Change in Script Usage in Japanese
A Longitudinal Study of Japanese Government
White Papers on Labor
by
Takako Tomoda
e-mail the Author
Abstract
In the post-war period, official language reforms combined with social and
technological change have changed the Japanese writing system. Notable amongst the
reforms were officially sponsored limits on the number of kanji. Technological
change has been accompanied by an influx of loanwords written in katakana. Both
these changes have been subjects of considerable dispute. Since the early 1990s
katakana words have received official language planning attention and particular
attention has been given to katakana use in government White Papers. This study
examines longitudinal change in the proportions of the three Japanese scripts of
kanji, hiragana and katakana using samples of White Papers on labor published
between 1960 and 1997 which were controlled for subject matter to enable valid
longitudinal evaluation. Two counts were conducted and the same trends were found
for both counts when variation due to format was controlled for. Contrary to
expectations, the proportion of kanji increased while hiragana decreased. The
proportion of katakana increased, due mainly to an increased use of loanwords, but
the overall level was less than expected. Comparisons were made with other Japanese
studies and the effects of language reforms discussed.
Introduction
The appropriate use of the various kinds of script has long been a
topic of scholarly and popular debate in Japan. Official language policies have also
placed considerable emphasis on script issues. Whereas in the past attention tended
to focus on issues surrounding kanji use, in recent decades the use of katakana has
received more attention. It has been claimed that katakana words (many of them loans
from English) are overused and their use in government documents has been the target
of both criticism and recent official action (Kokugo Shingikai, 2001). Statistical
data from both opinion polls and studies of text are frequently quoted and play an
important role in guiding decision makers. Textual data does, however, vary according
to genre and methodological differences in data collection and processing can make
comparisons between studies problematic. Moreover, longitudinal studies are few in
number but these are essential if trends are to be revealed and the results of past
interventions assessed.
By examining the changes in script usage over a series of samples
from government White Papers this study aims to determine which scripts have declined
or increased and to examine the role of language policies and other factors that
influence the changes found.
The Japanese scripts and how they are used
The traditional Japanese writing system comprises three distinct
scripts: the logographic script adapted from Chinese called kanji (漢字), and the
phonological scripts of hiragana (ひらがな) and katakana (カタカナ). In addition, repeat
symbols, referred to as odoriji, and a range of punctuation marks are used.
However, the modern Japanese writing system has also adopted Arabic and Roman
numerals, the Roman alphabet (called rōmaji) and additional symbols such as
dashes and % symbols. In general, kanji are used for content words of native Japanese
origin, referred to as wago, or for various words of Chinese origin which are
referred to as kango. Hiragana are used for grammatical features as well as
for some content words, most of which are of native Japanese origin, i.e. wago.
Numerous words (particularly verbs and adjectives) are written with a combination of
these two scripts − kanji for the stem and hiragana for the inflection (e.g. 行きます).
The hiragana used in this manner are referred to as okurigana. Katakana have a
diversity of uses including content words of foreign origin, as a replacement for
writing a word in kanji, for a wide range of proper nouns, for slang terms and
onomatopoeia. Alphabetic characters are mostly employed in acronyms of foreign or
domestic origin, as well as in numbering sections in a document. Numbers can be
written in kanji or Arabic numerals depending upon the type of text. The general rule
is that kanji numerals are used when texts are in vertical format and Arabic numerals
in horizontal format. Roman numerals are mostly used as section numbering devices.
Reforms to the Japanese writing system
The type and manner of usage of kanji, hiragana, katakana and
rōmaji have been the topic of discussion, dispute, agitation and official action
since the latter part of the nineteenth century (see Miyajima, 1977; Twine, 1991).
Over the post-war period changes in the Japanese writing system have included
officially sponsored language planning measures primarily aimed at script usage as
well as a range of unplanned changes such as the influx of new loanwords. A
comprehensive discussion of post-war language policy and language change is beyond
the scope of this article, so the following outline is limited to issues that are
likely to have had an impact upon script proportions.
In November 1946, a series of official reforms in the writing system
began. The stated aims of these reforms were to simplify the use of hiragana and
katakana, reduce the number of kanji in everyday use, and standardize writing styles
(see Seeley, 1991; Tsuchimochi, 1993; and Unger, 1996 for details). The first wave of
reforms was phased in over a period of more than ten years, however both the reforms
and the reform process were subjected to considerable criticism from some quarters.
During the 1960s a number of the reforms and reform proposals were re-examined and
during the 1970s and 1980s the reforms were rolled back somewhat. The limits on kanji
were relaxed and the rules for okurigana use changed in favor of less usage (see
Shiota, 1973; and Gottlieb, 1994; 1995 for details). Nevertheless, the present
structure of the Japanese writing system remains largely a product of the first
series of post-war language reforms.
The post-war era saw an influx of loanwords into the Japanese
language. The majority of these loanwords, referred to as gairaigo, are derived from
English with smaller proportions deriving from other, mostly European, languages.
Loanwords have long been a feature of Japanese and the Japanese language has
undergone a number of periods of massive borrowing, mostly from Chinese (see Miller,
1967; Seeley, 1991). In the past, loanwords were generally written in kanji but over
the last century the general convention has been to use katakana for new loanwords,
particularly for those of non-Chinese origin. This practice was formalized in the
immediate post-war period (Habein, 1984).
Whereas in the pre-war era creating calques was a major means of
introducing new words into the language, post-war the direct borrowing of words of
Euro-American origin has tended to take precedence. Calques generally employ kanji to
express the meaning of the new term. For example, 'airport' is calqued as kūkō
空港, which comprises one kanji for 'air' and one for 'port' In contrast, direct loans
approximate the pronunciation of the source language and are written in katakana, for
example 'modem' becomes modemu モデム. One consequence of this is a relative
increase in the proportion of katakana gairaigo and a decline in kango (Sugito, 1989).
