The Role of Language in Advancing Nationalism: Noriko Iwamoto
The Role of Language in Advancing Nationalism: Noriko Iwamoto
The Role of Language in Advancing Nationalism: Noriko Iwamoto
Noriko Iwamoto
0. Introduction 0. Introduction
1. Language, reality and our conceptual This paper on language and politics
system explores the use of language when it is
needed for creating and consolidating a
1.1. World constructed by word: language and state’s power, such as in wartime. I examine
ideology how linguistic resources and devices are used
1.2. Language, our conceptual system, and a to regulate, reconstruct, and, sometimes,
critique of already existing literature manipulate reality. The operation of political
1.2.1. The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis language is to categorize and label events,
1.2.2. Extreme and limited versions of the phenomena, people, and the state’s goals, and
hypothesis to formulate them in a way desirable to
1.2.3. Criticisms regulate and control the ideas and behavior of
people.
2. Nation, people, and language
2.1. The role of language in the formation of The paper consists of three parts: the role
nationhood of language in the perception and
2.2. Ideology of “official nationalism” and understanding of reality; the function of
“official language” language in the creation and promotion of
2.3. Centralized bureaucratic language and nationhood; and specific language patterns
the real usage of ordinary speech such as metaphor and labeling that leaders
2.4. Print-language and the development of take advantage of, in order to manipulate the
nationhood and nationalism thoughts of people.
2.5. Criticisms
Firstly, I introduce and critically examine
3. War, peace, and language: linguistic devices the literature on language, reality, and our
for control conceptual system in relation to political
3.1. Language and war discourse. The discussion starts with a
3.2. Metaphor as political language statement of my personal position and belief
in nominalism and language relativism: the
4. Summary
world is constructed by word, and any aspect
Bibliography
of language used, in political discourse
概要(日本語)
especially, carries ideological implications.
91
Hence, I critically analyze the validity of the terms or commonly used terms are, and can
Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, which is considered only be, names that human beings attach to
to be fundamental to the study of language’s things or phenomena. They see the
role in perceiving reality. In the second objectives of Aristotelian realism as
section I explore the relationship between misunderstood: science of this form cannot
nation, people, and language, focusing on the produce objective knowledge of the world,
role of language in the formation of only the knowledge of the way human beings
nationhood and the advancement of use words.
nationalism. This is followed by a discussion I myself would hold a weaker version of this
of authority in language: what is authority in nominalism, and I would reject realism. I
language, and how does it work in exercising am of the belief that the world is created by
political control? the way human beings label and categorize
In the last section I specify what linguistic things, states, and processes. By extension, I
devices are employed for mass mobilization or would represent the position of a weaker
for managing public opinion for a certain version of the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis, or
national cause such as consolidating the linguistic relativism, which holds that a
state’s power or conducting a war. These linguistic structure to some extent
devices include metaphorical language and determines the conceptual system of the
categorization. speaker of the language that he or she speaks.
I shall discuss the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis,
and my attitude towards it, in section 1.2.
1. Language, reality and our conceptual
Ockham (c. 1280-1349) regarded our use of
system
general terms as a reflection not of the nature
of the world, but of the nature of our own
1.1 World constructed by word: language
minds. This is similar to Hume’s position, and
and ideology
a more modern form was advocated by Quine
My analysis of political language proceeds (1960, 1969), who maintained that
from the philosophical idea of nominalism, classification expresses a view that reflects
which had been originally advocated by our needs and interests rather than the world
Roscellinno, and later developed by Ockham, as it is in itself.
Hume, Locke, Humboldt, and Wittgenstein. Locke (1632-1704) recognized that the way
The idea also later influenced American in which people interpret the meaning of
Structuralists like Sapir and Whorf. This idea commonly used words often leads them away
of nominalism originally developed as an from the truth. He stated that the words an
antithesis to the claim of Aristotelian individual uses are signified by an arbitrary,
realism that there are natural kinds and spontaneous, individual, and private act
categories: that any sort of knowledge of the performed in the mind of the speaking agent.
world in itself or any understanding of cause He wrote:
or of the essence of nature, things, or
phenomena was to be acquired by human And every man has so inviolable a Liberty,
beings using their own faculties. to make Words stand for what Ideas he
Instead, nominalists hold that general pleases, that no one hath the power to
92
make others have the same Ideas in their known Sapir-Whorf hypothesis. The account
Minds, that he has, when they use the same below deals with this hypothesis in more
Words, that he does. detail, along with its criticisms.
(Locke, 1690: III 2.8)
Thus, naming is a function of our mind: our
This view additionally implies that we way of thinking and our interests, and not
cannot directly confirm whether the idea we reality in itself. This subjective view is not
signify by a given word is the same as is restricted to the lexical level of language. It
signified by other people when they use the can be said that any linguistic aspect of
very same word. language structure, especially when used in
Similarly, Wilhelm von Humboldt (1767- political discourse, whether syntactic, lexical,
1835) stressed the subjective feature of semantic, pragmatic, or discoursal, could
language: “Language is, as it were, the carry ethical implications or have ideological
external manifestation of the minds of people. significance, depending on the speaker’s value
Their language is their soul, and their soul is systems.
their language” (Humboldt, 1971: 24). He
was the first European to combine an
1.2. Language, our conceptual system,
extensive knowledge of non-Indo-European
and a critique of already existing
languages with a broad philosophical
literature
background. This led him to develop a
linguistic philosophy that held that the view A more modern form of relativism and
of the world of one people differs from that of nominalism is the well-known Sapir-Whorf
another people by a much greater extent than hypothesis, which is now a classic on the
ever conceived. He further stated that this is subject of language, worldview, and our
due to the extreme differences in the internal conceptual system.
structures of their respective languages
(Penn, 1972: 46-53). Franz Boas brought
1.2.1. The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis
Humboldt’s idea with him when he came to
America. He then had an influence on his In brief, the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis is
student Edward Sapir. based on two assumptions. The first is
linguistic relativism, which holds that our
In brief, according to nominalist and worldview is molded by the grammatical
relativist ideas, a thing comes into being structure of the language we speak; in its
when it is given a name. To carry the idea to extreme version, it implies that people who
its extreme, a thing does not exist until it is speak different languages can never share
given a name. That naming is done on the the same reality, and this in turn implies that
basis of our subjective needs and interests. a perfect translation from one language to
There is no objective existence, as the another is impossible. The second
realists proclaim. A weaker version of the assumption is linguistic determinism, which
nominalists’ ideas is supported here in in its extreme form maintains that we are
pursuit of the studies of language and politics. inescapably passive prisoners of the
A more modern form of this view is the well- language we speak rather than active
93
masters of it. reality. The following are some points of
criticisms:
94
The very concepts of linguistic repertoire, Who paid the bill?
