In many multilingual societies and states, the dominant ethnic group(s) often attempt to assimilate linguistically ethnic and/or linguistic minorities. On the other hands, ethnnolinguistic minorities in such a situation try to differentiate themselves from the dominant group(s) on the basis of the difference in language and other properties. This opposition between assimilation and differentiation, or homogenization and heterogenization is present in most of the ethnic and/or ethnolinguistic conflicts. It is, however, most clearly seen in nested conflicts discussed in the present paper. Nested ethnic conflicts involve three ethnic groups layered hierarchically in both power and territory. The first party is the greatest of all both in power and territory. The second is contained territorially within the scope of the first, and intermediate in power and territory. The third is the smallest in territory and power and is completely embedded territorially within the sencond, and hence the first. In a nested conflict, two principles or doctrines of assimilation and differentiation are often found to be working in a very oppposite way. Usually, the largest and strongest party imposes the dominant language upon the second (and the third). While the intermediate group opposes the imposition of the dominant language, the group in turn imposes their language upon, and seeks to homogenize, the third, smallest group within their territory, especially at the time of decline or fall of the power of the largest group. The smallest group in their turn often opposes the imposition of the language of the intermediate group and sometimes seeks assistance from the largest or collaborate with the lanrgest in opposition to the intermediate. The present paper attempts to illustrate the workings of the two principles through the examination of in the actual conflicts in the neneteenth-century Kingdom of Hungary, contemporary Georgia and Moldova.