The reasons for this shift away from calquing towards direct
borrowing have been the subject of considerable dispute but a discussion of these
issues is beyond the scope of this article. In brief, it is variously attributed to
the post-war limits on kanji (see Maruya, 1978; Suzuki, 1990), the rapid pace of
technological and social change (see Ishino, 1983; Iwabuchi, 1993), the spread of
English language education (see Honna, 1995; Suzuki, 2001), adulation of Western
things (see Suzuki, 1985; Ōno, Morimoto & Suzuki, 2001) as well as other reasons. The
phenomenon of an increase in loanwords written in katakana is, however, one that few
would dispute − although the degree of increase can vary considerably with the
language domain (see Tomoda, 1999). This increase in katakana words has received
widespread comment and there have been calls for limits to be placed on the use of
these words (Suzuki, 1985; Kajiki, 1996). In the early 1990s, katakana and gairaigo
emerged as an issue for official language policy and in the early 2000s steps were
taken to limit the use of new katakana words in government documents (Bunkachō, 1994;
Tanaka, 2003).
In terms of script proportions, as the number of direct loans in the
written language rises, so should the proportion of katakana. Besides adding new
vocabulary items to the language, most of which are nouns, new loanwords can also
replace existing nouns. For example, depāto デパート (a contraction of
'department store' has generally replaced the kanji calque hyakkaten 百貨店.
Since the new loanwords are written in katakana while established nouns tend to be
written in kanji, as new loanwords replace existing words, the relative proportion of
kanji could be expected to decline.
One gauge of the increase in loanwords written in katakana is the
proportion included in dictionaries. This has increased from 1.4% to about 10% of
total entries over the last century (Tomoda, 1999). There is, however, considerable
variation in the proportion of loanwords written in katakana used in the various
Japanese print media. Advertisements tend to contain high proportions of loanwords.
Takashi (1990) reported that 22.3% of word tokens in a sample of print advertisements
were classed as gairaigo. However, literary works generally contain much lower
proportions. An analysis of the monthly magazine Chūō Kōron of 1976 found that 3.7%
of words were classed as gairaigo (Miyajima, 1989). The large proportion of katakana
in advertising is not only due to the use of gairaigo. Katakana tend to stand out and
are consequently the preferred script for use on signs. Ordinary Japanese words can
be written in katakana in order to highlight them and product or business names are
often written in katakana even when they have no links to foreign words. As a result,
katakana can be the dominant script in an advertisement, whilst comprising the
smallest proportion of the three main scripts in a sample of general prose.
As a result of the language reforms which limited the number of kanji
in general use, the influx of loanwords written in katakana, and the shift away from
calquing as the preferred method of creating new words, the following changes in the
proportion of scripts could be expected.
-
With the increase in gairaigo, the proportion of katakana script used
should increase. The increase in katakana characters is likely to be greater than the
corresponding increase in loanwords since loanwords of European origin tend to be
longer than words of Japanese or Chinese origin.
-
The effect of limiting the use of kanji is likely to result in a
decrease in the proportion of kanji. Words that were previously written using those
kanji that were affected by the reforms could be expected to change to being written
in hiragana or katakana. Alternatively, they could be replaced by other words written
in kanji or by loanwords written in katakana.
-
Since both kanji and katakana are primarily used for writing content
words, the tendency to supplement the lexicon with items borrowed directly from
English, rather than create calques using the resources of kanji, could be expected
to result in an increase in the relative proportion of words written in katakana
compared with kanji words.
The above effects would all be expected to result in a reduction in
the proportion of kanji and an increase in the proportion of katakana. However, they
are by no means the only processes in action. With the advent of word-processors that
can deal effectively with Japanese script, the use of kanji has become more
convenient and this may have the effect of increasing the proportion of kanji in use
(Gottlieb, 1993). Usually this is at the expense of hiragana. For example, the word
'adjacent' can be written in hiragana as となり or in kanji as 隣. Of the two options the
hiragana is easier to write by hand compared to more complex kanji but on a computer
the kanji is as easy to produce and also takes up less space (see Gottlieb, 1993 &
1998 for discussions).
Considering the variety of processes that could be operating to
generate change in written Japanese over various language domains, the need for
quantitative longitudinal data from a variety of language domains is apparent.
In this study the domain chosen for examination was government White Papers on labor.
This domain is a formal one that should reflect official policies on usage, but it is
also one that deals with current subject matter and is therefore influenced by
socio-economic change. Since the White Papers are issued annually with similar
content this domain can provide samples of text that allow valid longitudinal
comparison.
The proportions of the three Japanese scripts of kanji, hiragana and katakana and the
Roman alphabet in White Papers published between 1960 and 1997 were calculated. These
were compared with the results of other studies with particular reference to any
change in the proportion of katakana and changes in the level of loanword usage.
Existing estimates of the proportions of scripts in Japanese
A number of estimates of the proportions of scripts used in Japanese
have been reported in the literature. These estimates were derived from a range of
genres and used quite different sampling methods, so direct comparison between
estimates can be problematic. In none of the studies examined was there an attempt to
control for subject matter. Since katakana feature prominently in foreign names and
in vocabulary relating to new technologies while kanji are prominent in literary
genres, the proportions of scripts can vary considerably with the subject matter of a
text. Therefore, control for subject matter and genre is a necessary feature of
longitudinal studies.
The major surveys of newspapers and of ninety magazines conducted by
the National Language Research Institute (NLRI) did not report data for script
proportions (NLRI, 1964; 1970). However, the following studies did address this
issue. The Kyōdō news agency estimated the proportions of scripts used in newspapers
on the basis of a sample of 4,252 sentences selected from newspapers published
between July 15 and July 21 of 1971. All characters were counted including symbols
and numerals. The following proportions were obtained: kanji 46.5%; hiragana 35.3%;
katakana 6.6%; alphabet 0.4%; numerals 1.4%; and symbols 9.8% (see Table A2). When
only the four main scripts were considered, the results were: kanji 52.3%, hiragana
39.7%, katakana 7.5% and alphabet 0.5% (Hayashi, 1982).