role repertoire, repertoire range, and
repertoire compartmentalization argue So many reports.
against any such neat classification once So many questions.
functional realities are brought into
consideration. Any reasonably complex (cf. Geyer-Ryan, 1988: 201-202)
speech community contains various speech
networks that vary with respect to the Therefore, more attention should be paid to
nature and ranges of their speech the way in which “different perspectives,
repertoires. (1970: 94-95) different ideologies interact within a
particular language and a particular culture”
Whorf’s “neat and simplistic” linguistic (Lee, 1992: 48). The implications of this on
relativism presupposes the idea that an entire the study of language and conceptualization is
language or entire societies or cultures are that language should be seen more properly
categorizable or typable in a straightforward, “as the medium of consciousness for a
discrete, and total manner, ignoring other society, its forms of consciousness
variables such as contextual and semantic externalized” (Kress and Hodge, 1979: 13).
factors. Geyer-Ryan says “each word is Indeed, any aspect of language use, including
inextricably bound up in the dissemination of the words, grammar, and discourse of a
its social contexts” (1988: 195). language, encode a view of the way we see
In regard to that point, Bakhtin presented the world. For example, we say in ordinary
the concept of “social semantic hybrid” discourse that “The sun rises,” as we perceive
(Bakhtin, 1981: 360). Bakhtin points out it that way, though the sun never rises in a
that, for example, in the following poem by strictly physical sense. It is more appropriate
Bertolt Brecht, we can observe “the mutual to define language as an external
exclusivity of the two stylistic processes” manifestation of one’s conceptual system (see
between the ruler and the ruled. section 3.2. for metaphorical language).
95
other people’s language (the existence of be fashion designers who would use more
multitude words for snow) without checking varieties of terms than ordinary people).
the evidence. He disapproves of the way in The reality about Inuk is that there may be
which the definition of terms is so uncritically many, many words for snow that are not used
accepted: by so-called standard Inuk speakers. Pullum
may be right when he points out complexities
When you pose a question as ill-defined as within a culture, and that not all the existing
“How many Eskimo words for snow are terms were used by “standard” Inuk speakers.
there?” Woodbury observes, you run into
major problems not just with determining The languages that the Eskimo people
the answer to the apparently empirical speak around the top of the world, in places
“How many” part but with the other parts: as far apart as Siberia, Alaska, Canada, and
how to interpret the terms “Eskimo,” Greenland, differ quite a lot in details of
“words,” and “for snow.” All of them are vocabulary. The differences between
problematic. (ibid.: 168) urbanized and nomadic Eskimos and
between young and old speakers are also
Pullum then concludes that the list for the considerable. So one problem lies in
terms of snow is still short, “not remarkably getting down to the level of specific lists of
different in size from the list in English” words that can be verified as genuine by a
(170). Pullum is correct when he notes that particular speaker of a particular dialect,
we sometimes uncritically accept a myth and getting away from the notion of a single
because of intellectual shortcomings or even truth about a monolithic “Eskimo”
negligence. language. (168)
Similarly, it is observed that in Japanese
there are lots of words for rain: kirisame This statement of Pullum implies the need
(misty rain), harusame (spring rain), for studying individual speakers and suggests
hisame (winter rain), yuudachi (summer that there is no such thing as a “monolithic
afternoon shower), niwaka ame (same as Eskimo language” that can qualify for
yuudachi), shigure (a shower in late autumn scientific description. He is saying there is no
or early winter), and samidare (early monolithic or standard language in any nation
summer rain, May rain). In the Japanese or society. There are ideological diversities.
language there are also many distinctions There may be lots of words for snow in Inuk,
made about rice, which is the staple food: but they are not used by “standard Eskimo
momi (unhulled rice), ine (the rice plant), speakers,” just as various Japanese terms for
kome (a grain of rice), gohan (boiled rice). rain and rice are not used by “standard”
Yet, as Pullum points out, there is a Japanese speakers.
problematic issue. We could question how
many of these words are actually used in daily
1.2.3.3. Limitation of Whorf’s sphere of
speech by a “standard Japanese speaker.”
interest to fundamental physical
Poets and farmers may use them, but
concepts
normally not ordinary people (just as, when it
comes to color terms, in any society, it would Whorf’s analysis of classification of language
96
and culture is more or less confined to is oversimplistic in terms of range of
fundamental concepts of the physical world: applicability. Classification is indeed an
how to divide space, time, and movements. ideologically creative process. Thus, language
Indeed, linguistic relativism may reasonably realizes and makes sense of a world by
apply to these fundamental physical classification in the double sense of
concepts. In a given highly complex society comprehending it and producing it (Fowler,
of today, however, how valid is the 1991: 58).
assumption that “language determines the
way of classifying reality”? To Whorf,
1.2.3.4. Language as action not as a static
language is a “self-contained object,” just as
system
Saussure perceived it. Language is a static
object, which already exists and waits to be For this reason, there has been a tendency
acquired. To take his idea to its extreme in the last few decades to view language fully
conclusion, human beings are not agents as a pragmatic, multifunctional instrument
actively involved in classification processes, rather than as essentially a descriptive
but solely passive and helpless prisoners of instrument that simply makes propositional
them. Then where and how, is the statements about the facts of the world. One
classification that is basic to all scientific of the recent developments in sociocultural
activities made? Kress and Hodge (1979) theory of language has been the movement
hold that away from the analysis of structure and
towards the study of process and, recently,
the basic system of classification is itself towards the study of activity rather than the
abstract, and isn’t manifest until it is made products of activity (Brenneis and Myers,
actual by human agents engaged in social 1984: 6). In terms of the speech act theory of
interaction.... Classification only exists in Wittgenstein, Austin, and Searle, language is
discourse.... Classification is a living placed in the sphere of action. Indeed, in
process. (64) everyday situations a sentence is spoken not
simply to exercise our speech mechanisms
The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis advocated but to perform and effect a certain social act
more than half a century ago fails to see such with a certain intention. In this sense, every
discoursal aspects; it limits its authors’ view of sentence is a performative (Ross 1970) and
language to a static object, dealing solely with “social action is seen as the outcome of the
rather slow-to-change fundamental physical externalization of individual intention”
concepts. Again, it considers language to be a (Brenneis and Myers, 1984: 7). A statement is
“monolithic system rather than a not uttered solely as the externalization of a
heterogeneous form of human behaviour” static mind, as Humboldt and others
(Lee, 1992: 21). It fails to see “complexities proclaimed more than a century ago.
inherent in our social structure” (ibid.). By extension, language is a form of action
Particularly, in a society where power and a means of affecting reality rather than
relations are complex and unstable, a great passive reflection of it. Brenneis and Myers
deal of ideological diversity can be found continue:
(Fairclough, 1989: 87). Thus the hypothesis
97
The many functions of language may be of innocent victim. This happened to the
significance in those political processes former North Korean terrorist, Kim Hyon
“defining” the social order ─ a context of Hee, in 1987. When her attempt to bomb a
ordering established not only by what is Korean Airlines plane at the command of
said propositionally but also by who says it, North Korea failed and she was captured by
who cannot, the speech situation, and so South Korean police, she realized for the first
on. Any of these attributes of a speech act, time that she had been brainwashed and
in relationship to the speech situation, may found herself an innocent victim. Language
be the medium for its function (ibid.: 8). thus encodes social facts and conditions at
each given moment of time.
