Languages and Identities

FURANSU-JIN

In the middle of July 2022, I took the oral interview test of the DAPF, and there found a direction saying: “There are two examiners in the room. One is Japanese[nihonjin], and the other is French[furansujin].” I again thought about what the necessity of indicating nanijin in that context. I think the essence of that instruction was that one examiner speaks Japanese and the other speaks French toward a test-taker. I especially feel strangeness with the wording of furansujin because French is spoken as an official language in about 29 countries, written on the official homepage of the DAPF. As cited in the article on Greelane.com, approximately 128 million people speak French as their main language. It means that furansujin dominate only 52% of the whole native French speakers. Moreover, according to the homepage of DAPF, French language education is being promoted based on the conception of “francophonie”. Francophonie means the language sharing community including all of the French-using area regardless of whether it is as official language or not. Therefore, why do they call a native French speaker examiner furansujin? Is it unacceptable for Cameroonians in Japan to do that job, even if their first language is French?

NIHON-JIN

I introduce my idea of vanishing the conception of nihonjin and instead identifying as "Japanese users". I understand there would be other obstacles if this idea comes true in practice, but my desire is just to stop grouping everything altogether. Rather, I would like to name each habit one by one if there is a necessity to name them. Here are some examples. I bow to high positioned people and use honorific forms to them. This is not because I am Japanese, but because I am Japanese habit follower in terms of human relationship. My first acquired language is Japanese, but this is not because I am Japanese, but because the person who raised me was native Japanese speaker. I am not Japanese, but instead, I am a Japanese user, Japanese habit follower, live in Japan, have nationality of Japan, and have parents whose nationalities are Japan. I am also an English user, Mandarin user, French learner, university student, part-time worker, badminton player, supermarket customer, radio listener, and so on. It depends on each person what part of their facts construct their identities. Thus, simply indicating “Japanese” is yet inaccurate. Being inaccurate itself is not a sin, but if it is offensive or hurt some people’s feeling, it is ought to be modified.

GAIKOKU-JIN

Once when I wrote a paper titled “Providing Information Effectively for Non-native Japanese Speakers”, I deliberately avoided using the term “foreigners” or “foreign residents”. I also avoided indicating as “people from other countries” which is often used as a softer expression for “foreigners”. I did so because the topic was about language (=Japanese) ability of them. The places they come from (=outside of Japan), their own identities (=they identify themselves as nanijin) or other residents’ perceptions of them (=that they are gaikokujin), all these things are not directly related to how they use language, and what can be done for those who do not use Japanese as their first languages.