Nomura (1980) surveyed 27 magazines aimed at general readers
published in July 1979 in order to examine the proportion of kanji. The magazines
were divided into six classes according to topic area, type of publisher, and
readership as follows: seijikeizai-kei 'politics and economy', shimbun-kei
'news magazines', shuppan-kei 'magazines produced by general publishers',
taishū-kei
'tabloid magazines', josei-kei 'women's magazines', and dansei-kei 'men's magazines',
Nomura sampled 100 sentences per magazine excluding titles, poems, short stories,
advertisements, names, tables and other non-prose sections. All classes of characters
were counted including punctuation. He found that magazines within a class contained
similar proportions of kanji. Magazines in the area of politics and economics had the
highest average proportion of kanji at 38.2%, while the lowest proportions were found
in women's and men's magazines, at 25.2% and 23.6% respectively. There was a direct
inverse relationship between the proportions of kanji and katakana. The average
proportion of katakana in magazines concerned with politics and economics was only
6.5% but this increased to 10.4% in women's magazines and 15.4% in men's magazines.
Longitudinal studies are few. Yasumoto (1963) sampled 1,000
characters from each of 100 novels, all by different authors, that were published
between 1900 and 1954. He found the proportion of kanji progressively declined while
the proportion of hiragana and katakana rose. If this tend continued at the same
rate, he predicted that in around 2190 kanji would cease to be used in novels and
they would be wholly written in phonological characters.
The monthly magazine Chūō Kōron was sampled at ten-year intervals
between 1906 and 1976 to examine changes in the Japanese written language. This
sampling involved the random selection of pages to produce a one tenth sample. When
the four main scripts were examined for the post-war period the following trends were
evident (see Table A1). Kanji declined between 1946 (41.2%) and 1956 (36.2%) but then
increased again to 38.0% in 1976. Hiragana increased from 1946 (56.0%) to 1956
(58.2%) but then declined to 55.0% in 1976. Both the katakana and alphabet
proportions fluctuated but showed overall increases. Katakana increased from 2.6% in
1946 to 6.7% in 1976 and alphabet from 0.2% to 0.3% over the same period (NLRI,
1987). The authors of this study noted that when the results of the character counts
were compared to the results of the word counts over the whole period 1906 to 1976
the following trends were evident. The increase in katakana was due to an increase in
gairaigo and the replacement of kanji with katakana. For example, in a number of
cases the names of foreign countries and places that were written in kanji in 1916
had come to be written in katakana by 1926. Overall, hiragana tended to increase but
the use of native Japanese words, wago, decreased. Following the post-war language
reforms, parts of wago that used to be written in kanji came to be written in
hiragana. With regard to kanji, the change paralleled that of kango before 1945 but
after this the relationship was lost. This may have been due, however, to the subject
matter contained in the 1976 Chūō Kōron. The proportion of kanji may have risen in
this year since the magazines used were concerned with stories from the Meiji era (NLRI,
1987).
Loanwords in government documents
Government documents have generally been considered a domain in which
language use is conservative. Nevertheless, the use of loanwords and other new terms
written in katakana appears to have increased in recent decades. Japanese government
departments have received criticism for their excessive use of loanwords written in
katakana (see Mogami, 1984, 1991; Suzuki, 1990; Loveday, 1996). A survey conducted by
NHK (Japan Broadcasting) found that out of a sample of 11,835 names of local
government projects 25.2% contained gairaigo (Mogami, 1984). Suzuki (1983) argued
that government departments should use words that people can easily understand but
that recently introduced gairaigo were unclear and caused confusion. Ekuni (1993)
said that he could accept the use of many katakana words in advertising but not the
high level of use of gairaigo in government. Government use of katakana words has
been blamed for their increase in the news media. When such words are used in
reports, the media has no choice but report them and this introduces these words into
the language of ordinary people (Mogami, 1984; Sekine, 2003).
The Asahi daily newspaper reported that in 1988 a glossary of
katakana terms, which had been compiled for internal use in the planning department
of the Tokyo Metropolitan government, had become unexpectedly popular. The reason
given for this was the difficulties being experienced by bureaucrats and politicians
in understanding written texts due to the increase in new katakana terms (Asahi,
1988).
In 1989 the Minister for Health and Welfare (later to become prime
minister) Koizumi Junichirō criticised the use of katakana words and said proper
Japanese words that older people could understand should be used in aged care. He set
up a Terminology Rectification Committee to replace katakana words in publications
produced by offices under control of his ministry (Kajiki, 1996). At the national
level, in 2002 the Foreign Loan Words Committee (Gairaigo Iinkai) was established. It
was charged with producing lists of replacement terms for katakana gairaigo that had
been used in White Papers (Tanaka, 2003).
On the basis of the above examples, it appears that there has been a
considerable increase in the use of katakana and gairaigo in government.
Nevertheless, it is not clear whether there has been a general increase in these
words in government publications, or whether this increase has been limited to
specific high-profile areas such as project names.
Aims of this study
This study examines longitudinal change in the use of scripts in the
formal domain of government White Papers using samples that are directly comparable
in both subject matter and style. The primary aim is to determine whether there has
been an increase in katakana and decline in kanji and gauge its extent. Government
White Papers on labor, called rōdō hakusho, were chosen for the following reasons:
-
Rōdō hakusho are issued annually and cover very similar lists of
topics, and therefore are a text medium in which the subject matter is relatively
stable over time.
-
Since they refer specifically to events and socioeconomic conditions
of the previous year, they are unlikely to include extended passages that reflect the
writing styles of the more distant past.
-
Labor conditions is a field in which technological change would not
be expected to have resulted in a large influx of new terms associated with new
technologies.
-
Unlike newspaper or magazine articles, White Papers on labor contain
very few personal, place or product names.
-
Being government documents they should conform to public service
guidelines for writing and consequently variations in style from year to year and the
use of faddish terms could be expected to be minimal.
-
Finally, rōdō hakusho could be expected to be free from katakana
words associated with the reporting of foreign news or advertising.
For the above reasons, White Papers on labor provide a domain in
which the effects of subject matter, literary style and technological change are
controlled for.
The secondary aims were: 1. to examine the data published by previous
researchers and reorganise this data to allow meaningful comparison between these
studies and the present study; and 2: to determine the extent to which any changes
were attributable to language policies and to discernable stylistic factors.
Hypotheses
On the basis of the findings in the existing literature three
hypotheses were proposed:
-
The overall proportion of kanji would decline over time.