The analysis of such an activity perspective
echoes with work in sociolinguistics Yuan et al. (1990) have conducted research
(Gumperz and Hymes 1972) and on some of the changes to formulaic speech
ethnomethodology (Garfinkel 1967, Goffman that took place in postrevolutionary China
1974) that examined the importance of and during the Chinese Cultural Revolution.
individual choice, persuasion, intention, and On the basis of a hypothesis that “routine
manipulation of ideas in realizing social formulae code cultural norms,” they hold that
actions through the use of language (Brenneis “social change will reveal itself in the
and Myers, 1984: 7). Indeed, human beings formulaic inventory of a language” (61). They
use their words to affect and change the demonstrate how formulaic language (e.g.,
world they speak about. The Sapir-Whorf politeness formulae) changes according to
hypothesis fails to account for such a dynamic the need of a new era to encode new social
aspect of language. facts, and also how the new formulae are
established on old social norms (ibid.). For
example, they discuss how new formulae
1.2.3.5. Ignorance of diachronic
were made by inserting them into old
perspective
formulae.
Diversity of ideology and classification
hence does not exist only within a language Some old formulae were not completely
or culture, as some critical discourse analysts eliminated but were used instead as a basis
have described it in modern literature (Geyer- from which new formulae were derived.
Ryan 1988, Fairclough 1989, Kress and Hodge Such formulae had to be syntactically
1979, Lee 1992). Discourses that are decomposable to allow for the insertion of
competing and changing also exist in a new constituents.
diachronic context. Ideological shifts can be (ibid. 66)
found in every moment of historical change.
Even the way of labeling a terrorist changes For example, here is a prerevolutionary
with the passage of time. At one moment he greeting formula and its derivatives:
is both freedom fighter and violent terrorist,
depending on the sepaker’s ideological ci zhi jingli!
viewpoint. But the next moment, when he “With high respect!”
has lost his faith, he is nothing more than an
98
This formula was originally used in suit the new hierarchical order and a new
prerevolutionary times, at the end of a letter context (ibid.: 66-67). To meet new social
or a document, to pay respect to the realities, new formulae are derived from old
addressee if that addressee was old or of ones by the insertion of new constituents, and
higher social status than the speaker or the by changing the meaning of a word.
writer. However, as its use was confined to
people with respect to age and social status, Thus, the contradiction between an old and
and the social attitude towards age and social a new reality creates a change. More
status had changed to a large extent, precisely, “the social basis in discourse acts as
particularly in the Cultural Revolution, the a motor of change in the system over time”
formula did not suit the revolutionary (Kress and Hodge, 1979: 64). Kress and
context, in which the social hierarchy was Hodge explain the process of discoursal
turned upside down, with landlords and local change in society:
officials losing their power and positions and
becoming the targets of proletarian criticism, New materials and new interests are
and the position of peasantry was raised. The incorporated into the old system, leading to
proletariat and the Red Guards rejected the a different “fit” between language and
old formula and replaced it with new formulae reality, and a different set of relations
such as between existing categories. The result is
that all categories have a slightly altered
ci zhi geming jingli! scope or function within the whole, which is
“With revolutionary greetings!” essentially a new system disguised as the
old one.... Change can occur more visibly,
ci zhi wuchanjieji jingli! with the evolution of new categories. (ibid.)
“With proletarian greetings!”
In opposition to this view, Whorf seems to
ci zhi wuchanjieji geming jingli! perceive language as a very fixed object. He
“With proletarian revolutionary greetings!” presupposes that language is an unchanging
existence, which remains as it is over time as
Such formulae are derived from the old a shaper of or a constraint upon one’s
formula ci zhi jingli by the insertion of worldview. With such a static view of
elements like geming and wuchanjieji language, how does he explain the social and
(ibid.). This insertion was needed so as to cultural changes that are taking place at any
express regard for class status (the moment of history? Kunio Yanagida, a
proletariat, revolutionaries) rather than for folklorist, noted that nothing changes as
age or social status. Interestingly, the change easily as language. Through language change,
of participants in the formulae results in a “the perceptual and cognitive inventory of the
different meaning of the word jingli. In the language and therefore of the language user
old formula, jingli meant respect for the old will change accordingly” (Kress and Hodge,
and for those of a higher social status, while in 1979: 27). As discussed earlier, more recent
the new formulae, it simply means greeting, ideas view language, and classification made
which has a more egalitarian connotation to by language, as a living process. Despite
99
these criticisms, however, the Sapir-Whorf It is always a mistake to treat language in
hypothesis is a rewarding academic construct the way that certain nationalist ideologues
in that it was the first to point out the treat them as emblems of nation-ness, like
profound connection between our conceptual flags, costumes, folk-dance, and the rest.
system and the language we speak. Much the most important thing about
language is its capacity for generating
imagined communities, building in effect
2. Nation, people, and language
particular solidarity. (Anderson, 1983:
In an exploration of how language 122)
resources are used to mobilize people or a
nation for a certain cause (e.g., war), it is He explains how the role of language in
necessary to look at the literature on the forming solidarity differs from that of national
relationship between nation, people, and flag and costume, presenting the term
language. “experience of simultaneity.” For instance,
language can provide a “special kind of
contemporaneous community,” especially in
2.1. The role of language in the formation
the form of poetry and songs (ibid.: 132). For
of nationhood
example, in the act of singing national
Nationhood is the most primary unit in anthems, however mediocre the words and
politics: it is perhaps “the most universally the tune may be, there is an “experience of
legitimate value in the political life of our simultaneity” shared by all people present. At
time” (Anderson 1991: 3). Anderson (1983) such moments when people totally unknown
argues that a nation is simply an “imagined and anonymous to each other, utter the same
community”: imagined because the members verses to the same melody, the image of
of even the smallest nation are unknown and unisonance is created. Singing such national
anonymous to one another, yet the image of anthems or songs as The Marseillaise or
their fellow citizens’ communion is Waltzing Matilda, for example, gives
undoubtedly in the minds of each one’s life opportunity for “unisonality, for the echoed
(Anderson 1983: 15, 133). Anderson further physical realization of the imagined
states that the existence of the community or community” (ibid.: 133). At this “selfless”
nation is often imagined through language moment of simultaneity, nothing but
(ibid.: 133), and thus stresses the role of imagined sound connects everybody present.
