The influence of Japanese could be chased back to the establishment of Meiji government in 1868 (Hirayama, 1984 as cited in Heinrich, 2004: 154). During this period, there are two major factors contributing to the language shift in Okinawa: Assimilation schooling policies of Japan and social discrimination towards Ryukyuan speakers. The determination of Meiji government on "Japanization" was further strengthened after the success of Japan on international battlefields.

 

          In order to consolidate the control over the domains and then over all country, centralization was promoted by the Meiji government, which started the discussion on the abolition of domain in the early 1871 (Kinzley, 2003: 25-28). In the August of the same year, the domains were claimed to be abolished and to be replaced by prefectures (Jansen, 2002: 348). However, situation was slightly different in the Ryukyu Islands, which was annexed into the Japanese nation state in 1872 as the Ryukyu domain first, then turned into Okinawa Prefecture in 1879 (Heinrich ,2004: 155). The assimilation embodied the escalation of the control from the central government, and the beginning of the contact with the Standard Japanese.    

 

           Governance in Ryukyu Islands was not easy due to the communication gap created by the unintelligible languages which were used by people in the mainland and the archipelago (Heinrich, 2004: 154). Not restricted in the Okinawa Islands, dialects had been viewed as an obstacle exclusive with obedience of the subjects and hence national unity (Bairon, Brenzinger & Heinrich, 2009). In order to establish a stronger control over the prefecture, a series of language planning activities was launched in Okinawa, trying to promote a standard language, the Standard Japanese, in Okinawa, and all over the country.

 

Difficulties in the first decades

 

          Notwithstanding the intention to spread Standard Japanese to every Prefectures from the central government, it was not favorable for the diffusion of the standard language at the beginning stage, as centrally co-ordinated language policy was absent and there were insufficient qualified school teachers for education at that time (Heinrich, 2004: 156). Even the teachers of Standard Japanese were not familiar with it as they had difficulties in switching between the local and standard languages, which have different idiosyncrasies in representation (Heinrich, 2004: 157). Besides, the use of Japanese for government services and written communication was not discussed in the contemporary society (Heinrich, 2004: 158). However, there was also a lack of promoters of Ryukyuan at the same time (ibid), so Ryukyuan did not take many advantages in the initial state.

 

 

Education Policies

 

           In 1871, the Ministry of Education proclaimed that all schools in the country are subject to the regulation of the Meiji government (Clark, 2002: 57). In the next year, the government announced the Education System Order and established a universal education system to unite and to ensure the identification of citizens in the whole nation (Hansen, 2014: 331). According to the instruction from the Ministry of Education in that year, it was required that each district should have more than one elementary school, where the schools have to follow the curriculum approved by the Ministry of Education (Clark, 2002: 58).

 

          In 1880, compulsory school education was enforced in Okinawa and Standard Japanese was at first taught as a foreign language to the Ryukyuans (Heinrich, 2004: 157). The teachers of Standard Japanese were trained in the “Conversation Training Center”, which was founded in Feb 1880 under the Ministry of Education (ibid). Meanwhile the training center was also in charge of the compilation of the Japanese-Ryukyuan bilingual textbooks, as a monolingual one could not be used practically (Heinrich, 2004: 155). As aforementioned, there were some communication issues between the locals and government officials. Although some Okinawans might speak some of the Kyushu varieties, especially the Satsuma varieties, most of them could not understand the varieties from Tokyo (Heinrich, 2004: 157).

 

          Later in the same year, textbook “Okinawa Dialogue” for the Okinawan children was published (Hansen, 2014: 337), co-authored by officials of the Ministry of Education and some Ryukyu elites (Heinrich, 2004: 157). Even though “Okinawa Dialogue” was written in both Okinawan and Standard Japanese, the example dialogues adopted in the book (for example, it was written that the language of Tokyo is generally understood in each Prefecture) revealed a strong inclination to the Standard Japanese and emphasized the superiority of the standard language that was originated from the place, Tokyo (Hansen, 2014: 336-337). Since the textbook was majorly prepared by officials from Tokyo, it could also be considered that a national identity was promoted underway (Hansen, 2014: 337).

 

           The declaration of the “Imperial Rescript on Education” in 1890 embodied the ideologies of “cultural nationalism” have turned from debate level to real practice (Hansen, 2014: 331). Meanwhile, this also indicated that language (or Standard Japanese) education was not only a matter of communication, but a section of “Imperial subject education” promoting identity recognition of the nation state (Heinrich, 2004: 157).

