'¬'É …‡…M…O41 02Intro
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Introduction I would like to focus primarily on Japan, which holds a unique position in Asia, and provides important insights for understanding various methodological, attitudinal, and ide- ological issues about the uses and users of English. In East Asian region Japan has been one of the first countries to articulate positions about the acceptance of English and an identity with it, and about the rejection of the language and proposing a distance with it. The case study of Japan and its ongoing love–hate relationship with the language has a lesson for us all. A large body of such writing is in Jap- anese and therefore is not as well-known as it ought to be in Asia and elsewhere.1 (Kachuru 1997: 68) For in isolating beginnings as a subject of study my whole attempt was precisely to set a beginning off as rational and enabling, and far from being principally interested in logical failures and, by extension, ahistorical absurdities, I was try- ing to describe the immense effort that goes into historical retrospections as it set out to describe things from the beginning, in history. (Said 1975: xi–xii) 1. Purpose The aim in this paper is to reexamine Mori Arinori’s 1872–73 lan- guage reform discourse within a new theoretical framework, and to elucidate his Weltanschauung shaped by his early language experiences at home and abroad. Thus I want to offer an alterna- ― 1 ― tive interpretation of what Mori was really aiming at in his plan for national language reform. The main reason that I will deal with Mori Arinori’s philosophy of life in connection with his language use is that, as Braj B. Kachuru (1997) points out in the above quote, if we look at the history of modern (Meiji) Japan, we will find that quite a few samurai intellectuals “articulated positions about the acceptance of English and an identity with it, and about the rejection of the language and proposing a distance with it.” Kachuru is doubly right when he says that Japan is one of the first countries that tackled head on the question of the “local politics” of “English as a global language” (Crystal 1997; see also Sonntag 2003); and he also aptly takes up as a starting point for discussion Mori Arinori’s discourse on English and Japanese. Mori’s idea for the introduction of a “simplified” English into Japan is worthy of remark precisely because it can be seen as an unprecedented attempt at English orthographic reform by a non-English speaking nation in world history. Given the distinct geo-cultural/political position of modern (Meiji) Japan in East Asia, it is well worth examining how Meiji samurai intellectuals such as Mori Arinori looked uopn the hegemony of English in the new world order as the crucial part of the “national language” issue in terms of nation- state building (Kobayashi 2001). While, in Japan, there are some distinguished Japanese schol- ars (Tsuda 1990; Oishi 1990, etc.) who are interested in figuring out synchronically how the hegemony (or the dominant use) of English has contributed to “language inequality and distorted com- munication” in international and domestic settings, it would appear that they do not treat Mori Arinori as the first samurai ― 2 ― intellectual who explicitly problematized the politics of the English language for the benefit of non-native English speakers. It is obvi- ous that the historical and diachronic study of the problem of national language in Japan in relation to English linguistic hege- mony will help us gain more insight into the essence of the ques- tion of a “global” language facing the Japanese today. In order to understand in much greater depth the contemporary relevance of the question of the “big language” for the Japanese in the past, we need to develop our understanding of how the English language came to be historically, geopolitically, and culturally situated in the early development of a new branch of Western Learning in mid- nineteenth century Japan; this is where, as I shall argue in this paper, the modern language recognition of the Japanese had begun in earnest. In the field of English studies abroad, most of the papers deal- ing in English with the problems associated with the hegemony of English in the world have more to do with the former colonies of Britain and America; very few focus on the case of Japan.2 Recently, however, some serious attempts have been made by for- eign scholars (naturally, in English) to reexamine socio-linguistic issues surrounding the question of English in Japan (Stanlaw 2004; Kachuru 1997; Unger 1996). Regrettably, while they bring up for discussion Mori’s proposal for language reform in the early Meiji period trying to understand its historical significance in terms of modern Japan’s political and cultural development, they nonethe- less seem to fail to go beyond the socio-linguistic interpretative framework and get at the reason