The paper argues that a typology of multilingual contexts that witness different kinds of development of languages and national identities has to be viewed as a cline. At one extreme lie Type A societies in which 'language' as an entity is anthropomorphized by its speakers, so much so that in some communities, it is revered and regarded as an object of worship. Language develops like an organ or a faculty among children of these communities and remains with them as long as they live. Their language becomes a matter of passion for which the community is ready to make sacrifices, and the history of nation-building is often written after such sacrifices. Bangladesh is an ideal example of this type. At the other extreme lie Type Z communities that view 'language' as a tool or skill to perform some action, the nature of which depends on exigencies such as doing business, establishing links, using a medium of mass communication for leisure-time, or for utilitarian use like library language, or language of religion, etc. Type Z communities often use different 'tools' (e.g., languages) for different purposes, and are unable to be charged enough to use language as an instrument of nation building. Singapore with its four national language communities presents a picture that comes closer to this kind of postulation. Here we find a number of interesting strategies being used, including cultivation of new country-internal norms, like Singlish, for instance. This paper discusses a number of situations in multilingual communities around the world to show that they are not all-or-none or mutually exclusive as was often assumed in earlier typologies. It is suggested that many of these situations show an overlap of features and pose an interesting challenge for language planning agencies. The paper shows that the planning models have to be eclectic and pluralistic to accommodate these differences.