language in imagining and creating the Just by listening to a certain mode of
nationhood. In much the same way, Gellner language with members of a community
(1964: 169) radically states that “nationalism provides the same “experience of
is not the awakening of nations to self- simultaneity”; it may take the form of sutra
consciousness: it invents nations where they chanting, as happens more frequently in
do not exist.” Asian countries, or the form of chokugo
Anderson discusses this importance of (guidance of morals) as used in schools in
language in forming solidarity to create such Japan during the Second World War when
nationhood in the following terms: mobilization of the nation was an urgent
necessity.
100
Brass (1974) presented the concept of “a This echoes Brass’s idea that “assimilation
pool of symbols” that expresses the internal is a subjective more than an objective
values of a community or a people, as a tool process” (ibid.: 423). Since the linguistic,
for mobilization or nationality-formation. religious, historical, and cultural traits of a
Presenting the cases of Sikhs and Muslims in nation or community may be employed as
North India, Brass explains the nationalist symbols, “a full-blown and coherent myth
movements as “the striving to achieve multi- may ultimately develop” to promote a sense
symbol congruence among a group of people of nationalism (ibid.: 412).
defined initially in terms of a single criterion
(410)”. The symbols are mainly linguistic and
2.2. Ideology of “official nationalism” and
religious. In this process of nationality-
“official language”
formation, or “myth construction” in a
struggle against opponents, values are affixed Notice that there are different types of
to symbols of language or religious identity, nationalism and language. To take the
depending on the social reality of that simplest examples (or classification), they
community. For instance, when religion was may originate from above (“official
not an acceptable symbol (as happened in nationalism”) or from below (“popular
postindependence India), the Sikh political nationalism”). “Official nationalism” can often
leadership relied on and employed the symbol be a very obscure concept in terms of
of Punjabi language to create solidarity. In language usage. It conceals a discrepancy
this way, the symbols of group identity that between the nation as a whole and its political
were used to achieve the goal of a community sphere: the discrepancy between national
depended upon the political strategies language (language spoken in everyday lives)
adopted by its leaders. In addition to and official language. A national language has
attaching values to symbols of language or more symbolic characteristics as an emblem
religions, both Muslims and Sikhs in North of a community than an official language,
India used other associated symbols. As which is used for practical purposes for
Brass puts it, communicating at a national level. Let us see
some specific cases in multicultural and
spokesmen for the Muslim community look multilingual societies. In India, for example,
for inspiration from the past in the history where about 845 languages are spoken,
of Muslim empires; those for the Sikh English functions as an official language at a
community find their glory in the history of national level. This is also true in Malta,
the Sikh kingdoms and in the valour of the where, even after its independence from
Sikh warriors of the past. In this process of Britain in 1964, English is still used as the
symbol selection from the past, it is often official language. Japan is a rare nation in the
necessary to ignore inconvenient aspects of sense that it calls its own language kokugo
a community’s history. The process (national language), not nihongo (Japanese).
involves deliberate selectivity in search of Kokugo is deliberately ambiguous, and it
myth, not truth. serves to obscure the distinction between
(Brass, 1974: 412) language and national authority (Tanaka,
1992: 201 - 202). It is widely believed that
101
there is no difference between national atmosphere (ibid.).
language and official language in Japan. Note, Orwell is criticizing these linguistic abuses
however, that Japan is not a “monolithic” as attempts to exert power in a covert way.
nation in terms of language. There are many They are not usually observed in the
dialects and registers as well; there also exists colloquial speech of ordinary people but are
a gap between the centralized official found in centralized, official speech and
language (whether written or spoken) and documents, and they are spoken or written as
ordinary speech, just the same as in any other “standard English.” He condemns authority
country. Nevertheless, the term kokugo has found in language use that is the result of
the effect of effacing these contradictions and standardization by “institutionalists” (Milroy
making the national language look as if it were and Milroy, 1999: 37).
one unitary system. Institutionalism regards language “as an
institution which exists independently of the
individuals who perform linguistic acts”
2.3. Centralized bureaucratic language
(Taylor, 1990: 10). Institutionalism
and the real usage of ordinary speech
George Orwell has criticized centralized denies the relevance of individual agency
bureaucratic language, particularly in his well- and of the normative mechanisms by which
known essays “Politics and the English agency is influenced; the science of
Language” (1946) and “Propaganda and language is conceived to be independent of
Demotic Speech” (1944) (discussed in Milroy political issues of authority, power, and
and Milroy, 1999: 36). ideology. (ibid.)
Orwell’s criticism focuses on the huge gap
between the centralized bureaucratic Contrary to this view, Orwell and critical
language of people in power and the common linguists hold that language is inseparable
usage of ordinary people. He takes a position from political issues. “Official” language in
that is against the standard ideology, which English is characterized by a relatively high
encourages prescription in language, and he proportion of words borrowed from Greek
supports “demotic speech.” He argues and Latin. Access to this elaborate
against “stilted bookish language” (“context- vocabulary is not easy for ordinary people.
free elaborated code,” to use Basil Bernstein’s Interestingly, such classical words originating
term), and maintains that this language is in Greek and Latin in English are equivalent
useless for communicating with ordinary to kango (words of Chinese origin) in
people. He argues against the emptiness and Japanese, which commonly uses a mixture of
artificiality of propaganda slogans and kango and yamato-kotoba (traditional
political jargon, seen in words like Japanese words) (Suzuki, 1990: 129).
objectively, counterrevolutionary, Kango, being an elaborate vocabulary, gives
capitalist, etc. (discussed in Milroy and the same impression of formality and
Milroy, 1999: 36). Yuan et al. (1990: 74) term impersonality as do words of Latin and Greek
this type of vocabulary “empty phraseology” origin in English. To obtain the same effect,
whose meanings are vague, general, and the Nazis also employed classical German
abstract, but useful for producing a feverish styles in their political propaganda. There
102
seems to be a tendency for more words of organized mobilization of all the masses;
classic origin to be used, the stronger the propaganda, public opinion, and mass
controlling system becomes. These elaborate communication were always of great concern
terms have the function of concealing to them (Pool, 1973: 463, 465). This was the
emptiness of thought, and of preventing those process by which “the new mid-class
who are not adequately familiar with the intelligentsia of nationalism had to invite the
classical language from having access to the masses into history” (Anderson, ibid.).
ideas expressed (Milroy and Milroy, 1999: The role of language in nationalist
37). movements is well exemplified in the case of
In the nineteenth century some scholars of the Irish independence movement. During
language and literature radically objected to the campaign, Irish Gaelic played a significant
foreign loanwords in English. They opposed role in mobilizing the people into the
overcentralized and “artificial” forms of movement, and its use was very much
language, and they considered the real and encouraged. Once independence was
“natural” form of language to be the achieved, however, the Irish Gaelic language
vernacular speech of common people (ibid.). became almost extinct.