why the samurai-diplomat intel- lectual had to hammer out new Japan’s linguistic strategy in 1872– ― 3 ― 73. Our concern, therefore, is to take a critical look at the estab- lished theory on Mori’s language reform discourse from a broader perspective, and thereby shed new light on his hitherto ill-famed enterprise. It goes without saying that his ideas for national language building and education in Meiji Japan have posed many difficult problems (aporias) from the present standpoint of multicultural- ism, multilingualism, and postmodernism, and that the down side of his attitude and approach to the issues of modern language and society also needs to be retrospectively examined. However, ques- tions of such a controversial nature regarding the other side of the equation demand a separate study and go far beyond the scope of this paper; here I limit the discussion to reevaluation of the histori- cal and theoretical misinterpretations of his language reform dis- course and his Weltanschauung. 2. Methodology Theoretical framework for textual criticism3 of Mori Arinori’s English discourses on language Mori Arinori’s 1872–73 discourse on language reform in Japan has long been seen as resulting from his nihongo pesimizumu (pessimism over the future of the Japanese language) or kokugo shouaku setsu (belief in the inherent inferiority of the Japanese language to the larger languages such as Chinese and English) (see Watanabe 1993; Tanaka 1989). Consequently, it has been generally held to be a controversial proposal for “the abolition of the Japanese and the introduction of the English language into Japan.” Such vague and unreasoned conjectures helped perpetuate the accepted theory ― 4 ― rather than encouraging thorough textual criticism of the discourse by way of re-examination. Such being the case, it is necessary to problematize the old assumption behind the unmerited denuncia- tion of Mori’s serious proposal and seek to figure out new ways of getting at the truth of the matter. The conventional study of Mori Arinori, however, only seems to provide an insufficiently limited framework for understanding his linguistic tactics and strategy in the political, economic, cultural, and historical contexts. Whether we can succeed in challenging the long-established theory on Mori’s language reform discourse and thereby further extend the knowledge in the study of Mori Arinori in a small yet significant way, largely depends upon the methodology of this new study. To this end, we definitely need to formulate a new theoretical and interpretative framework for making possible an alternative inter- pretation of Mori’s “stigmatized” discourse on language reform in early post-Restoration Japan. Historical-sociological approach to a case study This is a historical-sociological re-examination of Mori’s Weltan- schauung and language experiences within a new theoretical/inter- pretative framework in which we will attempt to establish our hypothesis. Since historical-sociological approach can and should be hermeneutical in its own right, this methodology, first of all, as Tsutsui Kiyotada (1997: 3) explains, is intended “not to construct a general theory of modernization or social change (such as the theo- ry of evolution) in dealing with the establishment and develop- ment of modern society, but rather to interpret the historical significance or to elucidate the cause and effect of individual ― 5 ― cases.” Also, this approach involves using what C. W. Mills (1956) called the “sociological imagination.” Indeed, as Mills cogently argues, “neither the life of an individual nor the history of a society can be understood without understanding both.” After all, it is this sociological imagination that only “enables its possessor to under- stand the larger historical scene in terms of its meaning for the inner life and the external career of a variety of individuals…. The history that now affects every man is world history” (Mills 1956: 3–6). For this very reason, the present writer, born and raised and still living in this country, uses the “sociological and his- torical imagination” to carry out a case study of a samurai individ- ual in late-Edo and early Meiji Japan so as to understand his lan- guage-thought and behavior in the context of world history (Yuasa 1996). Another feature of this historical-sociological approach is that, as Tsutsui (ibid: 6) comments, “it borders on many other academic traditions or disciplines,” and therefore, “is open to a wider range of approaches.” To conduct textual criticism of Mori’s language experiences in the late-Edo and early-Meiji periods necessitates incorporating geo-political and cultural perspectives; for Mori was a globetrotting diplomat who put forth his “notoriously radical” proposal for language reform in Japan in light of the international balance of power and a colonial reconfiguration of East Asia by Western nations in the new world system.