-
The proportion of katakana would increase.
-
The proportion of hiragana would increase.
Method and materials
Four rōdō hakusho were selected on the basis of availability and
similarity in content. The same section was examined in each. These sections dealt
with the living conditions of workers. The selections examined were as follows:
-
1960 (Showa 35) Rōdōsha no seikatsu jōtai 'the living conditions of workers' pp. 201-213;
-
1976 (Showa 51) Shōhisha bukka to kinrōsha kakei no dōkō
'trends in
consumer prices and the household budgets of workers' pp. 22-31;
-
1986 (Showa 61) Bukka, kinrōsha kakei no dōkō
'trends in prices and
the household budgets of workers' pp. 67-82; and
-
1997 (Heisei 9) Bukka, kinrōsha kakei no dōkō
'trends in prices and
the household budgets of workers' pp. 68-83.
The White Papers of 1976, 1886 and 1997 were directly comparable in
terms of content and sub-headings whereas the organization of the 1960 White Paper
was rather different. Consequently, the most comparable section, in terms of content,
of the 1960 White Paper was selected.
For each White Paper two counts were done. These used the same
criteria for judgment. In the first count all characters in the sections specified
above were classified according to the type of script in which they were written and
the totals recorded page by page. The aim of this count was to control for
variability between the samples due to differences in subject matter. Since there was
considerable variation from year to year in the length of the sections, a second
count was done on samples of equal length. The aim of this count was to control for
sample length. In some years more detail was included in the prose, while in others
it was summarized in tables and graphs. In both counts, graphs and tables were
excluded as were their titles and other associated script. All characters in the
prose sections were counted by the same scorer. Since the principal aim was to
examine changes in the language over time, the use of the same scorer controlled for
any variation due to subjective decisions about the status of a particular item.
There was, however, very little scope for subjectivity since the decision making
criteria were determined beforehand.
The focus of each count was upon the status of each written
character. Scores were determined for the total numbers of kanji, hiragana, katakana,
Arabic numerals, Roman numerals, % symbols, letters of the alphabet, and ~ symbols.
Sentence endings and other punctuation marks were not scored. Katakana bars (ー) were
counted as one katakana, repeat marks were counted as kanji or hiragana depending
upon the case, and numerals written in kanji (including zero) were counted as kanji.
In addition the number of numerals written in kanji was scored separately. This
sub-score did not include kanji numerals that were parts of words, such as in ippō
'on one hand' but included numerical terms such as futari 'two people'.
The frequencies of each kind of script were entered into Statistical
Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS). Chi-square tests were conducted to determine
whether any changes in the proportions of the different scripts from sample to sample
were significantly different from that expected as a result of chance variation.
Results and discussion
Count 1: Variable sample length
The results reported in this section derive from samples of White
Papers on labor, which have been controlled for topic matter. The total number of
characters sampled in each edition varied greatly. The same section of the 1986 White
Paper contained almost twice the number of characters as the 1976 one. The total
numbers and proportions of each of the scripts and symbols counted are presented in
Table 1.
Table 1: Frequencies and proportions of each character type in
White Paper samples (Count 1).
The large difference in the frequency of Arabic numerals included in
the 1960 White Paper and in the papers from 1976 onward was mainly due a change in
the style of printing between these two dates from vertical to horizontal. This meant
that many numbers that were written in kanji in 1960 were written in Arabic numerals
in 1976. The following categories of numerals were written using kanji in 1960 and
using Arabic numerals in 1976: section numbers, table numbers, years, months, and
percentages. In the 1960 White Paper, sub-sections and lists of points were numbered
using Arabic numerals or katakana, whereas only Arabic numerals were used in the 1976
White Paper. Roman numerals were used in both the vertical and horizontal formats but
nearly always as components of tables. None appeared in the sections of connected
text that were counted. Quantities were always written in kanji in the 1960 selection
but in the 1976 White Paper all quantities were written in Arabic numerals. In the
1986 White Paper some small quantities, for example futari, tended to be written in
kanji, while larger ones always used Arabic numerals. The effect of these changes in
the way numerals were written was an inflation of the overall number of kanji in the
1960 White Paper relative to the later ones. Due to the effect on the overall
proportion of kanji, numerical kanji were scored separately.
In the 1960 White Paper 6,151 characters where counted but this
included 52 symbols and 11 Arabic numerals. No Roman numerals or alphabetic
characters were used. The three Japanese scripts accounted for 98.98% of characters.
52.87% were kanji, 45.65% hiragana and only 0.46% were katakana. Of the kanji, 333
were numerals, so when these were subtracted the proportion of kanji fell to 47.46%
of total characters. Of the 28 katakana found in the sample, 6 were section markers
while the rest were used in writing words (see Table 1).
The 1976 White Paper contained 4,828 characters of which 92 (1.90%) were symbols.
11.54% of characters were Arabic numerals, there were no kanji numerals and there
were no alphabetic characters or Roman numerals. The three Japanese scripts accounted
for 86.56% of all characters: 44.88% kanji, 39.15% hiragana and 2.53% katakana (all
in words).
The 1986 sample was the largest with 8,362 characters of which 7,504 (89.74%) were in
Japanese script in the following proportions: 48.54% kanji, 38.65% hiragana and 2.55%
katakana. Symbols comprised 1.71% and Arabic numerals comprised 8.51%. Three letters
of the alphabet appeared as the acronym VTR.
In the 1997 sample, Japanese characters comprised 90.21% of the 6,229
characters sampled, with kanji accounting for 50.36%, hiragana for 36.36% and
katakana for 3.48%. There were 50 alphabetic characters (0.8%) and Arabic numerals
accounted for 7.16%.
The change from vertical to horizontal printing style between 1960
and 1976 was associated with a decline in the proportion of Japanese script used.
However, this proportion then increased through to 1997 even though it did not reach
the 1960 level. The change from writing numerals in kanji to Arabic form accounted
for much of this change between 1960 and 1976. The overall proportion of hiragana
declined throughout the period while that of katakana increased. However, the level
of katakana increase was less than the hiragana decrease so the relative proportion
of kana declined overall. The use of letters of the alphabet became evident in the
1986 sample and had increased considerably in the 1997 sample. In both samples the
items in which alphabetic characters appeared were acronyms.
