31 posts / 0 new
Last post
Tau
Tau's picture
The Use of Japanese in an English Dojo

I'm hoping this will promote a little discussion. It is my opinion on the use of Japanese in an English dojo. Do we need it at all? Can it be overused?

Finlay
Finlay's picture

Hi

Nice topic, i'm afraid I can't access youtube right now so my apologies if Iam not completely on point with this.

I think use of Japanese/Korean in a class caan be a little bit of a double edged sword. I have trained with people that find the most obsucre terms in training manuals or even phrase books and then will go around the dojo trying to impress people with their knowledge (learning how to count to 20 instead of just 10 for example), very often i found that these people are making up for some lacking in physical ability.  There is nothing wrong with specialising in the theroy and knowledge side of the art if you are not so physically able for some reason other than lazyness, but the knowledge should be useful in some way.

Japanese terms can also be (maybe accidentally) used to encourage cultish behaviour. Having a special lanague that only the peopleinside the dojo can understand and once you learn how to speak you are welcomed to the group. Not always but this can easily be exploited.

From the other point of view, the language is an important cultural aspect of the arts. This is one part of training that I really enjoy, by using the same language i feel that i have gotten just that little bit closer to the source and the masters of old. In China many students actively reject learning the japanese phrases. i sometimes feel that becasue of this, they are missing out on something.

One a more practical issue when dealing with people from different countries who can't all speak the same language the japanese terms are useful.

Drew Loto
Drew Loto's picture

This is a great topic that explores an aspect of traditional martial arts practce that often goes unexamined.  I've trained in schools in which absolutely no Japanese was ever utilized and in schools where Japanese (and Cantonese) were used generously.  From these experiences, I've come to believe that using the language of an art's originators can be a really powerful tool for exploring the mindsets and perspectives of those individuals and communities.  A great example for me has been the concept of "uke".  Recognizing that uke is generally roughly translated as "receiver," and is often the word for a person on which a technique is performed during practice, as well as a term for describing different blocking techniques, and is the root word for ukemi (the methods one often employs to ensure one's personal safety when acting as uke) opens up some really interesting doors for conversation and exploration.

One could argue, although that is true, surely not all words that have been perserved can offer profound meaning.  But it seems potentially wasteful to discard certain words, as their meaning might not be readily apparent, but down the road, those meanings may become clear.

ky0han
ky0han's picture

Hi Peter,

here is my take on that.

I always tell my beginning students that Karate has an Okinawan/Japanese cultural background thus it is common to use Japanese terminology and cultural stuff like sitting in Seiza and bowing here and there.

But since we have our own culture here in Germany it is not nesseccary to use the Japanese cultural stuff. We could shake hands instead of bowing we could use German terminology for the techniques and so on.

The thing is, if you ever move to another city or to another club where they indulge in the Japanese culture you gonna have problems.

Thats why I do both. I use German terminology and Japanese terminology at the same time so my students can slowly adapt and grow comfortable with it. We also do the whole Dojo etiquette so they can familiarise themselves with the dojo culture.

BUT I find it important that if someone uses Japanese terms that this someone is using them right and knows what he is saying. Like for example Shuto doesn't mean knife hand, it means sword hand ;o).

I also warn my students that every teacher may have a different understanding of certain Japanese terms. That can have different reasons e.g. the teacher heard it from his teacher and never thought about it and uses it like his teacher did. Others looked up terms and found out that e.g. "uke" means to receive and not to block or that bunkai doesn't mean application.

Then there are broader concepts like the concepts of Kiai, Maai or Riai. Most people think Kiai is just screaming but that doesn't even scratch the surface of that concept.

Like in every field of interest, there is a certain risk in using technical terms. If two people communicate with a different understanding of the same technical terms they may think they understand each other while in fact they are at cross-purposes.

For me the whole cultural thing is an important part of what makes Karate what it is. It has an exotic flavor and that appeals to so many people not just me. So I continue to use Japanese terms but I am easy on my students in using it not exclusively.

