étatiser versus nationaliser

[alan gould]

Is there a difference?  For example, in English, you would say that a corporation (or bank) that the government took over has been "nationalized."  But you only use it regarding a big enterprise.  Otherwise, you speak of something being "state-run" or "government-run."  Maybe "nationaliser" is also used for corporations and "etatiser" is not?  

[George Hunt]

I don't have first hand experience of those words but logic  would say that "nationaliser" would be  a more normal  way of saying it  than "étatiser" since the nation  is a more accessible notion (yes ,notion  not nation!) than the state.

Both those  words (nation+state)   exist in equivalent form in English and so I  suppose they  have  identical meanings to those in French (la nation and l'état).

 

I would hazard that  "étatiser"  has a more limited sense  in the same way that the State is  a limited (subordinate) part of the Nation. It also ,to my sense,  has a more technical  feel to it.

But,as I say , I can't be sure  how the 2 words are actually used in French.( although a quick glance through Google  returns  seems to indicate that "nationaliser" may indeed be the more common usage.

I am sure there are nuances that I  wouldn't know of.

[Chantal Savignat]

In fact, in reality, in France, we never use "étatiser", but we used to hear "nationaliser", in the same way and in the same meaning you said "a corporation has been nationalized".

I look for, but it seems that "étatiser" is a synonym, and I didn't find where it's used. Maybe in books, not to repeat "nationaliser".