伊澤修二與小川尚義的語言觀──從日語教育的觀點論述

The View of Language of Isawa Shuji and Ogawa Naoyosi --- based on their Japanese language education--

本論文以伊澤修二與小川尚義對於戰前日語教育的見解，來考察兩者的語言觀。1895年，台灣成為日本的殖民地。統治初期因社會情勢混亂，雙方語言無法溝通，因此口語表達能力的培養，為日語教育的首要目標。但從語言學習要素來分析，當時的日語教育有兩個因素須考慮。一則為台日兩語言之間的互補與干涉。二則為當時的日語其書寫與口語不同調，即所謂言文不一致的現象。本論文就此兩點，以伊澤修二與小川尚義曾參與編輯的教科書為考察對象，將其假名與台語文字之使用上作一比較，從中探討兩者語言觀的差異。從教科書的分析當中，我們發現，小川尚義認為文字只不過是語言的工具，它的功用在於忠實地呈現聲音。因此，只要能將聲音表出的文字符號，都可以記述任何語言。所以他力排言文不一的現象，強調假名的表音特質，將假名修改為更具系統化與合理化。小川尚義稱自己修改後的假名表記方式為「記音假字法」。他認為只要使用此記音表記法，不僅可提高日語學習效果，更是日台溝通的最佳媒介。反觀伊澤修二為了顧及中央與殖民地的連繫，他選擇聽寫一致的表音假名教學的同時，也將言文不一致的表記方法，帶入當時的日語教育。至於台語的意思表述，伊澤修二選擇了倚靠漢字而非假名。從這些文字的選用來看，小川尚義比伊澤修二更徹底貫徹表音文字，語言是藉由聲音傳達之語言觀。

This is a paper of the view of language of Isawa Shuji and Ogawa Naoyosi, who were Japanese teachers, based on their opinions of the Japanese language education in prewar days. In 1895 when Japan began to rule over Taiwan , they had the training of conversation as the main object in the Japanese language education. And we should consider two elements of the language as for the operation of the Japanese language education of those times. The one is the supplement and interruption between two languages; Taiwanese and Japanese. And the other is un-unification of the written and spoken Japanese. I considered these two elements through the usage of the Japanese characters used in text books whose production they participated and edited. As the result, Mr. Ogawa excluded the un-unification, regarded the letter only as the inscribed symbol of the sound and invested ‘inscription method of the sound by using Japanese characters.' He thought this method would be useful to break situation where was a lack of understanding between Japan and Taiwan . On the contrary, Mr. Isawa introduced unification of the Japanese to prevail Japanese language and develop its conversational ability, and also introduced un-unification to make equal both educations in Japan and Taiwan . Besides he used Chinese characters to inscribe Taiwanese as well as Japanese kana letters which Mr. Ogawa used. Seeing usage of the letters, it is proved that Mr. Ogawa used phonetic symbol more thoroughly than Mr. Isawa and that he thought of the languages as the expression by sound.