Regards Holger

Gavin J Poffley
Gavin J Poffley's picture

An interesting question.

I personally think that it is best to have a familiarity with the foriegn language terms used in the historical development of one's art but not go overboard or force them on students. Ultimately it should be up to the instructor who runs the group or the individual student's interest levels. Knowing Japanese names for techniques won't make you a better fighter (does anyone actually think it would?!) but they are pretty useful if you want to pursue a more academic study. So for those with very little interest in the historical and cultural side you can probably get away with just some basic technique names that will help with recognition if they go to other dojos and then go deeper for the students who do have a genuine interest. The first type of student should have the good grace to accept that others want to know more, while the second should accept that the instructor may not always go into the depth they would like. 

Not teaching an English (or local language) equivalent at all seems pretty silly to me though, as even if you do intend to mainly use Japanese terminology in your explanations, the students will still need to learn what they actually mean.

In the main dojo I train and teach at we have a lot of interested and knowledgeable people so we tend to go quite in depth sometimes and use both languages terms side by side, even delving into some Okinawan language terms. At another of the same organisation's dojo I frequent there is almost no Japanese used at all and everything seems to work just fine there too.

Sometimes I am actually presented with the rather unique situation of a class where all the students are Japanese speakers and conduct the whole class in Japanese. I have never really thought about it but I don't go out of my way to use or teach the English terms in those classes. Perhaps I should.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

My thoughts on this, as a monolingual Brit who travels a lot, is that there is value in a common worldwide terminology. For karate, Japanese has provided that terminology so it’s important to be aware of those terms if you are seeking to interact with other martial artists around the globe. For example, the world over uses the term “Gaku-Zuki”, but if I were to stick to the English equivalent of “a right cross” it will be meaningless to all but those who speak English.

Within the four walls of any given dojo though it really does not matter what terms you use. To paraphrase Shakespeare, “a rose would smell as sweet by any other name” … or, if you like, “a punch to the face hurts the same amount regardless of that you call it” :-)

As regards day to day dojo teaching, and a Brit teaching other Brits in Britain, I am very aware that we are not Japanese and hence English phraseology such as “being in the flow” is much more useful that the alien term “Mushin”.

Holger stated that he uses Japanese and German terms for his students. That makes perfect sense to me, but there would be little point teaching my English speaking students the German terms (I don’t know them for a start!). Gavin said he uses Japanese when teaching Japanese students and never gives the English terms. Again, that makes sense to me.

I don’t think either extreme is ideal (i.e. all Japanese or no Japanese), and like the rest of the martial arts, it is a matter of context and what is practical. For any given group, what is the most effective terminology to use to ensure understanding and effective communication?

For me, that would be predominately English, with a dash of common worldwide Japanese terminology.

All the best,

Iain

Blackwood
Blackwood's picture

Our Hanshi is from Okinawa and speaks Japanese.  He uses the basic Japanese names for things and that has spread across all of our dojo across the world.  It allows us to all to work in a common language, regardless of the native language we use.

I visited a dojo in South America and was asked to help teach the class.  Dispite knowing almost no Spanish, and having few students with any English, I was able to communicate using the Japanese terms and demonstration.  The cool thing was seeing those 'Ah Ha!' moments in their eyes when they got the idea or concept, even though the verbal communications was rudimentary at best.

andrewgjennings
andrewgjennings's picture

I get the common-tongue argument.  But older people statistically have a more difficult time learning new languages, and new students (and even people like me with 30+ years in martial arts) have a difficult time as it is remembering left and right with decent dexterity.  So a foreign language can impede the understanding of a class discussion.

