식민지타이완의 이중어상황과 일본어글쓰기

Abstract

This thesis aims at examining the language policy of Japan,Taiwanese's reaction and counteraction against it, and their desire and frustration of the imperialist language, Japanese, centering on the Taiwan's verbal multi-layeredness and its result, Japanese writing. This topic is related to figuring out the colonized people's re-identification in the backdrop of colonialism, which is non other than the basic ‘ruling/ruled' relation on one hand, and the stratum of the structured colonial authority in the diglossic environment on the other hand. In addition, it exposes the contradiction of the old nationalistic formula, ‘nationality=nation=national language,' since the modern, a symbol of nation-state, and colonialism has encountered. Japan Imperialism controlled the language by two ways in Taiwan; legalizing only Japanese yet accepting Chinese character,the common cultural written language of East Asia together. However impossible to control the hybridity caused by using both languages, Japan abolished the latter one and pursues a language shift to Japanese in force. In spite of such cultural violence, the colonized Taiwan intellectuals attempted to establish their mother tongue as a modern cultural language. However, all their attempts failed due to the shortage of public systems such as school education and the colonized mother tongue withers as a private,unofficial language. Therefore, Taiwan entered a diglossic society that co-exists the public/ national/ cultural/ central language,Japanese, and the private/ local/ non-cultural/ circumferential colonized mother tongue. Inside the diglossic society, bilingualists practiced and pursued Japanese writing as the colonized intellects and hierarchize the cultural interior authority based on the cultural one-upmanship. It is undeniable that the derive for the hegemonic assimilation of bilingual Taiwanese worked as a main factor to maintain and consolidate the ruling-ruled relation of two languages. However, it also experienced the frustration of not completely owning the imperialistic language due to the discriminative cultural imperialism by Japan. Yet it is clear that Japanese writing opened a new prospect of thought as well as writing beyond Taiwan. In other words, it created a very hybrid and hetrogeneous cultural space which does not belong to neither Japan nor Taiwan. Therefore Japanese writing constituted a space of trans-nation connecting the colony and the colonized, while ceaselessly making a space of discourse exposing the ‘difference’ between them. Overall, this research of Japanese writing is meaningful in that it not only reveals the limit of a simple nationalism's dichotomy of pro- or anti- Japan but also provides a steppingstone to reconstitute the East Asian colonial culture which transgresses the border of one nation.