Since the principal aim of this study is to examine longitudinal
change in the three Japanese scripts, three further calculations were done.
-
The three Japanese scripts plus alphabet but excluding Arabic
numerals and symbols were totaled.
-
Proportions were calculated for each of the Japanese scripts and
alphabet as percentages of the total number of characters written in Japanese and
alphabetic script, excluding Arabic numerals and symbols.
-
To control for the change in numeral use between 1960 and 1976, kanji
numerals were subtracted from the total kanji scores to give a non-numerical kanji
score. This allowed the kanji proportions to be more validly compared as well as
controlled for variations in the level of reporting of figures in text compared to in
the tables (see Table 2 below).
Table 2: Frequencies and proportions of non-numerical Japanese
and alphabetic characters in White Paper samples.
When the proportions of Japanese scripts and alphabet were adjusted
for numeral and symbol use, a steady rise in the kanji portion over the years 1960 to
1997 of 4.57% was found. There was a corresponding decline in the hiragana portion
over the same period of 8.79%. These trends were not simply associated with the
change in format since both were evident from 1976 to 1997. The katakana portion rose
from 0.49% percent to 3.83% between 1960 and 1997, a rise of 3.34%. In addition, the
use of letters of the alphabet increased from zero in 1976 to 0.88% in 1997. Since
both katakana and alphabetic characters were used principally for writing loanwords,
these two scores can be combined to give an indication of the proportion of script
taken up in rendering loanwords. The katakana score in 1960 included katakana used in
numbering so only 0.38% (22) were used in writing katakana words, whereas 4.71% of
katakana and alphabetic characters were used in words in 1997, a rise of 4.33%.
Due to the small number of alphabetic letters, these were excluded
from statistical analysis. The Chi-square test for independence was conducted on the
three Japanese scripts only. Taking all four samples of text into account the
Chi-square statistic was highly significant (χ2 = 205.9, df 6, p < 0.001). The
standardized residuals indicated that the increase in katakana from 1960 to 1997 was
the largest contributor to this result, so a further test was undertaken on kanji and
hiragana alone. Again the result was highly significant (χ2 = 61.4, df 3, p < 0.001)
and an inverse relationship was evident in the standardized residuals. Figure 1 is a
graphic representation of the change in the proportions of script types.
Figure 1.
Count 2: Equal sample size
The effect of using samples that were controlled for both topic
matter and number of characters was examined by equalizing the size of the samples.
Since the 1976 sample was the smallest at 4,828 characters, scores were calculated
for the same total number of characters in each of the other samples. This was done
by counting the first 4,828 characters in each of the corresponding sections of the
other White Papers. The resultant samples contained equal numbers of characters and
covered similar topic areas. When all characters are considered, the effect of equal
sample size compared to count 1 on overall kanji proportions was very small with the
same trend being evident. In the 1986 sample the proportion of hiragana was reduced
by 2.9% and the proportion of katakana rose by 0.6%. When compared to count 1 the
proportions of numerals and symbols were affected in all of the three White Papers.
However the variations did not exceed 1.5%. Since numerals tended to be unevenly
distributed in the texts some variation was expected. When the numerals are removed
and the main three Japanese scripts plus the alphabetic characters are considered
separately for count 2, the sample sizes lose their equality and range from 4,179 to
4,773 characters. The resulting totals and proportions for count 2 are presented in
Table 3.
Table 3: Frequencies and proportions of non-numerical Japanese
and alphabetic characters in White Paper samples (Count 2).
For the White Papers of 1960 and 1997 there was little difference in
the proportions of the four main scripts between the two counts. Both of these
samples were of roughly equal size in count 1, so they were each reduced by about a
quarter for the second count. In contrast, the sample of the 1986 paper used in count
1 was almost twice the size of that in count 2. This resulted in greater variation
between the two counts particularly in the proportions of hiragana and katakana. The
shorter sample (count 2) resulted in increased proportions of kanji and katakana and
reduced proportions of hiragana and alphabet. Nevertheless, the trends which were
evident when equal subject matter was the criterion (count 1) were still evident when
equal sample size was the criterion (count 2), albeit less obviously. The proportions
of kanji, katakana and alphabet increased from 1960 to 1997 while the proportion of
hiragana decreased.
When the three Japanese scripts were considered the variation across
the samples was found to be significant (χ2 = 195.4, df 6, p < 0.001) with katakana
showing the greatest range in the standardized residuals. For kanji and hiragana
alone a significant effect was again found (χ2 = 56.4, df 3, p < 0.001) as was an
inverse relationship. Figure 2 shows the script proportions for count 2.
Figure 2.
The statistics for the two counts demonstrate the same trends and
indicate that the changes found in script types over the samples are highly unlikely
to be the result of chance.
Summary of results
There was an increase in the non-numerical kanji proportion from
sample to sample. However, this increase was relatively small (4.57% in count 1),
indicating that kanji use was fairly stable between 1960 and 1997 in White Papers on labor. This result was unexpected, since it was predicted that the proportion of
kanji would decline as the proportion of katakana rose. Instead the hiragana portion
declined by 8.79%. As expected, katakana use increased but only to 3.83%.
Comparisons with other studies
In order to enable meaningful comparisons between the present study
and other studies, published data from earlier Japanese studies was re-systematized
and adjusted to the counting system used in this study (see appendix for complete
figures). When compared to the Chūō Kōron sample of the same year, a much lower
proportion of katakana was found in the 1976 White Paper. Also, the kanji proportion
of the White Paper was far greater even though the vertical format of Chūō Kōron
would have placed numerals into the kanji portion, while these would not have been
included as kanji in the horizontally formatted White Paper (see Table 4 and Table A1
below). It should be noted, however, that the Chūō Kōron study was primarily
concerned with word types and not script proportions. By their own admission, the
authors of the study indicated that the script proportion data may have suffered from
inadequacies. In addition, Chūō Kōron and the White Paper on labor are very different
kinds of documents. Therefore, the most that can be drawn from this comparison is
that the kanji proportion can vary by 14% between text types published in the same
year. Compared to the newspaper sample of 1971, the proportion of kanji in the 1976
White Paper was only slightly lower despite the vertical format of the newspapers
(see Table 4). The difference in the hiragana proportions appeared to be mostly
accounted for by the higher level of katakana in the newspaper sample. However, due
to the absence of separate data for numerals in the newspaper sample such a
conclusion can only be tentative (see Table A2).
