Skip to content
BY-NC-ND 3.0 license Open Access Published by De Gruyter March 28, 2013

The meta-language of politics, culture and integrity in Japan

Junichi Kawata and Melinda Papp
From the journal Human Affairs

Abstract

Words and phrases must be interpreted within the proper cultural and contemporary political and historical context. In particular, the language of politics is distinguished by the use of specific terms and phrases which often allude to other associated meanings. This means that caution must be exercised when interpreting the terms used not only within the context of the other language, but often also within its own linguistic context. The translator or commentator has to be familiar with the language code used in the given environment and within the cultural biases of that particular society so that meanings are not lost and the often crucial connotations are not misinterpreted. Political rhetoric often employs words and language in a manipulative yet frequently subtle manner. This paper analyzes examples of shifts in language code by looking at a number of cases in Japan and their cultural construction where loss of integrity and backstage practices are at stake.

[1] Bernstein, B. (1971). Theoretical Studies towards a Sociology of Language. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Search in Google Scholar

[2] Cheng, P. P. (1988). Political Clientelism in Japan. The Case of ’s’. Asian Survey XXVIII, 471–483. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/264473910.2307/2644739Search in Google Scholar

[3] Easton, D. (1953). The Political System. New York: Alfred A. Knopf. Search in Google Scholar

[4] Hendry, J. (2004). Understanding Japanese Society. London and New York: Routledge Curzon. Search in Google Scholar

[5] Hunziker, S., Kamimura, I. (1994). Kakuei Tanaka: A Political Biography of Modern Japan. Singapore: Marshall Cavendish. Search in Google Scholar

[6] Ito, Toshiyuki (2006). Motto Chikaranoaru Kotoba wo Kikasete. [Let’s Hear about More Powerful Words]. The Yomiuri Newspaper, October 8. Search in Google Scholar

[7] IviĆ, Milka. (1965). Trends in Linguistics. Paris: The Hague Mouton. Search in Google Scholar

[8] Johnson, Ch. (1980). Omote (explicit) and ura (implicit): Translating Japanese Political Terms. Journal of Japanese Studies 6, No.1, 89–115. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/13200110.2307/132001Search in Google Scholar

[9] Kawata, Junichi (1977). Working Class Tories ni tsuiteno Ichi Kosatsu. [A Study on Working Class Tories]. Konan Law Review 17 No. 1, 1–55. Search in Google Scholar

[10] Lawton, D. (1968). Social Class, Language and Education. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul. Search in Google Scholar

[11] Nakane, Chie. (1971). Japanese Society. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson. Search in Google Scholar

[12] Percheron, A. (1974). L’univers politique des enfants. Paris: Armand Colin. 10.3917/scpo.perch.1974.01Search in Google Scholar

[13] Percheron, A., Subileau, F. (1978). Definition du champ politique. In A. Percheron et al. Les 10–16 ans et la politique, pp.139–201. Paris: Fondation Nationale des Sciences Politique. Search in Google Scholar

[14] Shiota, Ushio. (2002). Tanaka Kakuei Shikkyaku. [The Downfall of Tanaka Kakuei]. Tokyo: Bungei Shunju. Search in Google Scholar

[15] Takabatake, Michitoshi (1976). Politics and Language. Gengo Seikatsu [Linguistic Behavior], No. 299, 86–93. Search in Google Scholar

Published Online: 2013-3-28
Published in Print: 2013-4-1

© 2013 Institute for Research in Social Communication, Slovak Academy of Sciences

This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.

Scroll Up Arrow