Having said that, I'm used to the Japanese and Korean being brought onto the mat.  What I can't stand is the grammar that is also expected.  We add "s" for plural, and have no concept of gender in English.  We order "two pizzas", not "two pizze".  And we certainly don't order "Due pizze grande", do we?  So why should we be expected to remember "one jo, two jo, a hundred jo"?  It's "jos".  And "senseis".  And "hakimas".  And "bokkens".  English grammar is hard and inconsistant without the vacuuming in foreign grammar.  We have enough exceptions with "children", "data", and "indexes", and in Italian when we discuss music.  We don't import Greek and Latin grammar when we use medical terms.  We don't need to be adding Japanese grammar rules.  We have rules, let's use them (isn't that what you expect of your students?   :-)

Kevin Woods
Kevin Woods's picture

Although I understand ones desire to stay within tradition, I question the need. If Gedan Barai translates to down block and that move is not designed to block,but to control among many other things, then why label it as such and refer to it in a unnatural language? I think it was a result of Karate being introduced into the schools following the outline of Judo. As in needing to break down the kata so it fit in a elementary school ciriculm. Other than for fitting in when visiting other classes, I find no reason to even name  the techniques much less complicate the students learning progress by requiring they learn a new language. 

jeffc
jeffc's picture

Hello everyone,

Martial arts have been around for a long, long time and appear to have crossed cultural boundaries and back again frequently over that time.  Historians obviously differ on the exact route that the martial arts have taken but virtually all agree that the teachings have passed between cultures, and there were so many paths taken simultaneously that I personally don't believe that we will ever know for certain.  What I am fairly sure of is that most martial arts contain the same or similar techniques/concepts, generally by a name that is native to their own cultural language.

When the Greeks taught and learned Pankration, they did so by using the Greek language. Why?  Because it was the best language to speak for them in order to learn the often difficult and complex concepts and techniques so that the teachings would be most effective.  When Indians teach and learn Kalaripayattu, they do so in their native language for the same reason.  Chinese teach and learn Chin na, Shuia jiao and Quanfa in Chinese for the same reason.  The Cambodian art of Bokator is taught using the language and symbolisms of Cambodia for the same reason. 

When the Okinawans went to China and learnt what became known as Karate, they received their instruction in Chinese because that was the language that the Chinese masters knew.  This created an issue about having to learn and speak another language, which most of them did, particularly from the Kume village area.  When these Okinawan masters taught Okinawans on Okinawa, they did so speaking Okinawan!  When the Okinawans went to Japan to spread the art over there everything began to be taught in Japanese because the Japanese could not understand the Okinawan dialect and as Japan now controlled Okinawa, it was the Okinawans that had to fit in to become more Japanese.  Apparently, Funakoshi Gichin could not even really speak Japanese well!  The Japanese were not concerned with learning the Okinawan names for techniques or concepts, they wanted everything to be in their language so that they could understand it fully and assimilate the teachings.

When the Japanese began to spread their interpretation of Karate worldwide, they did so using the Japanese language.  This was generally the only language they spoke and did create a universal language for modern day Karate teachings, certainly a positive thing when spreading an art far and wide.  The problem comes in the lack of understanding from non-speaking Japanese resulting in mistranslations and pidgeon-holing.  Uke means block does it?  Gyaku zuki means reverse punch does it?  Why do some people say "OSS" constantly, even when the teacher is in the middle of explaining a concept?  My parents always taught me that it was rude to interrupt someone mid-sentence!!  Through the excellent work of people like Patrick McCarthy, Taira Masaji, Iain Abernethy, Vince Morris, Kris Wilder etc, the general Karate community is beginning to see that a Gyaku zuki is not always a punch and that a Gedan barai is not always a lower block.  Trying to speak a language that you don't really understand and are not really learning (knowing a few words in a specific context i.e. Karate, is NOT understanding a language) then you can unwittingly create large obstacles to true understanding that need to be overcome at a later date. 

Am I saying that you do not need to speak Japanese in order to learn what many recognise as a Japanese art?  Certainly not.  If you are in Japan and learning from a Japanese speaking master, then you certainly do need to speak Japanese.  If you are teaching a Japanese student who does not speak your native language, then speaking Japanese may help bridge the language gap and enable true learning and understanding to take place.  Likewise if you are teaching or learning from somebody who speaks a different language to you and Japanese is the "common" language between you, then Japanese could be vital. 