Table 4: Comparison of studies for 1970s samples.
Of the previous studies of script proportions in Japanese, that of
Nomura (1980) would seem the most comparable to this study. Of the categories of
magazines examined in his study, those concerned with politics and economics (seijikeizai-kei)
could be expected to be the most similar in content and style to White Papers on labor (see Table A3). The grouped data placed these magazines in an intermediate
position between the 1976 White Paper and Chūō Kōron with regard to proportions of
kanji and hiragana. Since Nomura has published detailed data, it is possible to
calculate script proportions for individual samples using the same method as used in
this study, thereby allowing more meaningful comparison (see Table 4). Since the
seijikeizai magazines used both horizontal and vertical formats, it was necessary to
separate the data for this category. Only one of the four magazines in this category
was written in horizontal format, Shūkan Daiyamondo (Weekly Diamond). However, its
11.4% of katakana and 38.7% of kanji indicated that it was very different to the 1976
White Paper and to subsequent White Papers. Both Ekonomisuto (Economist) and
Tōyōkeizai (Eastern Economics) were written in vertical format and covered similar
subject matter. Their kanji proportions were very similar, particularly when
non-numerical kanji were considered, but remained well below those of the White Papers (see Table 5).
Table 5: Seijikeizai-kei magazines 1979 adjusted to 4 main scripts.
Since Nomura's data allowed investigation of the variation in script
proportions between samples from different magazines published in the same year,
further investigation was undertaken to determine the range of script proportions and
facilitate comparison between studies. As data was available for Chūō Kōron in 1976,
a comparable magazine was sought from among Nomura's samples. Shūkan Shinchō (Shinchō
Weekly) was selected and found to contain very similar proportions of kanji and
hiragana to Chūō Kōron and somewhat more katakana (see Table 6).
Table 6: Shūkan Shinchō 1979 and Chūō Kōron 1976
adjusted to 4 main scripts.
At the lower end of the kanji spectrum, four magazine samples from
the Men's and Women's magazine categories were selected for further analysis (see
Table 7). All were written in the vertical format but only one, Shūkan Josei (Weekly
Woman), tended to use kanji numerals. The magazine with the lowest proportion of
kanji (23.8%) had the highest proportion of katakana (22.4%), while that with the
highest proportion of kanji (31.1%) had the lowest proportion of katakana (11.9%).
This inverse relationship was evident across the four magazines. The highest
proportion of alphabetic characters was also found in this group at 1.6%.
Table 7: Men's and women's magazines 1979 adjusted to 4 main
scripts.
The reasons behind the changes found in the White Papers are likely
to lie in a combination of official language policies, departmental guidelines on
writing style, the stylistic preferences of the writers and editors, and the advent
of wide-spread computer use. Of these factors, official policy and the associated
guidelines for government publications are the most amenable to analysis.
The kanji list issued by the National Language Council (Kokugo
Shingikai) in 1946 (Tōyōkanjihyō) limited the kanji used in government documents to
1,850. In the preface, it also recommended that certain types of words be wholly
written in hiragana rather than kanji. These included: auxiliary verbs (jodōshi),
adverbs (fukushi), conjunctions (setsuzokushi). In 1949 the Council issued reforms to
be applied to government documents that recommended they be written in horizontal
style. A style guide for government documents (Kōyōbunsakusei no yōryō) was issued in
1952 that specified the use of plain, easy to understand language including the
replacement of difficult kango, mainly by wago. Further reforms in 1959, increased
the use of okurigana, for example, verbs such as owaru (finish) were
written with two hiragana following the kanji rather than one (i.e. 断わる instead of
断る) but recommended adverbs be written in kanji (Shiraishi, 1960).
The 1960 White Paper did not completely conform to these policies and
guidelines. It was still written in vertical style (this changed to horizontal in the
1961 White Paper) and used a few kanji outside the list, for example shojō
(爼上). With regard to hiragana use, it went beyond the guidelines. For example, words
such as
izen (still), mottomo (most) and tsugi (next) were all in hiragana as were a number
of the verbs that had been the subject of the 1959 okurigana reforms (e.g. okonau,
kuraberu). This preference for hiragana was, however, not always consistent, for
example onaji (same) was sometimes written おなじ and other times as 同じ.
In 1973, the Council issued new guidelines that allowed the option of using fewer
okurigana (Gottlieb, 1995). It was expected that these would be followed in the 1976
White Paper, however, its okurigana use followed the 1959 guidelines. Adverbs
were in kanji (e.g. 最も) and the kanji were generally within the Tōyō kanji
list (桁 was an exception).
In the 1997 Paper, there was no evidence of the additional kanji that
were added to make the Jōyō kanji list but again this was likely due to the
vocabulary used. Some kanji outside the list were used (e.g. 剥落). Okurigana
use was mixed with both longer and shorter forms appearing. Kanji use for adverbs was
similarly inconsistent (e.g. 更に and さらに) but many were written in kanji.
Besides these policy-related changes some stylistic factors were
evident. Words that were written in wago in 1960 had been replaced by kango synonyms
in 1997. Typical examples included ichijirushii (いちじるしい) 'remarkable' being
replaced by kencho (顕著), kuraberu (くらべる) 'compare' by
hikaku suru (比較する), medatta (めだった) 'conspicuous' by kenchona
(顕著な), and ochikomu (落ちこむ) 'go down' by
geraku suru (下落する). Also, more sub-headings were used in 1997. The effect of
this was that conjunctions used in bridging passages, written mainly in hiragana,
were replaced by sub-headings written mainly in kanji.
