The story of the standard language seen in the plain-language article runs on the same ground as this paper. In “Kokugo to kokka to,” placed at the head of Kokugo no tame (1897), Ueda Kazutoshi spoke of kokugo as a task of the state. In this article we check its claims in three places in the original. (The English renderings of the quotations below are ToL translations.)
The premise: language ties a people together
In this paper Ueda examines in turn several elements that hold a state up — religion, law, and language, for example. He then cites the governments of the great powers of Europe respecting their own languages and working earnestly for their flourishing as “a living case,” and argues that Japan too should face the same problem.
First passage: what enables joint action
Of the people of Japan, Ueda says:
われわれ日本国民が協同の運動をなし得るは、主としてその忠君愛国の大和魂と、この一国一般の言語とを有つ、大和民族あるに拠りてなり。
(That we, the Japanese people, can act jointly is chiefly owing to the existence of the Yamato people, who have both their loyal-and-patriotic Yamato spirit and this language common to the whole nation.)
Here Ueda lines up, as two pillars supporting the people’s joint action, the “Yamato spirit” and “the language common to a nation.” Language is placed beside spiritual values as something that binds a people into one.
Second passage: keeping the unity of language and race
Continuing, Ueda gives his conclusion in the form of a duty.
故に予輩の義務として、この言語の一致と、人種の一致とをば、帝国の歴史と共に、一歩も其方向よりあやまり退かしめざる様勉めざるべからず。
(Therefore, as our duty, we must strive not to let this unity of language and this unity of race retreat, mistakenly, even one step from that direction, together with the history of the empire.)
This sentence is the most political part of “Kokugo to kokka to.” Ueda sets the unity of language and the unity of race side by side as things to be kept. How this claim was received in later ages, we sort out in the verdict article.
Third passage: language as the embodiment of spirit
In the same text, another famous idea showing Ueda’s view of language appears.
予輩は言語をば、其話す人の精神上に生活する思想及感情が、外に出でて化身したるものと見做すを躊躇せず。
(We do not hesitate to regard language as the thoughts and feelings that live in the spirit of the one who speaks, come out and taken bodily form.)
Ueda adds that he lacks the courage to say flatly “language is thought,” as Müller did, but that he sees no objection to saying “language is thought given form.” The idea that language reflects the mind of those who speak it has a side that connects to the tradition, seen in the Humboldt feature, of tying language to the spirit of a people.
What to keep in mind when reading
Two points are worth confirming in reading this paper.
First, this is Ueda’s claim of that time. In the middle of the Meiji era, when Japan was shaping itself as a modern state, Ueda placed kokugo as a task of the state. The paper was written in the air of that age.
Second, Ueda’s own interest doesn’t fit inside this paper’s claim alone. In Lecture 4 of the later Kokugogaku no jikkō (1916), Ueda takes up, as “languages within the empire’s territory,” Korean, Ryukyuan, Ainu, Taiwanese, and Sakhalin languages, each in turn (per the table of contents). Ueda was aware that within the empire there were various languages beyond the national language of Japan. How he handled them, however, is beyond the scope of this article.
Summary
| Point | Detail |
|---|---|
| What supports a people | The loyal-and-patriotic Yamato spirit, and the language common to a nation (Ueda’s phrasing) |
| Ueda’s conclusion | The unity of language and of race, together with the history of the empire, are to be kept |
| View of language | Language is the “embodiment” of the spirit of its speakers; “language is thought given form” he accepts |
| In reading | Read it as a claim of the mid-Meiji era; later reception is sorted out in the verdict article |
In a nutshell — starting from the view that “language is the embodiment of spirit,” Ueda Kazutoshi spoke of the unity of language as a task that ties the people together and supports the state. That claim can be checked in the original as the words of its time.