 

           In the first journal published by the Ministry of Education in Okinawa from the year of 1895, it was emphasized again that Okinawa Prefecture was important as a part of the nation state of Japanese (Hansen, 2014: 330). Also, as mentioned above, being a section of the “imperial subject education”, Standard Japanese had become an essential subject in school education, and were even treated as a prerequisite subject of other courses (Hansen, 2014: 331; Heinrich, 2004). This provided the foundation of the widespread of Standard Japanese as it provided the opportunity to contact with the standard Tokyo language in the rudimental education for the children in Okinawa.

 

Victory in international stage

 

           In the end of the 19th century, Japan became active gradually in the international stage, especially in the battlefield. It would be ideal the army, better would be all subjects under the nation state, unified in terms of ideology and language. Therefore, the decision of the central government to build up cohesion within the whole country, including the Prefectures, was strengthened (Ramsey, 2004: 82).

 

          Meiji Japan had triumphed in the battle with the Qing Dynasty in 1895, which is also known as the Sino-Japanese War, and defeated Russia in the North in the Russo-Japanese War 10 years later in 1905. Being the southern boundary of the Japanese Empire, and the border separating Japan and the Qing dynasty, Okinawa was viewed as the “cultural heartland” of Japan (Hansen, 2014: 331). Similar to Hokkaido in the North, the Meiji government tried to build up a belief of being in the same nation in Okinawa (and other Prefectures) (Heinrich, 2004: 157).  In the interest of the promotion of identity recognition, education policies and language planning activities appeared to be escalated since this period.

 

          While governments imposed ever strengthening policy, there were also a rise of intrinsic motivation to be “Japanized” among the Okinawans. The victory of Japan in Sino-Japanese war had indeed convinced many Okinawans to seek for a closer relationship with the glorious Japan (Rabson,1996). Various Japanese culture were adopted by Okinawans, including changing hairstyles and renaming, and some Japanese linguistics features were also adopted voluntarily (ibid).

 

Social discrimination of Ryukyuan speakers

 

          Unification had been a pivotal objective to the Meiji government. The establishment of The National Language Pedagogical Institute indicated that “That national language solidifies the national polity” (Shimoda, 2010: 721). Later in the same year, the Linguistics Research Institute was founded, which had put “the vitality of the state” and language into equation (ibid). In the late 19th century, a number of language-related government based institutes were established, this clearly represented the strong intention to unified the languages and dialects.

 

           In the 1890s, around the third decade of Meiji, the government was even more determined in promoting unity within the nation through spreading Standard Japanese, and eliminating every dialect. Starting from this period, anti-dialect slogans began to pervade the streets and open areas. Signs with messages like “Correct the dialects” and “Eradicate the dialects” were hung in public areas (Ramsey, 2004: 97).

 

           The Japanese government had passed an ordinance, known as the Dialect Regulation Ordinance, in 1907 (Heinrich, 2004: 158). This ordinance manifested the strong determination of the government against local dialects, which had been perceived as a “bad language” (Sibata, 1999: 191 as cited in Heffernan, 2006: 643). In Okinawa, the use of the Okinawan was prohibited in public areas (Holmér, 2013: 7). Not only limited to this line, the ordinance included a series of rules and actions that intentionally suppressed that spread of the dialect (Heinrich, 2004: 158-159). One of the most coercive measures would be namely the “dialect tag” policy.

 

           The use of Ryukyuan languages was strictly banned in schools in Okinawa. Dialect tag system was adopted to impose punishment on students using the vernacular language. Students caught using Ryukyuan languages would have to put on a tag around their neck, where the tag could be passed to others if there is someone who also used the prohibited language (Holmér, 2013: 6). Students who were frequenter of speaking Ryukyuan languages would receive warnings (Heinrich, 2012: 90 as cited in Holmér, 2013: 6). This conduct was not only confined in schools, not only teachers and students, even parents were required to be monitors observing whether theirs sons and daughters were breaking the rules (Heinrich, 2004: 159).