It should be noted that was not possible to quantify the effects of
particular policies on the relative proportions of kanji and hiragana. It was,
however, possible to identify policy changes that favored increased kanji use and
determine whether these had an effect. The 1981 reform had the effect of increasing
the number of kanji for general use from 1,850 to 1,945 and removed the ceiling on
kanji usage by downgrading the force of the guidelines on kanji use (Gottlieb, 1995;
Seeley, 1991). In terms of effect on the samples used, this change had no impact.
Almost all kanji across the samples were within the earlier Jōyō kanji list and both
the 1960 and 1997 White Papers used kanji beyond the official lists on occasion. The
changes to okurigana usage, and to the use of hiragana for adverbs and
conjunctions reduced the number of hiragana but a considerable time-lag was found
between the release of a policy or guideline and its implementation. The 1960 sample
was closer to guidelines issued in 1946 than those of 1959. In 1976 the 1959 style
was followed − not that issued in 1973. Even in 1997 the 1973 okurigana changes were only
partially followed. Nevertheless, these changes did favor an increase in kanji at the
expense of hiragana. With regard to adverbs, kanji use was evident in 1976 and more
so in 1997. Conjunctions generally remained in hiragana throughout. Again these
changes favored an increase in the proportion of kanji. Stylistic change in the form
of a shift towards greater kango use also contributed to the relative increase
in kanji and indicated a move away from the earlier policy of using a plain spoken
style − a shift that can also be discerned in official style guides (see for example
Bunkachō, 2003).
The proportion of katakana in the White Papers increased from sample
to sample but this increase was smaller than had been expected. When the subject
matter and numeral usage were controlled for, the increase was 3.34% from 1960 to
1997 with only a 1% increase in the period 1986 to 1997. Apart from a few instances
of katakana being used for numbering in the 1960 White Paper, katakana were found to
be used for content words. Most of these were loanwords, the only exception being the
Sino-Japanese word tansu (タンス) 'chest of drawers' which is now conventionally
written in katakana (the kanji i.e. 箪笥 are not on the lists). Consequently, the
increase in katakana script was directly related to loanword usage. We found no
evidence of a massive influx of loanwords and our expectation that White Papers on
labor would be at the lower end of the scale of loanword usage in print media was
confirmed. No loanwords were used in titles or subheadings and there were many pages
that contained no katakana. The majority of loanwords were found in sections dealing
with the quality of life and referred to common household items and well-known terms.
Of the economics-related terms, the majority were compounds comprised of kango with a
katakana portion, such as mainasuyōin (マイナス要因) 'minus factor',
purasuyōin (プラス要因) 'plus factor', and sābisuryōkin (サービス料金) 'service
fee'. A few terms may have posed comprehension difficulties. These included anbaransu
'unbalance' and piiku 'peak' in
the 1976 sample; raifusaikuru 'life cycle' and taimuragu 'time lag' in the 1986
sample; and rifōmu 'reform' and rīsu 'lease' in the 1997 sample. The main innovation
over the period was the introduction of alphabetic acronyms. The first of these was
VTR, which appeared in the 1986 sample. In the 1997 sample, four acronyms (D.I., WPI,
CSPI, CPI) appeared and the proportion of alphabetic characters was highest at 0.88%.
Since these acronyms all appeared with explanation they could not have been a source
of confusion. When the katakana and alphabet proportions are combined, the proportion
of script used to write foreign-derived lexical items in the 1997 sample rises to
4.71%.
It was not possible to discern any effect of the use of
word-processors. From 1984 their use increased rapidly (Gottlieb, 1998). So it is
likely that the writers of both the 1986 and 1997 White Papers used them. However,
the use extra-list kanji predated this and I could find no examples where kanji that
should not have been used, according to the guidelines, otherwise appeared in the
text.
Of the samples of text examined in this and the other studies, White
Papers on labor contained a high proportion of kanji, comparable in level to that of
newspapers. The level of katakana was lower than that of the other samples and this
seems to have been due to the lower level of gairaigo use compared with magazines or
newspapers. The level of katakana use has increased over the last few decades but the
increase in these White Papers was comparatively small. An unexpected finding was the
relative decline in hiragana and increase in the proportion of kanji. This trend was,
however, in accordance with the Chūō Kōron study and points to a relative decline in
kanji until the 1950s followed by an increase. In the White Papers this change was
probably due to a combination of: 1. policy changes that favored the use of fewer
okurigana and the use of kanji for words previously written in hiragana (but was not
due to the increase in the number of kanji on official lists); 2. a shift in style
away from plain speech towards a literary style that employs more kango; and 3.
changes in layout that produced more subheadings and shorter prose sections. What was
also notable about the effects of official language policies and guidelines was the
extent to which the White Papers did not conform and the long time-lag between the
release of a policy and its effects.
Over the various studies of text examined, there was considerable
variation in script proportions between the types of print media. Therefore the
findings of this study cannot be generalized to other written genre. Similarly, a
longitudinal study of the change in Japanese script usage in one genre cannot be
regarded as representative of the language as a whole. What is needed is longitudinal
data from samples from a number of genre that are comparable in terms of subject
matter and include controls for confounding factors such as horizontal or vertical
format and numeral use. If the same phenomena found in this and the Chūō Kōron study
are evident, this would suggest that these changes are ones that characterize written
Japanese in the post-war period.
Asahi Shinbun (1988). Katakanago hanran kanawan (I cannot bear the flood of
katakana words). 13 May, p. 29.
Bunkachō (1994). Kotoba ni kansuru mondōshū: Keigohen [Shinkotoba
Shirīzu No 2](Questions and answers on language: Polite speech). Tokyo: Ōkurashō
Insatsukyoku.
− − (2003). Kōyōbun no kakiarawashikata no kijun (Standards for writing in
government documents). Tokyo: Daiichihōki.
Bunkachō Kokugoka (1982). Genkō no kokugohyōki no kijun (Current
standards for writing), new edition. Tokyo: Gyōsei.
Ekuni, S. (1993). Gairaigo ni tsuite (Regarding loanwords). In Kawadeshobō
(Ed.),
Kotoba dokuhon gairaigo. Tokyo: Kawadeshobō Shinsha. 125-131.
Gottlieb, N. (1993). Written Japanese and the word processor. Japan Forum 5(1):
115-132.