However, if you are in Britain (as I am), with English as your native language, learning from an English speaking master, would it not be better to the learning process to do so in English?  This was certainly the example of the masters of old, as I outlined above.  Knowing the Japanese names for techniques, does not automatically make you better at executing or understanding that technique.  We are, presumably, ultimately trying to learn a martial art, not just partake in a language class. 

Language is just a vehicle that enables concepts, thoughts or feelings etc to be expressed between different people.  What language is the best vehicle to do this depends entirely upon the context.  I have heard it said that you cannot never learn Karate if you do not speak Japanese.  What nonsense!  Could the Japanese not learn Karate in Japan because they could not speak the Okinawan dialect of their masters? 

If you are learning Karate to have a better "understanding" of Japanese culture, are you making the assumption that all Japanese people practise Karate? What about tea ceremonies? Origami? Japanese educational policies? Current political situation? Japanese history? Japanese fashions?  Do you learn all of these things as well?  

Just some things to ponder!

Kind regards

Jeff Capstick

Gavin J Poffley
Gavin J Poffley's picture

It is true that some people over-fetishize the use of foriegn language terms in training. Ironically enough, a lot of these people do not have as great an understanding of the terms they use as they think they do, either only understanding the meaning in a very limited way or extrapolating it to be far broader in scope. For example I have often heard karateka say that they don't do "kumite" but prefer to "spar" instead, assuming the term kumite to only mean robotic preset drills such as the kihon sanbon kumite introduced in the mid 20th century. Kumite literally means a "coming together of hands" which is an allegorical way of referring to a paired training activity and the scope of the term can encompass all partner work. Of course, the English "sparring" can also often be interpreted incredibly narrowly, creating the need for further clarification such as Iain's "kata based sparring", so perhaps it is more of a general problem with deciding on terminology.

One argument I hear from time to time is that there is "no proper English equivalent" to some term or another, which from the point of view of a professional translator like myself is rather insulting. There are a lot of concepts which cannot be expressed as succinctly in other languages but nothing which cannot be expressed at all (all language is a wonderful tool if you are willing to use it!). You may need a bit of cultural background or to insert a few caveats to explain something but just putting your hands up in the air and going "It's too foriegn!" is basically just lazy. Ultimately they are just words being used to explain an idea.

Of course, the wholesale adoption of foriegn terms is not only an issue in the English speaking world and you can see the exact opposite direction of the same phenomenon in Japan with kickboxing, pro wrestling and MMA, where a plethora of English terms are used for techniques in place of their native Japanese equivalents. For example a commentator for a K1 kickboxing match will often call out "high kick" and "spinning back knuckle" instead of "jodan mawashi geri" and "ushiro kaiten uraken". Note here that "high kick" could refer to any number of techniques in English but in this context in Japanese it always means a roundhouse kick and also that, while not incorrect English, "spinning back knuckle" is not the standard term in the English speaking martial arts world (spinning backfist is).

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Gavin J Poffley wrote:
Kumite literally means a "coming together of hands" which is an allegorical way of referring to a paired training activity and the scope of the term can encompass all partner work. Of course, the English "sparring" can also often be interpreted incredibly narrowly, creating the need for further clarification such as Iain's "kata based sparring", so perhaps it is more of a general problem with deciding on terminology.

Absolutely! Terminology is always an issue and is undergoing constant evolution. As an example, we see the words “reality based” used as a prefix to “self-defence” today as people acknowledge that most “self-defence” is not effectively addressing the requirements of criminal violence.

As regards “sparring”, there are many different types. Hence my prefix “kata based” for the type of sparring that utilises the methodology of the kata with a view to achieving the goals of civilian self-protection. There are many other types of sparring i.e. “competition based sparring” (what most karateka mean by “sparring”).