 

           Dialect tag was not the only penalty at that time. Even though one did not receive a punishment tag, there would probably be other duties assigned like cleaning up the classrooms (ibid). Other than punishment, ideas appreciating Standard Japanese was tried to spread among students to suppress the growth of Ryukyuan. In some of the schools, students were asked to sing “Using dialect is the enemy of the country” (ibid)  

 

           In 1931, “Movement for Enforcement of the Normal Language” started and the movement attempted to promote daily usage of the Standard language (Heinrich,2004: 158-159). Specific occasions, like the debate circles, were set up such that only Standard Japanese is allowed to use and punishment is given to those who failed to follow the rules (Kondo, 1997: 66-70 as cited in Heinrich, 2004: 159). This practice elevated up a level in standardizing languages and tags were distributed to related students more often (Heinrich, 2004: 158-159),

 

           The language movement was later renamed as the “Movement for Enforcement of the Standard Language” in 1939 (Heinrich, 2004: 160), whereas the government believed it would be urgent to catalyze the process of unification in Okinawa because the Okinawan children in the 1930s were being commented as “lacking of individual consciousness of being subjects of Great Imperial Japan” (Weiner, 2004: 236). The clarification of Standard Language marked that the intensification of assimilation regulation. Not only the “dialect tag” punishment system was made harsher, a new series of language planning campaigns were initiated within the year. Program platform “Program for education in Okinawa Prefecture” was founded for the spread of Standard Japanese among every local community (Heinrich, 2004:160). Besides, slogans promoting Standard Japanese like “One country, one mind, one language” or “Standard language – anytime, anywhere” had pervaded the public spaces (ibid).

 

Bottom-up or Top-down?

 

          In Rabson, 1996, it is argued the major factor accounting for language shift in Okinawa after the Sino-Japanese War was the increased intrinsic motivation of Okinawa people to learn Japanese. While the victory of Japan in Sino-Japanese War may lead to the decline of pro-Chinese among Okinawa Intellectuals (Rabson, 1996), we think the pushing force by the government still out-weight the effects of the intrinsic motivation of Okinawa people after the war.

 

          Japanese identity started rising among the Okinawan since the victory of Sino-Japanese war, and several attempts were made by the local in promoting standard Japanese. One writer of the Ryukyu Shimpo, a major newspaper circulating in Okinawa, stated “We must even sneeze as the Japanese do" and suggested that only by fully assimilated with Japan could Okinawa be materially and socially advanced (ibid).

 

            However, despite all the effort, Okinawan were still under social discrimination. Okinawan immigrants in mainland Japan were once welcomed by employers, but the tendency of them speaking to each other in Ryukyuan languages caused them to become the major victims in the economic turndown (ibid). Troubles of Okinawan military force also came from time to time. Although young Okinawans might want to share the pride of being a Japanese by joining the Japanese military, accidents on being mistaken as enemy when speaking Okinawan language were not rare, and the problem was magnified tragically in the Battle of Okinawa (ibid). Despite their attempts to be recognized by Japanese, the language, which their intrinsic efforts had little influence on, remained a great barrier.

 

 

 

Dialect Debate

 

           Under the coercive suppressions from government, resistance started to build up among the Okinawan society and awareness was raised towards these controversies among the people. Yanagi Muneyoshi was a proactive supporter of the preservation of the “people’s art” and “folk craft” (Moeran, 1981: 89). At the same time, he was also the founder of the “Japan Folk Craft Society” and was a central figure of the Japanese Folk Craft Movement (Moeran, 1981: 87).

 

           Yanagi had given a speech in the Second Prefectural Girls’ High School in 1939 where he had commented that “there is nothing as unreasonable as the compressions and rewards against Uchinaaguchi and traditional Okinawan costume” (Funatsu, 2009: 375)[1]. Many scholars, who were on the side of the Standard Japanese, responded and disagreed with Yanagi with reasons like “it is necessary to give up the obsolete one and step forward to the new era” (ibid)[1]. The discourse above is very similar to the debate over Ryukyuans in Okinawa, majorly between the Japan Folk Craft Society and the Department of Education Affairs in Okinawa Prefecture, whereas the debate is well known as the “Dialect Debate” (Saruta, 2006: 165)[2].

 

           Although different linguistic and cultural ideologies had been raised during the “Dialect Debate", antagonists seemed to outnumbered proponents at the time, which made the resistance appeared futile (Heinrich, 2004: 158; Funatsu, 2009: 377-378)[3].