They favored replacing a voluntary system of
speech with that of an institutionalized As an example of how language creates
system by transferring from a normative nationhood, we must look at the development
prescription mode to a descriptive mode. In of print-language in connection with the
Japan, since modernization, there has been a formation of nationhood. Anderson argues
similar movement towards linguistic purism, that “print-language is what invents
to replace the overreliance on Chinese nationalism, not a particular language” in
vocabulary with greater use of traditional itself (1983: 122). Print-languages set the
Japanese words. basis for national consciousness by presenting
a sense of “simultaneity in homogeneous,
empty time” (1991: 25). Because of the
2.4. Print-language and the development
development of print-language and the
of nationhood and nationalism
spread of newspapers in the nineteenth-
Gellner argues that an empire does not century Europe, people came to form vague
require literacy, but nationalist movements images of compatriots simply by reading a
do. Revolution is inseparable from the newspaper, and thus through print-language
movement towards literacy. Anderson argues (ibid: 77). There was no particular need to
that “everywhere [that] literacy increased, it know anybody individually. This happened in
became easier to arouse popular support” nineteenth-century Europe, where Latin had
(Anderson, 1991: 80). This is because all been superseded by vernacular print-
nationalist or “totalitarian” movements capitalism for approximately two centuries.
(Nazism, fascism, communism, etc.) have Thus, print-language generated national
differed from classical authoritarianism in consciousnesses and formed nation-states
that they not only ruled over the nation but (ibid.: 46, 77).
they have attempted to enforce their
authority by means of the controlled and To reiterate, Anderson argues that national
103
print-language is “of central, ideological and odd [sic] fellow-Americans” (Anderson, 1991:
political importance in nationality-formation,” 26).
because print-language lays the foundation In the newspapers, we are thrown into “a
for national consciousness and creates world of plurals”: buildings, offices, shops,
nationhood by presenting a sense of streets, and cars. We American (Indonesian,
“simultaneity in homogeneous, empty time” Japanese, Germans, whatever) readers are
experienced by people in the community. “plunged immediately into calendrical time
This can be observed in Japan’s case during and a familiar landscape... described in
the Second World War, too. Following the careful general details” (ibid.: 32). Even if
outbreak of the China Affair in 1937, and as someone reads about a car accident and a
the war structure was gradually built up, the dead man, he or she does not care seriously
government intensified its control over who the dead individual was: he or she
newspapers, particularly from 1938. With the visualizes the representative body, rather
need for a development of national than the specific personal life of the dead man
consciousness, the government urged local (ibid.). Nevertheless, one also confirms the
newspapers to amalgamate into national existence of many of one’s compatriots who
newspapers. In this way the government was are reading the newspaper at the same time,
able to speak through the united organs and but whose identity or personal life one does
at the same time save newsprint. As a result not, and need not, care too much about. One
of this shift from local to national newspapers, again experiences “the simultaneity of
the circulation of local newspapers was homogeneous, empty time” (Anderson, 1991:
halved, from about 12 million before the war 25).
to 6 million in 1944, while the circulation of Print-language also has the function of
national newspapers such as Asahi, Yomiuri- impersonalization, objectification, and
Hoochi, and Mainichi increased during the quantification of people and events. For
war. This government measure obviously example, the various experiences during the
strengthened the power of major newspapers, French Revolution were formed by millions of
with the number of subscribers of the top 54 printed words into an incident or a concept
newspapers continuing to increase monthly by on the printed paper and, eventually, into a
84,000 from September 1942 and reaching model (ibid.: 80). Hobsbawm concluded that
12,747,160 in July 1943. The rate of the French revolution was not planned,
circulation is almost one paper for every initiated, or led by an organized party or
household (Japan Year Book, 1943-44: 752- movement, or by a group of people aiming to
753; Shillony, 1981: 92; Asahi Shinbun implement a systematic reform in the modern
Hanbai 100 Nen Shi, 1980). sense (Hobsbawm, 1964: 80, discussed in
Anderson, 1992: 80). But once it had taken
The concept of solidarity forming means place, “it entered the accumulating memory
that one has full confidence in the of print.” The uncontrollable series of
simultaneous, steady, and anonymous activity experiences that perpetrators and victims
of one’s compatriots although, say, an both underwent during those events, became
American will never meet or even learn the a thing or a static concept ― with its own
names of “more than a handful of his 240,000- name on the printed page as the French
104
Revolution. People questioned why it arose, An antilanguage is not only parallel to an
what it aimed for, why it succeeded or failed. anti-society: it is in fact generated by it.
However, the systematic analysis of reality in (1978: 164)
a more concrete sense ― what really
happened, or “it-ness” ― was taken for This is an example of language generated
granted as if it had been an already existing by a certain community, as opposed to
program from the onset, and it was not Anderson’s model. One of Anderson’s flaws
questioned too much (Anderson, 1991: 80- lies in his treatment of community or nation
81). as an imagined entity, as if something without
real substance. Nevertheless, as this example
shows, a community is not necessarily an
2.5. Criticisms
imagined entity, it can be composed of people
One criticism to be raised against each with individual agency, which involves
Anderson’s view that language creates volition, responsibilities, and active-energy
nationhood is that he perceives language input, and it functions as an agent to create,
solely as a tool to regulate human behavior. change, and sometimes even direct the
Language controls people, language forms a course of history.
