The concern for giving a fuller currency to languages under threat and for the social and economic wellbeing of speakers of various languages is widely shared by linguists working in the field of language and society. However, there are some fundamental theoretical differences among them. These distinctions have important practical consequences. They are reflected in the policy and policy interpretation routes chosen to achieve the goals. At the risk of oversimplification, I should like to distinguish between and discuss two main orientations: an orientation to structure and compliance based on preconceived ideals, and an orientation to practice and needs based on an analysis of the actual situation. This paper takes the discussion into the realm of university language policy and affords access in English to some findings of Flemish sociolinguists originally published in Dutch and to the preliminary report of the Eurropean Dylan project.