We even have difficulty defining the word “karate”. Every definition I’ve ever seen does not encompass all the various disciplines and approaches operating under that label. In fact, I know of governing bodies and associations who have really struggled to accurately define what the activity is that they are overseeing.  

(My recent podcast around this topic: http://iainabernethy.co.uk/content/street-fighting-podcast)

Gavin J Poffley wrote:
One argument I hear from time to time is that there is "no proper English equivalent" to some term or another, which from the point of view of a professional translator like myself is rather insulting. There are a lot of concepts which cannot be expressed as succinctly in other languages but nothing which cannot be expressed at all (all language is a wonderful tool if you are willing to use it!). You may need a bit of cultural background or to insert a few caveats to explain something but just putting your hands up in the air and going "It's too foreign!" is basically just lazy. Ultimately they are just words being used to explain an idea.

Love that! Something for me to call to mind the next time I hear that :-)

It’s generally better, in my view, to explain concepts to people in the language they best understand. So I would explain ideas in English, but I may also attach the Japanese label due to the fact it is the accepted terminology / worldwide language of karate. I totally agree that it is only a lack of understanding of a concept that should make explaining it in any language problematic. The concepts for which we have Japanese terminology should be explainable in English, German, Polish, French, Russian, etc, etc so long as we have a decent grasp of the actual concept.

This example of trying to expalin "common sence" to a Japanse audiance is a good example of it happening the other way around:

Common sense means much more than the words may imply to the Japanese student , or to any own else not familiar with English idioms … Common sense means natural intelligence, as opposed to , and independent of, cultivated or educated intelligence … It means foresight. It means intuitive knowledge of the other people’s character. It means cunning as well as broad comprehension … No Englishman believes in working from book learning. He suspects all theories, philosophical or other. He suspects everything new, and dislikes it, unless he can be compelled by the form of circumstance to see that this new thing has advantages over the old … His statesmen do not consult historical precedents in order to decide what to do: they first learn the facts as they are; and then they depend upon their own common sense, not at all upon their university learning or upon philosophical theories. And in the case of the English nation it must be acknowledged that this instinctive method has been extremely successful.” – Koizumi Yakumo / Patrick Lafcadio Hearn (1850 – 1904)

Gavin J Poffley wrote:
For example a commentator for a K1 kickboxing match will often call out "high kick" and "spinning back knuckle" instead of "jodan mawashi geri" and "ushiro kaiten uraken". Note here that "high kick" could refer to any number of techniques in English but in this context in Japanese it always means a roundhouse kick and also that, while not incorrect English, "spinning back knuckle" is not the standard term in the English speaking martial arts world (spinning backfist is).

Did not know that! Fascinating and it’s good to know things word both ways :-)

All the best,

Iain

Dale Parker
Dale Parker's picture

Having trained with Soke Kenzo Mabuni, and Hanshi Minobu Miki, Japanese is the universal language of Karate.

If you attend any WKF event, you need to know it, knowledge of it allows every participating country to function at the event.

Just my 2 cents.

Steve Gombosi
Steve Gombosi's picture

I (primarily) practice an Okinawan martial art. The most senior practitioners in the system I practice are Okinawan, and Japanese is the language they teach in. If I or my students want to train with them, being familiar with their terminology is in everyone's best interest. The Japanese names for karate techniques are "terms of art", just as (somewhat mangled) Latin and Norman French terms are for an attorney. That's true even though the names of karate techniques are of fairly recent coinage and are used inconsistently between different systems. That doesn't mean that I only use Japanese in class (obviously I mostly teach in English), but it does mean that any of my students could walk into a dojo in Naha or Tokyo and be able to participate fully in a class without being completely lost. They certainly wouldn't understand a detailed explanation of a technical fine point, but at least they could get through class without walking into somebody's fist because they didn't know what was happening or which way people were stepping.