people ― and never vice-versa, according to
his view. Cannot people control language as
3. War, peace, and language: linguistic
well? Fischte, the German philosopher,
devices for control
defined people as “a group of those who
develop their own language by the continuous Thus far the role of language in forming a
exchange of thoughts.” One counterargument sense of community or nationalism has been
is the creation of an antitotalitarian language discussed in general terms. Next I shall
by underground activists in the “totalitarian” consider what specific linguistic devices are
states of Eastern Europe. Wierzbicka (1990) employed to mass-mobilize for a war or to
has carried out research on the development manipulate public opinion for a certain
of “antilanguage” from the lexical to the cause. These devices include metaphor,
discoursal level in Poland, where “ ‘the categorization, and the like.
antilanguage’ is most people’s mother tongue”
(5), although normally “antilanguage is
3.1. Language and war
nobody’s mother tongue” (Halliday, 1978:
171). Wierzbicka observes that the As we saw in the section on the Sapir-
antilanguage actually results from official Whorf hypothesis, language not only reflects
propaganda. reality, but it also affects reality and makes
Here we find a view of language that is the changes to it. In the same way, language not
direct opposite of Anderson’s; language is only mirrors history and politics (Wierzbicka,
generated by a community, and a community 1990: 1), it also profoundly affects them. I
is not only the invention of language. Halliday disagree with the view of one war analyst who
links the notion of antilanguage with that of states “the violent reality of war exists outside
anti-society in the following terms: language; everything, including language,
melts into the brutal reality of war” (Nishitani,
105
1992: 3). This view devalues the role of even disregarded by linguists. Lakoff and
language, which dynamically operates in the Johnson (1980), however, radically defined
discourse of war. metaphor as a conceptual phenomenon as
Language has the power to mass-mobilize, well as a linguistic phenomenon. They believe
and it was used for this purpose by, for that the crucial role of metaphor is not only in
example, Hitler during World War II. language but profoundly in the way we make
Language has the power, by metaphor, sense of and talk about the world. They
categorization, or the like, to construct the express this view in the following terms:
image of an enemy (as we shall see in section
3.2.). In modern politics, too, language can be Metaphor is for most people a device of the
used to accelerate the potential for war or poetic imagination and the rhetorical flourish
militarization. Expressions like “to live with ― a matter of extraordinary rather than
nuclear power” or “nuclear power is brighter ordinary language. Moreover, metaphor is
than thousands of suns” entail an assimilation typically viewed as characteristic of language
process into our daily lives and can even alone, a matter of words rather than thought
evoke war sentiment in a subtle way. and action. For this reason, most people
This view owes a lot to the literature of think they can get along perfectly well
postmodernists, such as Michael Foucault without metaphor. We have found, on the
and Jacques Derrida, and also to the general contrary, that metaphor is pervasive in
semantics view, which has been influential in everyday life, not just in language but in
America since Alfred Korzybski published thought and action. Our ordinary conceptual
Science and Sanity in 1933. The above system, in terms of which we both think and
writers offer the belief that the misuse of act, is fundamentally metaphorical in nature.
language is a major cause of human conflict ... The concept is metaphorically
and endangers the future of the human race. structured, the activity is metaphorically
Anatol Rapport also discusses the role of structured, and consequently, the language is
language as a factor in accelerating metaphorically structured...metaphor is
militarization from the perspective of general not just a matter of language, that is, of
semantics. And, as we shall soon see, P. mere words...on the contrary, human
Chilton has written extensively on the role of thought processes are largely metaphorical.
language as an agent promoting militarization. (Lakoff and Johnson, 1980: 3-6)
106
control (Chilton, 1985: 55). As another
3.2.2. Metaphor and ideology
recent phenomenon, mediaeval chivalry has
Metaphor can be a tool for “thought been evoked by names such as Lance and
control” because of its ideological potential. Mace: the metaphorical construction of these
As a specific example of this, let us consider weapons as hand-held instruments has
briefly Chilton’s language of nuclear weapons, operated through names such as Harpoon
or Nukespeak (1985), the term that refers to and Tomahawk (ibid.). The naming process
words and rhetoric used by specialists and is
officials of nuclear strategy. This term
derives from George Orwell’s “newspeak” in part of an attempt to promote their
his novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, which acceptance, to incorporate them into our
concerns the way to exercise mass control. everyday understanding of the world, to
Chilton says, “metaphor plays an important legitimate them in terms of our past and
role in our conceptualizations, and that is not our cultural heritage (Lee, 1992: 84).
to be dismissed as mere rhetorical ornament
― but so assimilated to our cognitive It is a linguistic strategy of “negotiating
processes that they go unnoticed” (Chilton, nuclear discourse with the non-military
ibid.: 121) public” (Chilton, 1985: 55). The same
rhetoric is used not only at the level of word
One interesting aspect of Nukespeak has to meaning but also at a more general level of
do with the kind of nomenclature applied to discourse. The following catchphrases have
weapons. The naming of weapons systems been used to hide the destructive features of
rests on broad cultural prototypes. Let us nuclear weapons: “to live with nuclear
consider the terms used in U.S. Defense power,” “nuclear power is brighter than a
reports, given in Table 1. We notice that most thousand suns,” “secondary casualties” (to
of the names given are heroes, animals, or minimize the image of casualties among
gods, or associated (syntagmatically) with noncombatants). The whole effect is
these attributes (e.g., Eagle, Blackhawk, distancing through abstraction, by
Sergeant, and Hawkeye). connoting “positive strength rather than
Some terms in the table suggest the negative destruction: to switch meaning of
intended function of the weapon, such as a specific object and effect to more generalized,
threat, violence, or sinister aims (e.g., emotive conditioning” (Chilton, 1985: 57).
Prowler, Intruder, and Harm). Obviously,
the naming was based upon familiar things we
can easily associate with. Also, names from
Greek classical mythodology were adopted:
Jupiter (the ruler of Heaven), Vulcan (the
god of fire), Poseidon (sea god and
earthshaker), Hercules (hero of mythic
strength), and Trident (his three-pronged
spears represent control of the oceans). All
these names connote supernatural power and
107
Table 1. The Nomenclature of Weapons Systems
Source: P. Chilton, Language and the Nuclear Arms Debate: Nukespeak Today.