− − (1994). Language and politics: The reversal of postwar script reform policy in
Japan. The Journal of Asian Studies, 53(4): 1175-1198.
− − (1995). Kanji Politics: Language policy and Japanese script. London: Kegan
Paul.
− − (1998). Keeping up with the Tanakas: The social construction of word
processing technology in Japan, 1982-1995. Japanese Studies 18(2): 153-163.
Habein, Y.S. (1984). The history of the Japanese written language. Tokyo:
University of Tokyo Press.
Hayashi, O. (Ed.) (1982). Zusetsu nihongo (Japanese language in tables and
charts). Tokyo: Kadokawa shoten.
Honna, N. (1995). English within Japanese society: language within language.
Journal of Multilingual & Multicultural Development, 16 (1&2): 45-62.
Ishino, H. (1983). Gendai gairaigokō (Thoughts on contemporary
loanwords). Tokyo: Taishūkan.
Iwabuchi, E. (1993). Gairaigo. In Kawadeshobō (Ed.), Kotoba dokuhon
gairaigo. Tokyo: Kawadeshobō Shinsha. 7-15.
Kajiki, M. (1996). Kotoba chōsa no kongo no kadai (Challenges for future
language surveys). Hōsōkenkyū to Chōsa, Dec: 17-21.
Kokugo Shingikai (2001). Kokusai shakai ni taiōsuru nihongo no arikata
(Optimum response of the Japanese language to the global society). Science of
Humanity, Bensei,
33, 97-114.
Loveday, L. (1996). Language contact in Japan: A socio-linguistic history. Oxford:
Clarendon Press.
Maruya, S. (1978). Nihongo no tame ni (For the sake of Japanese). Tokyo:
Shinchosha.
Miller, R.A. (1967). The Japanese language. Tokyo: Charles E. Tuttle Co.
Miyajima, T. (1977). Gengoseisaku no rekishi (History of language policies). In Y.
Suzuki (Ed.), Kokugo kokuji mondai no riron. Tokyo: Mugishobō. 7-19.
− − (1989). Changes in the language of a magazine. In S. Mizutani (Ed.),
Japanese quantative linguistics. Bochum: Studienverlag Dr. Brockmeyer. 31-49.
Mogami, K. (1984). Oyakusho wa katakanago ga osuki? (Do government offices like
katakana words?). Hōsō Kenkyū to Chōsa August: 20-38.
− − (1991). Hakusho no naka no gairaigo (Loanwords in White Papers). Hōsōkenkyū
to Chōsa, June: 34-45.
NLRI (National Language Research Institute) (1964). Gendaizasshi
kyūjusshu no yōgoyōji (Vocabulary and Chinese characters in ninety magazines of
today) Vol. III. Tokyo: Shūeishuppan.
− − (1970). Denshikeisanki niyoru shinbun no goi chōsa (Computer study of
newspaper vocabulary). Tokyo: Shūeishuppan.
− − (1987). Zasshiyōgo no hensen (Changes in the language of a magazine).
Tokyo: Shūeishuppan.
Nomura, M. (1980). Shūkanshi no kanjiganyūritsu (Chinese character content
of weeklies). Keiryōkokugogaku (Mathematical Linguistics) 12(5): 215-222.
Ōno, S., Morimoto, T. and Suzuki, T. (2001). Nihon, Nihongo, Nihonjin
(Japan, Japanese and Japanese people). Tokyo: Shinchōsha.
Seeley, C. (1991). A history of writing in Japan. Leiden: E. J. Brill.
Sekine, K. (2003). Shinbunkiji no nakano katakanago (Katakana words in newspaper
articles), Nihongogaku, 22(7), 30-39.
Shiota, N. (1973). Nihon no gengo seisaku no kenkyū (Research on language policy
in Japan). Tokyo: Kuroshio Shuppan.
Shiraishi, D. (Ed.)(1960). Tōyōkanji, gendaikanazukai, okurigana no
tsukekata (Guide to the tōyōkanji, modern kana usage and okurigana). Tokyo:
Ōkurashō Insatsukyoku.
Sugito, S. (1989). Lexical aspects of the modernization of Japanese. In F. Coulmas
(Ed.), Language adaptation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 116-126.
Suzuki, S. (1983). Gyōsei to gairaigo (Public administration and
loanwords).
Gengo
Seikatsu 329: 29.
− − (1990). Kanjijōhōryoku saihakken (The rediscovery of the informational power
of kanji). Tokyo: Sotakusha.
Suzuki, T. (1985). Yōgo no genjō to shōrai (The current condition of Western words
and the future). Nihongogaku 4: 4-17.
− − (2001). Eigo wa iranai!? (We don't need English?). Tokyo: PHP Shinsho.
Takashi, K. (1990). A functional analysis of English borrowings in Japanese
advertising: Linguistic and sociolinguistic perspectives. Ph.D. dissertation,
Department of Linguistics, Georgetown University.
Tanaka, M. (2003). 'Gairaigo iikae teian' nitsuite (On the proposal for replacing
loanwords). Nihongogaku, 22(7): 50-60.
Tomoda, T. (1999). The impact of loan words on modern Japanese. Japan Forum,
11(1): 231-253.
Twine, N. (1991). Language and the modern state. London: Routledge.
Tsuchimochi, G. H. (1993). Education reform in postwar Japan: The 1946 U.S.
education mission. Tokyo: University of Tokyo Press.
Unger, J. M. (1996). Literacy and script reform in occupation Japan: Reading
between the lines. New York: Oxford University Press.
Yasumoto, B. (1963). Kanji no shōrai (The future of kanji). Gengoseikatsu 137,
46-54.
Acknowledgements
I would like to thank Dr Bruce Stevenson, Dr Pam Reynolds, Dr Kais Hamza and Brian
May for advice and assistance with statistical analysis. This project was completed
with the assistance of research grants from the Faculty of Arts, Monash University.
About the author
Takako Tomoda is a lecturer in the
School of Languages,
Cultures and Linguistics at Monash
University, Australia. She graduated from
Seijo University and
completed her Master's degree at the University
of Arizona. Her research interests include language policy, language change
and language contact.
Back to Top