No matter what language we speak, when we impart a specialized technical skill we will typically use specialized technical terminology to describe it. Regardless of the language that terminology is based on, it's going to be relatively incomprehensible to those outside of the field. That's true whether the technical term in question is "mae geri", "Zener diode",  "subpoena ducas tecum", or "isorhythmic motet".

Paul_D
Paul_D's picture

It's no different than Ballet calsses which are done in French all over the world.

Dale Parker
Dale Parker's picture

Good point, I was going to point out that Fencing uses a lot of non English terms.

Steve Gombosi
Steve Gombosi's picture

Paul_D wrote:

It's no different than Ballet calsses which are done in French all over the world.

Precisely. French is the technical language of ballet (and of European cuisine as well - nobody complains when a chef uses the terms "sauté" or "hors d'oeuvre", do they?). One could argue that any culinary school which didn't teach its students the meaning of the word "sauté" had done them a great disservice.

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Steve Gombosi wrote:
Precisely. French is the technical language of ballet (and of European cuisine as well - nobody complains when a chef uses the terms "sauté" or "hors d'oeuvre", do they?). One could argue that any culinary school which didn't teach its students the meaning of the word "sauté" had done them a great disservice.

I find myself in general agreement with this, but to play devils advocate for a moment …

When people are served good looking, great tasting food in a restaurant, they very rarely ask for the chef to explain the terminology behind it. What truly matters is that the cook produces good food.

At the ballet, people generally don’t shout out to the dancers and demand that they name the motions they are performing … and if they can’t then take the view the performance is somehow ruined: “I could not believe it! There was me thinking that the performance of Swan Lake was skilfully performed and when I interrupted to ask what the name of the flawlessly performed turn was they had no idea! I explained I was appalled and that it was a “Demi detourné”! I demanded my money back! The dancer started crying – that’s 6 year olds for you – and the headmistress escorted me from the school hall. A total rip off!” The objective measure is, of course, the skill of the dancing.

With the martial arts it is the effect of the motion that is the true measure. Knowing the “correct names” for techniques is not vital; but being able to perform them effectively is.

One other thing to bear in mind is that differing arts use differing terms:

Judo: Ippon Seoi Nage

Karate (Funakoshi): Tani Otoshi

Wrestling: The Flying Mare

Standard English: A one-arm shoulder throw

Different terms, but the exact same throw. I would also suggest that it is only the “Standard English” name that would be understandable to most martial artists, regardless of discipline.

We also have the problem that in Judo "Tani Otoshi" is an entirely different throw to the one that Funakoshi labels as “Tani Otoshi”. So using the “right” terms can also be confusing.

As a karateka, I generally use the Judo and “Standard English” terms, because they are the most understandable to my students (many of whom have also trained in Judo). I generally don’t use the “official karate term” that Funakoshi gave the throw. I feel that to do so would lead to confusion.

I guess the bottom line is that people need to be able to effectively execute the throw … what they call it is largely an irrelevance; provided the terminology used does not cause confusion for the group in question.

All the best,

Iain

PS In this first clip I demo what Funakoshi calls “Tani Otoshi”. In the second clip at 2:46 I demonstrate what Judoka call “Tani Otoshi”. As we can see, totally different throws!

Funakoshi’s “Tani Otoshi”

Judo / Jujutsu’s “Tani Otoshi” (2:46 onward)

Swoop678
Swoop678's picture

"Tani Otoshi" means valley drop in japanese, regardless of the use of the term.

The transalation in karate-do kyohan is stated as "to push off a cliff" but this is obviously the translaters license

as there is only one kanji for "Tani" which means valley.

If you are teaching Karate you should use the karate term, and if you are teaching judo you should use the judo term.

If you are explaining and teaching a technique then that explanation needs to be in the language that the student understands, i.e. there native language.

But that shouldn't mean you don't tell them what the japanese name for the technique, as japanese is the language of asian martial arts.

As french is the language of food, most top restaurants use french names on their menu's, and if i didn't know what a particular dish was

I would ask the waiter/waitress, who would explain in english.