London: Frances Pinter, 1985, p. 56
Animals: wild or aggressive Descriptive names
Jaguar Hawkeye
Bear Hellfire
Bison Honest John
Bushmaster Patriot
Cobra Quickstrike
Sidewinder Harm
Copperhead Seafire
Eagle Intruder
Blackhawk Sergeant
Captor
Harmless Thunderbolt
Frog Stinger
Badger Redeye
Sparrow Peacekeeper
Prowler
Non-animals: gods
Titan Traditional weapons
Poseidon Tomahawk
Vulcan Lance
Hercules Rapier
Jupiter Mace
Thor Harpoon
Atlas Thunderbolt
Phoenix Trident
Heroes
Minuteman
Pershing
Honest John
Hawkeye
108
their people to perceive the enemy. During
World War II, the Japanese called American
3.2.3. Employing religious discourse
soldiers kichiku beiei (beast-like American
Religious discourse is often applied to the and British people). During the Vietnam War,
naming process to give the impression that American soldiers were indoctrinated with
some awesome power of divine origin was the idea that what they were killing were
involved. For example, Hitler renamed his commies, not human beings, in the
nation Reich, avoiding the term Staat, Vietnamese villages. For the same purpose,
because Staat sounds artificial, while Reich the murder of a village postman in Ulster,
connotes supernatural power and control and England may be reported as an
echoes the heritage of the Holy Roman assassination, while destruction of
Empire. The term Reich was first used by Vietnamese villages may be described as
the Holy Roman Empire (962-1806), then by pacification. Construction of an enemy is
the German Commonwealth (1871-1918). based on the simplified categorization process
Reich was more appropriate than Staat; the of dichotomization: us and them. This
former has a more classical and solemn process entails dehumanizing, the
connotation than Staat, which possesses a transformation of human individuals into
more modern connotation of Renaissance depersonalized objects (Fowler et al., 1979:
origin. In wartime Japan, too, a classical 128). This is a kind of replacement process
language style was used in an extensive way by which a particular kind of individual can be
for militarists’ slogans. replaced by noun phrases indicating larger
Americans also justified their westward abstract entities (ibid.: 162). Such
movement of the nineteenth century by impersonalized naming leading to
utilizing the high-sounding religious phrase, depersonalization is “a routine feature of
manifest destiny; it sounds as if their official discourse” (ibid.). The use of a
movement were favored, guided, and generic pronoun such as us presumes that
protected by divine providence. By the use of the interests of all of us are unitary and
such religious discourse, the real initiator or undivided, although this is not the case in
agent of the policy will be obscured, with the reality (Hartley, 1982: 81-83). In this
connotation that the legitimacy of the discourse, a class of agents is simply related
movement derives from divinity rather than to a class of actions in a simplified manner,
from the people. with complex variables ignored, as a
collectivization strategy (Fowler et al., 1979:
163). In this way, each discourse is formed in
3.2.4. Creating an image of an enemy
a certain direction in order to rationalize and
through metaphorical process
justify policy and goals utilizing the power of
As Hitler stressed in his book Mein Kampf, metaphor.
constructing an image of an enemy is an
important rhetoric when waging a war.
4. Summary
Creating an enemy image is also a
metaphorical process; that is how leaders This paper started with a discussion of the
conceptualize an enemy or how they want relationship between language, reality, and
109
our conceptual systems. Some literature on linguistic patterns to be employed for mass-
nominalism and Whorf’s linguistic relativism mobilizing public opinion or for particular
was presented, accompanied by criticism of national goals.
these ideas. Criticism focuses on Whorf’s lack
of perspective on complexities and dynamism As we have seen, metaphor makes it
in a culture and on diachronic perspective on possible for human beings to be transformed
language, and on the limitation of his interest into dehumanized objects (e.g., being
to a fundamental physical sphere. When referred to as a threat, an axis of evil, or an
pursuing studies of political language, the enemy), whereas, conversely, inanimate
view of language as a dynamic entity is objects are personified (e.g., by naming
essential because power relations in a society weapons after animals or heroes) all for the
are very complex, diverse, and subject to purpose of manipulation of the thought and
constant change with time. conduct of people.
Thus, some of the meanings from the basic
The second part of this paper concerned words and to a more generalized level of
the role of language in creating nationhood discourse are implicated in metaphorical
and advancing a sense of nationalism. Some language. We could easily become victims of
literature on these subjects was introduced, metaphorical processes constructed out of
accompanied by criticisms of these ideas. our own conventional conceptual system by
Benedict Anderson’s well-known idea of leaders of the time. The underlying idea
“imagined community” was presented along exploited is the Sapir-Whorf hypothesis,
with his view on how national print-languages which explains how a language can reflect
can contribute to the formation of nationhood and control the conceptual system of its
ideologically and politically. Next, Brass’s speakers.
idea of a “pool of symbols” or common Lakoff and Johnson (1980) observe that
possession by a nation of symbols as a metaphor is not only an issue of language but
historical or a cultural heritage, was also one of thought and behavior. This view
introduced. These symbols are commonly implies that official discourse is not just a
presented to people in order to generate means by which the leaders of the time
solidarity by leaders of the time, in the form intend to enforce a particular view on a public
of poetry, popular songs, or slogans, or in that sometimes could be easily taken in. A
textbooks. This myth construction process more serious implication here is that, as the
involves employing metaphorical or religious metaphors of Nukespeak suggest, official
discourse because myth-formation for discourse is a way in which leaders
assimilation is a subjective, not an objective, conceptualize the discourse of nuclear
process. It could be said that the more weapons (discussed in Lee, 1992: 90).
national solidarity is essential, the more the Metaphor encodes the pattern of thought that
rhetoric of this “pool of symbols” is used for formulates such discourses. Thus, according
mobilization purposes. to Sauer (1988: 87), Nazi propaganda,
metaphorically treating the Jews not as
The final section dealt with metaphorical human beings but as the enemy,2) was not
language in political discourse as specific simply a static level of misconceived ideas but
110
more dangerously a part of “dynamic Brenneis, D. and F. Myers (eds.) (1984) Dangerous
processes of actual socialization.” Words: Language and Politics in the Pacific.
New York: New York University Press.
Thus, by conducting a careful analysis of Chilton, P. (1985) Language and the Nuclear Arms
the language of metaphor, critical linguists Debate: Nukespeak Today. London: Francis
Pinter.
may have revealed not only the
characteristics of propaganda or a deviant Fairclough, N. (1989) Language and Power.
form of language use, but more basic London: Longman.
problems regarding the patterns of thought
Fishman, J. (1970) Sociolinguistics. Rowley, Mass.:
that are deep-seated within such Newbury House Publishers.
propagandistic discourses (Lee, 1992: 90).
Fowler, R. (1991) Language in the News: Discourse
The varied topics discussed in this paper and Ideology in the Press. London: Routledge.
are interrelated. The more a society is under Fowler, R., B. Hodge, G. Kress and T. Trew. (1979)
bureaucratic or state control, there seems to Language and Control. London: Routledge &
be a linguistic tendency for certain patterns of Kegan Paul.
political language involving metaphorical,
Garfinkel, H. (1967) Studies in Ethnomethodology.
ideological and religious discourse to emerge. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
Asahi Shinbun Hanbai 100 Nen Shi (a 100-year Halliday, M.A.K. (1978) Language as Social
history of Asahi Newspaper publishing) (1980). Semiotic: The Social Interpretation of Language
Tokyo: Asahi Newspaper Publishing Co. and Meaning. London: Edward Arnold.
