrial activity, in the form of migrant labour, particularly in the domestic
sector, and regional tensions in the late 20th century.

The 20th century is credited with bringing the region closer together, despite the fact that
always on an equal footing or in ways that are mutually desired. The postcolonial paths of many
groups. Countries in Southeast Asia, including that of Thailand, which was known for its
technological innovation actually never under the control of a colonial power (for more
information, see Anderson 1977) – have revolved within the context of nation-building (inclusive of
fostering a sense of nationalism) and the advancement of the economy. These paths have a
tendency to frame the discussion. The projects of autocratic and market-driven governments in
Southeast Asian countries governing, becoming a nation, and growing the economy are all
important.

This volume emerges from the context of "cross-cutting features" (Barker, Harms, and
Lindquist 2014, page 8) among the countries of Southeast Asia with a focus on issues pertaining to
language, education, nation-building, minority languages, and their interrelationships. Education is
a crucial component of the necessary infrastructural foundation for the successful implementation
(or arbitrary imposition) of reforms. The languages of the region have been intricately entwined
with the nation-building projects of individual countries. Education systems have developed into
significant tools for the institutionalisation of languages as both dominant and national, with the
inevitable result being the marginalisation of less influential local languages. There have been
times when reforms have been implemented in the name of anti-colonial resistance, social
integration, and the formation of national identities (see the chapter on Myanmar, as an acute
example). Schools have also become centres for the (re)affirmation of the role of colonial
languages in society, particularly English. These affirmations are couched in market-driven
ideologies and practises, which has resulted in changes to the linguistic ecologies of the region.
English is a prime example of this phenomenon (see the chapters on Indonesia, Brunei and
Singapore that illustrates these ecological shifts). In a nutshell, the formulation of language policy
in Southeast Asia has been an inextricable component of the processes of nation-building.

This volume strives to define and track these changes through ways in which particular
countries have constructed their languages and education systems within their own situations.
Minority or non-dominant languages are of particular interest in this context, particularly because
they tend to reflect different positions vis-à-vis colonial and national or locally dominant languages,
for example, from the perspectives of local elites: as symbols of backwardness, anti-modernism,
and anti-nationalism; and as instruments of potential national disunity and disintegration. On the
other hand, they could be regarded as democratising voices of cultural preservation and
affirmation of ethnic identity; tools for effective teaching and learning, particularly at elementary
levels; and core elements of restorative justice and socioeconomic redistribution. Despite this,
Kosonen and Young (2009, page 10) write that "many educational planners and practitioners
around the region are still not always fully aware of the issues involved in the use of minority
learners' mother tongues in education."

This is said to be the case in Southeast Asia. In this volume, language hierarchies and the
ways in which nationalist language policies manage or attempt to contain or curtail diversity in
order to re-affirm the linguistic and educational status quo of respective societies are analysed and
questioned. These questions point to issues of assimilation and shift in Southeast Asia as reflected
in the volume's title, and the individual chapters in this volume aim to unpack these issues through
scrutiny of individual countries in the region. The volume's title is "Assimilation and Shift in
Southeast Asia."

The study is focusing on five nations in Southeast Asia: Indonesia, Malaysia, Singapore,
Thailand, and the Philippines. These countries make up the region known as Southeast Asia. Their
history textbooks will serve as the focus of the inquiry. Each of the five nations that make up
Southeast Asia have their own distinct story in their school textbooks. The analysed data are as
follows inside the textbook, in the form of whole sentences, clauses, phrases, and individual
words. In this setting, the vocabulary that is presented in the textbook is understood to function
as an instrument of the power. The method known as critical discourse analysis (CDA) was used in
this research because it is possible to examine the power dynamics, history, and ideology that are
present in the text. The term "ideology" refers to the patterns and procedures that occur in
society. When looking at the social relationships between the many parties involved, social
processes may be understood by considering the historical backdrop (Janks, 1995; Wodak, 2001).

The three-dimensional framework developed by Fairclough for analysing discourse was

used for this study. These dimensions include text, discourse practise, and sociocultural practise.
The text is analysed linguistically using the Fairclough model, with particular attention paid to the
vocabulary, sentence structure, and semantics (verbally and visually). Within the confines of this
structure, the attention that is paid to cohesion and coherence, as well as how the words or
phrases were joined to generate knowledge, is the centre of attention. A component of the activity
that is relevant to the process of generating and consuming text is called discourse practise. The
practise of discourse investigates the steps involved in the production of text as well as the
historical context of the social circumstances that have an impact on those steps.