In the same way in martial arts, I wouldn't expect to ask the founder of the style or technique, but I would expect it to be taught to me in my native language to understand what the technique was.

If I attend a seminar taught by a Japanese instructor, who do not generally have a good grasp of english, i would expect the seminar to be taught in japanese with a translator to help out.

If I was taught by an English instructor, i would expect to be taught in english. In both situations knowing the japanese name for the technique is beneficial.

Steve Gombosi
Steve Gombosi's picture

When people are served good looking, great tasting food in a restaurant, they very rarely ask for the chef to explain the terminology behind it. What truly matters is that the cook produces good food...

... At the ballet, people generally don’t shout out to the dancers and demand that they name the motions they are performing … and if they can’t then take the view the performance is somehow ruined

A fair point, but in this scenario we and our students are not "diners" or "audience members" - we are practitioners (of varying levels of ability). It's one thing for a diner to not be able to name a cooking technique or understand it in detail. It's quite another for the chef, the saucier, or one of the line cooks to have that problem. It's not strictly necessary for a ballet audience to understand ballet terminology to appreciate a performance (although I actually think it helps), but it would be disastrous if the choreographer and the dancers didn't share a technical language. Again, that doesn't mean that dance academies in the US or UK should insist that only French be used and that nobody should use English when instructing - but it does mean that everybody on the floor should know what a "plié" is.

I would also suggest that it is only the “Standard English” name that would be understandable to most martial artists, regardless of discipline.

In the US or UK, certainly. In Argentina or France, maybe not. I'm not  entirely sure that "most martial artists" speak English even as a second language.

Is it really surprising that karate and judo practitioners would mean different things by the term "tani otoshi"? Heck, we karate practioners can't even agree among ourselves on which technique goes by the name "uchi uke" (and that's true even if we translate it into literal English). While that's unfortunate, it doesn't really affect whether Japanese terminology should be used in the context of a specific style with a fixed terminology. Outside of that context,all bets are off, of course. For example, I don't typically use the term "uchi uke" when I talk to Shotokan practitioners - or if I do I qualify it by telling them that it's what they call "soto uke" (with some performance differences).

jeffc
jeffc's picture

Did the Okinawans use the Chinese names when teaching the Chinese arts that they learned in China?  Did the Japanese use the Okinawan terms when learning the Okinawan art?  So why are the Japanese terms now so precious?

Just playing Devil's advocate!

Jeff ;-)

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

Steve Gombosi wrote:
A fair point, but in this scenario we and our students are not "diners" or "audience members" - we are practitioners (of varying levels of ability). It's one thing for a diner to not be able to name a cooking technique or understand it in detail. It's quite another for the chef, the saucier, or one of the line cooks to have that problem. It's not strictly necessary for a ballet audience to understand ballet terminology to appreciate a performance (although I actually think it helps), but it would be disastrous if the choreographer and the dancers didn't share a technical language. Again, that doesn't mean that dance academies in the US or UK should insist that only French be used and that nobody should use English when instructing - but it does mean that everybody on the floor should know what a "plié" is.

I think that’s a very good point well made. The “user” does not need to know the terminology though. Ballet is a performance art and the audience don’t need to know the terminology to enjoy that performance. Food is cooked to be eaten, and the consumer of the meal (the user of it) does not need to know the terminology used in the perpetration of the meal in order to enjoy eating it and gain nutrition from it. Likewise, the user of a martial arts technique does not need to know the name of the technique in order to use it effectively. I can see good arguments whichever way one decides to go.

Steve Gombosi wrote:
In the US or UK, certainly. In Argentina or France, maybe not. I'm not entirely sure that "most martial artists" speak English even as a second language.

The trouble we have is that we also have names for techniques across the martial arts that come from Japanese, Okinawan, Chinese, Korean, English, Spanish, Portuguese, etc. Does anyone speak all those languages? And even when they do there are terms specific to the martial art / style that are not common parlance for the wider population. When talking “across arts” then English may be the best option? Far more people speak English than say Japanese. The word “punch” will be understood by far more people worldwide than the word “zuki”.