Bakhtin, M. (1981) The Dialogic Imagination. M. Hartley, J. (1982) Understanding News. London:
Holquist (ed.), translated by C. Emerson and M. Mathuen.
Holquist. Austin: University of Texas Press.
Hobsbawm, E. (1964) The Age of Revolution, 1789-
Brass, P. (1974) Language, Religion and Politics 1848. New York: Mentor.
in North India. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press. Hoijer, H. (1953) “The Relation of Language to
Culture,” in A. Koeber et al. (eds.), Anthropology
111
Today. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
pp. 554-573. Pool, I. (1973) “Communication in Totalitarian
Society,” in I. Pool and W. Schramm (eds.),
Humboldt, W. (1971) Linguistic Variability and Handbook of Communication. Chicago: Rand
Intellectual Development. Coral Gables, Miami, McNally College Publishing Co., pp. 462-511.
University of Miami Press. Originally published in
1836 by the Royal Academy of Berlin under the Pullum, G. (1991) The Great Eskimo Vocabulary
title Über die Verschiedenheit des Menschlichen Hoax and Other Irreverent Essays on the Study
Sprachbaues und ihren Einfluss auf die geistige of Language. Chicago: University of Chicago
Entwickelung des Menschengeschlechts. Press.
Japan Year Book (1943-44). Tokyo: The Japan Quine, W. (1960) Word and Object. Cambridge,
Times. Mass.: MIT Press.
Korzybski, A. (1933) Science and Sanity: An Quine, W. (1969) Ontological Relativity and Other
Introduction to Non-Aristotelian Systems and Essays. New York: Columbia University Press.
General Semantics. Lancaster, Penn.: The
Science Press Printing Company. Ross, J. (1979) “On Declarative Sentences,” in R.
Jacobs. and P. Rosenbaum (eds.), Readings in
Kress, G. and R. Hodge (1979) Language as English Transformational Grammar. Waltham,
Ideology. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Mass.: Ginn & Co., pp. 222-72.
Lakoff, G. and M. Johnson (1980) Metaphors We Live Sauer, C. (1988) “Newspaper Style and Nazi
By. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Propaganda: The ‘Weekly Mirror’ in the German
Newspaper in the Netherlands,” in W. van Peer
Lee, D. (1992) Competing Discourses: Perspective (ed.), The Taming of the Text: Explorations in
and Ideology in Language. London: Longman. Language, Literature and Culture. London:
Routledge. pp. 82-105.
Locke, J. (1690) Essay Concerning Human
Understanding. P. Nidditch (ed.) (1975) Oxford: Shillony, B. (1981) Politics and Culture in Wartime
Clarendon. Japan. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
112
ば19世紀のヨーロッパにおいて,それまで絶対
Yuan, J., K. Kuiper and S. Shagu (1990) “Language 的であったラテン語が諸国のことば
and Revolution: Formulae of the Cultural
Revolution,” in Language in Society, vol. 19. ( vernacular ) にとって代わられていく過程で,
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. pp. 61-79. 諸国における新たな国家的な活字は,資本主義
の波にのり新聞等のメディアを通して流布し,
近代国家アイデンティティーの形成に大きな役
割を果たした。このように国家アイデンティテ
概要
ィーの形成とは,国家について共通あるいは類
国家統合のための言語の役割
似した考えやシンボルを内面化することで,民
本稿では Benedict Anderson (1983) が定義づ を社会化していくことである。
けたように,国家を「想像の共同体」と捉え, ナショナリズムの構築とは,斯く内部の類似
国家帰属意識や国家アイデンティティーを構築 関係の誇示と併設して「私たち」以外のもの,
していく過程で,言語がどのような社会的役割 ないしは外部者への差異を形成していくことで
を果たしてきたのかを考察した。 もある。「われわれ対彼ら」,「善玉対悪玉」のよ
まず第1章では,言語と現実認識の関係につい うに,人為的に対比関係を表出していくフィク
て扱った。唯名論 (nominalism) や,サピア及び ションの創設でもある。第 3 章では,差異構築
ウ ォ ー フ に よ る , 言 語 相 対 論 ( linguistic のための具体的な言語使用の例として,隠喩
relativism) を取り上げ,言語には,私たちを取 (metaphor) を主に考察した。野獣,侵入者,有
り囲む現実を理解する助けとなる認識的効果が 害物といった悪のイメージを「彼ら」や「彼ら」
ある反面,私たちの思考を規定し,時にコント を使用対象とした兵器等にラベリングすること
ロールする危険性を伴う働きがあることを述べ により,「自分たち」と「彼ら」の対比関係を明
た。時の指導者は,言語のこのような思考操作 らかにし,「われわれ」の社会的結束をはかって
的機能を用いて,戦争時等,国家の統合や動員 いく。これは,抽象性の高い隠喩的言説に基づ
が必要な際に,望むべき方向に民を密かに導い いており,時には内部的な矛盾を外部化する過
てきたのである。 程でもある。まとめるに,共同体や国家という
唯名論や言語相対論は,言語と現実認識の関 「幻想」が成立し,存続するためには,内には共
係を明示した先駆的功績であるものの,一方で, 通のシンボルやエートス,外には,異質な差異
言語には,ダイナミックで,複雑・混成的な面 的存在を捻出し,その言説を常に,国家的言語
があることや,時と共に変化していく面がある の力によって,発信・流布し続けることが求め
ことを軽視している傾向があり,これらを批判 られるのである。
点として述べた。
第2章では,言語,特に新聞を中心とした活字
が,国を統合し,ナショナリズムを育むために, Key words: Benedict Anderson; imagined
どのように役立ってきたかを述べた。Anderson community; nationalism; Critical Discourse
が,国家を「想像の共同体」と呼んだように, Analysis (CDA)
本来斯く,抽象的理念であるものを,具現化し キー・ワード:ベネディクト・アンダーソ
ていくためには,共同体に属する者たちの共通 ン;想像の共同体;ナショナリズム;批判的
のシンボル (a pool of symbols; Brass 1974) を意 ディスコース分析
識させ,「個人的には知らずとも自分と同じよう
な人間の多数同時的存在」を,国家的な活字
(national print language) である新聞等を媒介と
して,広げていくことが必要であった。たとえ
113