Preprint / Version 2

Official Statement by GHQ Supreme Commander MacArthur on the Abolition of Kanji

##article.authors##

  • Shoichi YOKOYAMA National Institute for Japanese Language and Linguistics, Research Department

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51094/jxiv.1423

Keywords:

GHQ, MacArthur, Report of the U.S. Education Mission, National Language Reform

Abstract

During the Allied Occupation of Japan from 1945 to 1952, the nation's language policy (known as kokugo seisaku) underwent a major turning point. Notably, Chapter 2 of the Report of the United States Education Mission to Japan, submitted to General MacArthur in March 1946, titled “Reform of the National Language,” outlined groundbreaking recommendations for that time, including restrictions on the use of Chinese characters (kanji) and the introduction of the Roman alphabet. Against this backdrop, a widely circulated view emerged—that GHQ and MacArthur actively promoted the abolition of kanji and the romanization of the Japanese language. This view has been supported by some scholars in the field of Japanese linguistics.

This paper aims to demonstrate, based on primary sources and prior research, that such commonly held beliefs lack sufficient evidentiary support. Specifically, in order to clarify what MacArthur’s official stance on language policy actually was, this study presents an image of a primary document from the U.S. Department of State that records his official statement at the time. This document will serve as an important clue for reexamining the intent behind Occupation-era policies based on historical evidence.

Conflicts of Interest Disclosure

The author have no conflicts of interest to declare.

Downloads *Displays the aggregated results up to the previous day.

Download data is not yet available.

References

Department of States, Publication 2579, Far Eastern series 11(1946) “Report of the United States Education Mission to Japan: Submitted to the Supreme Commander for the Allied Powers, Tokyo, March 30, 1946.” United States Government Printing Office, Washington. https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=pur1.32754081234191&view=1up&seq=7

賀茂道子(2024)「日本民主化における言語改革の背景と意義」『国立国語研究所論集』26, 151-169. https://doi.org/10.15084/0002000159

茅島篤(2006)「第4章.第4節.ローマ字問題と読み書き能力調査」『国語施策百年史』、文化庁編、345-369. https://www.bunka.go.jp/tokei_hakusho_shuppan/hakusho_nenjihokokusho/archive/pdf/93728801_04.pdf

茅島篤(2009)『国字ローマ字化の研究―占領下日本の国内的・国際的要因の解明 (改訂版)』風間書房

金田一春彦(1988)『日本語 新版(下)』(岩波新書, 新赤版 2-3)、岩波書店、p.1.

教科教育百年史編集委員会編(1985)『米国教育使節団報告書 : 原典対訳』、建帛社https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/12116003/1/84

森戸辰男等(1949)『新教育基本資料とその解説』、学芸教育社https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1159397/1/206?keyword=%E6%96%87%E9%83%A8%E6%99%82%E5%A0%B1%E3%80%80%E3%83%9E%E3%83%83%E3%82%AB%E3%83%BC%E3%82%B5%E3%83%BC%E3%80%80%E5%9B%BD%E8%AA%9E%E3%81%AE%E6%94%B9%E9%9D%A9

村井実全訳解説(1979)『アメリカ教育使節団報告書』、講談社学術文庫、253、150-151.

中西秀彦・横山詔一(2025)「即時オープンアクセスが拓く学術研究の新世界:OAの理念、要件、実践」Jxivプレプリント、https://doi.org/10.51094/jxiv.1102

大石初太郎・野村雅昭(2018)「国語問題」〈民主化と国語改革〉『日本語学大辞典』、397.

大桃伸一(2005)「米国教育使節団と教育内容・方法改革」『県立新潟女子短期大学研究紀要』 42、21-31. https://unii.repo.nii.ac.jp/records/407

土持ゲーリー法一(1985)「米国対独教育使節団の成立経緯:第一次米国対日教育使節団との比較考察」『教育学研究』第52巻第2号, pp.183–192. https://doi.org/10.11555/kyoiku1932.52.183

土持ゲーリー法一(1989)「占領下の教育改革 : 第一次米国対日教育使節団報告書と高等教育改革」『大学論集』広島大学、18、163-182. https://rihe-publications.hiroshima-u.ac.jp/search/attachfile/49075.pdf

横山詔一・相澤正夫・久野雅樹・高田智和・前田忠彦(2022)「『日本人の読み書き能力』(1951)における非識字率の再検討 ─ テストとしての問題点を中心に ─」『基礎教育保障学研究』6, 11-28. https://doi.org/10.32281/jasbel.6.0_11

横山詔一・石川慎一郎・井田浩之・相澤正夫(2025)「日本語学術論文の即時オープンアクセス実現に向けて」『国立国語研究所論集』29, 29-57. https://doi.org/10.15084/0002000510

『連合国軍最高司令官に提出されたる米国教育使節団報告』(1946年3月30日、国立公文書館所蔵)https://www.digital.archives.go.jp/file/1764170.html

『米国教育使節団報告書 : マックアーサー司令部公表 全訳決定版』(1946年9月、国際特信社刊)https://dl.ndl.go.jp/pid/1272931/1/20

Posted


Submitted: 2025-08-05 02:49:12 UTC

Published: 2025-08-06 00:12:01 UTC — Updated on 2025-08-14 09:45:54 UTC

Versions

Reason(s) for revision

I added references and revised parts of the wording and the paper’s title. In addition, I included a new section titled “On the Number of Subheadings in Each Chapter of the Report.”
Section
Literature, Language & Linguistics and Art