The study of social and linguistic discourse is carried out, with macroanalysis focusing on
the structure of society and microanalysis focusing on the behaviour of individuals in society. Both
language and society are components of linguistic phenomena, which in turn are components of
social phenomena (Henderson, 2005). The process of description is the first step in the text
analysis, which is followed by a process of analysis or interpretation, and finally, social analysis,
which is also known as an explanation (Janks, 1995). The nation-building initiatives that have been
developed by the governments of Southeast Asian countries are as follows examined by explaining
and providing an interpretation of the policymaking process. The study focused on things that
impact processes, such as the political climate at the time, as one of its primary areas of interest.
The significance of the link between text and context in the creation of meaning is emphasised
here.
 When making interpretations, each and every behaviour, belief, and attitude, in addition to
social connection, is taken into account. This is an interpretation of the data does not result in the
only possible truth. This analysis is in fact subject to interpretation, and the way it is interpreted
may shift depending on the underlying point of view. The last stage is to conduct an analysis of
the macrosocial circumstances that existed at that era. At this point, the ideology and culture that
lie behind the discourse are investigated in order to discover the connection between power and
educational materials. In the framework of society, questions of power and domination are
examined as examples of social constructions produced by the authorities

It is widely believed that ideology plays a key role in ensuring that the authorities can
continue to achieve their goals (Wodak, 2001). The social, political, and ideological factors of
individual Southeast Asian nations all play a role in the formulation of a nation-building programme
by those nations. For this reason, many programmes dealing with issues of ethnic reconciliation
and the memory of Japanese occupation in their own nations evolved among the countries of
Southeast Asia. One such programme is the example given above. Countries such as Malaysia,
Thailand, and Singapore are actively working toward ethnic reconciliation, for instance. Some
nations see the collective memory of the Japanese Occupation as a whip in the process of nation-
building and the formation of national identity. Some nations choose to disregard it because they
believe it has no bearing on their affairs the work of constructing Malaysia into a nation started
shortly after the country gained its independence in 1957. (Saad, 2012). In the past, the
government of Great Britain attempted to create a confederation of Malay republics called the
Malayan Union, which would have guaranteed equality for all of the region's many ethnicity.

On the other hand, those of Malay ethnicityrejected their formation since it resulted in the
loss of advantages and chose a different ethnic identity during the same time period, while
Malaysia was still under British colonial rule, the country attempted to rally national solidarity in an
effort to declare independence from Britain. The "State of Malay Dream" is an effort that was
started by Malaysian and Indonesian nationalists. Its motto is "Great Malay," and it expresses the
aspiration of Malaysian and Indonesian nationalists for an independent nation that is free from
invasion from other countries. The People's Power Center (PUTERA) and the PanMalayan Council
of Joint Action (PMCJA) came together as part of a coalition of left-wing forces during the months
of March to July 1947 as a consequence of the resistance movement against Britain Malaysia is
home to three of the world's most populous races: the Malays, the Chinese, and the Indians. More
over half are of Malay descent, while the Chinese and Indian populations each make up around 30
and 10 percent of the population, respectively. Late in the 19th century and early in the 20th
century saw the arrival of Chinese and Indian people on the Malay Peninsula. Their linguistic
practises, cultural norms, and religious beliefs are distinct from those of the Malay language. The
contrasts might make the programme in Malaysia for constructing the country more difficult at
times.

In Malaysia, one's political identification is strongly influenced by their ethnic background.

This is reflected in the establishment of political parties catering specifically to Malays, Chinese,
and Indians (Susanto, 2016). These parties include the United Malay National Organization
(UMNO), which has its roots in the Malay ethnic group, the Malaysian Chinese Association (MCA),
which represents the Chinese ethnic group, and the Malaysian Indian Congress (MIC), which
represents the Indian ethnic group. The fact that a Malay person was always elected to the
position of prime minister is one indication of UMNO's political supremacy. The United Malays
National Organization (UMNO) and other Malay organisations made repeated appeals to the
electoral draught panel to make Islam the official religion of Malaysia (Ziegenhain, 2018). The
scope of ethnic parties and collective aspirations grows.

The distance that separates them. Egocentrism can be found in each of these.
The disparity in wealth that exists between people of Chinese and Malay ancestry, as well as the
advantages enjoyed by Malay workers in the public sector, private industry, and educational
institutions, all contribute to the difficulty of nation-building (Susanto, 2016). Even if they have
less access to economic resources, the Chinese people have a greater degree of influence over
those resources. In addition, the cause is the historical heritage. The position held by Chinese
people is frequently leveraged for the benefit of Malay ethnics' interests. On the other side, they
are subjected to discriminatory treatment, such as with regard to the settlement options available
to them. The Chinese people's dogged will to succeed in business has propelled them to the
forefront of the global economy.