Paper short abstract:

In 1941, Tokieda Motoki published Kokugogaku genron, a failed attempt to refocus Japanese linguistics as an ontological alternative to Western theory. This paper examines Tokieda’s legacy and proposes a recontextualisation of an otherwise overlooked chapter in the global history of linguistics.

Paper long abstract:

Tokieda Motoki’s Kokugogaku genron (国語学原論), originally published in 1941, is arguably the most significant Japanese theoretical publication on the subject of language written in the 20th century: It constitutes a rare attempt by a Japanese linguist to propose an alternative theory of linguistics in a field that has been dominated by European and American (i.e. “Western”) theorists. Although Tokieda tailored his theory around the Japanese language, he insisted that it was a general theory of language, meaning that it could – in theory – be applied to the study of other languages. Thus, seen from the perspective of the global history of linguistics, Tokieda’s theory is nothing short of a veritable rara avis: a scientific theory of language conceived by a person whose first language is not Indo-European. For this reason alone, one would imagine that Tokieda was a more well-known scholar, but the reality is that he is virtually unknown outside specialist circles.

In this paper, I explore some of the reasons behind Tokieda’s obscurity. I argue that partly due to his own hubris and partly due to historical circumstance, Kokugogaku genron ended up in a web of controversies, misunderstandings and mistranslations. Chief among these is Tokieda’s audacious attempt at repudiating the Swiss linguist, Ferdinand de Saussure, whilst relying on a lacking Japanese translation. Furthermore, Tokieda’s political leanings also tie him to a broader question that extends far beyond theoretical linguistics: How do we approach the intellectual heritage of the numerous prewar thinkers who expressed sympathy for Japanese imperialism?

Despite the contentious gossamer, I maintain that Tokieda’s magnum opus deserves our attention, if only for the fact that it remains one of the few extant opportunities to glimpse into an alternative reality in which the modern science of language has not been almost exclusively shaped by speakers of the same language family (i.e. Indo-European). I propose that by recontextualising Kokugogaku genron as a thesis rather than an antithesis, effectively ignoring the polemic about Saussure, the text gains new relevance for the global discipline that is linguistics in the 21st century.