The Word "Is" the Thing: The "Kotodama" Belief in Japanese Communication

Abstract

Kazuya Hara (*) PART I In interpersonal communication studies, bywords are relationship and messages (Knapp, Miller, & Fudge, 1994). Zarefsky (1993) emphasizes that concern in discipline of communication is to explore the relationship between messages and In semantic-oriented viewpoint, communication is seen as process of transmitting messages to another person, who then interprets those messages by attributing meanings to them. These messages may be sent intentionally or unintentionally, consciously or unconsciously, and they include information about content of message and relationship among people communicating (Watzlawick, Beavin, & Jackson, 1967). In modern-day Japanese people's attribution of meaning to their they sometimes feel as if a word itself has power to make something happen. This concept is called kotodama, superstitious folk belief that a soul dwelling in words has supernatural power to make an idea in human brain come true simply by verbalizing it. Kotodama literally refers to mysterious power dwelling in words. In ancient times, it was believed that what words represented would be realized by kotodama 's supernatural power. To put it simply, koto means the words, and dama, origin of which is tama, means the spirit or soul. It seems that ancient Japanese might have marveled at magical power of words by which they felt all things in universe could be controlled. The belief in kotodama is people's illusion about words or messages, to which they give meanings superstitiously such as by praying for good fortune or for prevention of evil events. Therefore, they try to avoid verbalizing e vil words and are careful to use appropriate expressions so that undesirable events do not occur. The purposes of this paper are to (1) review how kotodama has been viewed historically in Japanese mind, (2) define and conceptualize kotodama belief in communication activities, (3) argue and exemplify how modern Japanese people are influenced by kotodama belief, and (4) discuss problems that kotodama belief brings about. Historical Review of Kotodama The term kotodama appeared for first time in classical literature compiled in Nara Period (710-784 A.D.). Origuchi (1927, 1935, 1943) presented well-organized accounts of changes in meaning of kotodama over course of Japanese history. Origuchi argued that meaning of kotodama has changed three times. The oldest meaning of kotodama was power of Kami (gods) lying in norito (a ritual prayer offered to Shinto Kami), and it was received by people along with belief in souls. Then its meaning changed to souls or spirits in norito, and finally it came to be seen as souls or spirits in word fragments, or languages. Kindaichi (1944) also categorized kotodama into three types from a linguistic viewpoint: kotodama of verbal action, which means that what people say would be realized; kotodama in some particular kinds of expressions or poems; and kotodama lying in each word inherited from ancestors. Toyoda's (1980) view is that two meanings of word koto ([meaning.sub.1] = words; [meaning.sub.2] = things), were indistinguishable for ancient Japanese people. Consequently, belief in kotodama meant that name and its reality were same, and content of people's utterances would actually take place. This word-is-the-thing superstition also relates to imina. Imi means taboo, and its verb form, imu, means to avoid uttering or doing something because it is taboo. Imina is defined as a person's real name that was disclosed after his or her death (Shinmura, 1991). In ancient Japanese society, it was taboo to let a person's name be known to strangers because his or her name was regarded as person himself or herself. People feared that someone would control them by a message sent to his or her true name, with power of kotodama. …

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 6 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.