As mentioned in a previous post, as someone who teaches overseas a lot, the use of the relatively uniform Japanese “karate terminology” has advantages. It’s certainly useful, but I can also see why some chose to stick 100% with their native language. It’s not what I have done, but I can see why others would choose to do so.

All the best,

Iain

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

jeffc wrote:
Did the Okinawans use the Chinese names when teaching the Chinese arts that they learned in China? Did the Japanese use the Okinawan terms when learning the Okinawan art? So why are the Japanese terms now so precious?

Just playing Devil's advocate!

Good point! To play devil’s advocate to your devil’s advocate …

Karate was only practised by very small numbers until it hit Japanese shores. In Japan it was the first time a common terminology was needed. Kenwa Mabuni wrote the following in the 1930s:

“From long ago, all karate styles and systems had names for their kata; however for uke-waza there were no names which in fact is quite foolish. Therefore for the purpose of instruction and explanation of uke-waza to my students, and for convenience, I devised the following names.”

So it was in Japan that a common terminology first developed, and from there it spread worldwide … which is why we have the Japanese Terminology as “standard” globally.

Whether we need to cling to that terminology is another question, and I can see merits either way.

All the best,

Iain

Katz
Katz's picture

I'm catching up here, and won't have time to read the whole thread. But I feel I can add something to the discussion :

I'm French, living in France. I started training in Tang Soo Do over in the US. Before that, I'd done Judo in France for a long while. Now back to France, I opened my own TSD studio.

I have no clue how a "side kick", "side punch", "sparring", "line drill" and all those things are called in French. I don't even think we have such a handy term as "forms". We mostly use "katas". So I'm very glad to have the korean to fall back to to call everything.

Being part of a world association, too, it's useful to be able to call a technique in korean and have everyone know what you mean, even if they don't speak the same language very well. Barring the "tradition"angle, it is very useful to have some common terminology, a sort of "code" everyone will understand.

Of course, it also make it harder for people from another MA to know what's going on... I frequently find myself not having any idea what people on these forums are talking about. :)

jeffc
jeffc's picture

Iain Abernethy wrote:

jeffc wrote:
Did the Okinawans use the Chinese names when teaching the Chinese arts that they learned in China? Did the Japanese use the Okinawan terms when learning the Okinawan art? So why are the Japanese terms now so precious?

Just playing Devil's advocate!

Good point! To play devil’s advocate to your devil’s advocate …

Karate was only practised by very small numbers until it hit Japanese shores. In Japan it was the first time a common terminology was needed. Kenwa Mabuni wrote the following in the 1930s:

“From long ago, all karate styles and systems had names for their kata; however for uke-waza there were no names which in fact is quite foolish. Therefore for the purpose of instruction and explanation of uke-waza to my students, and for convenience, I devised the following names.”

So it was in Japan that a common terminology first developed, and from there it spread worldwide … which is why we have the Japanese Terminology as “standard” globally.

Whether we need to cling to that terminology is another question, and I can see merits either way.

All the best,

Iain

Hi Iain

Presumably the intention of Kenwa Mabuni in the 1930's, was the successful exportation of Karate from Okinawa to Japan, hence the desire to give a single Japanese name to each technique.

Looking back this would appear to have been a successful method of allowing the new students learn the art.  Following this principle, arguably, if Mabuni was trying to export Karate from Okinawa to England, he would have sought to come up with a single English term for each technique and principle to allow to successful transmission of knowledge from the Okinawa art to English speaking students.  Similarly, if his intention was to export the art to Russia, he would have sought to use Russian terms to allow the students to learn most effectively.

Maybe, maybe not. I do, however, think it is slightly short-sighted to mindlessly follow the tradition that Kenwa Mabuni et al established in the 1930's, without considering the purpose for establishing these traditions in the first-place.  If the reason remains valid then continue with the tradition.  If the purpose has already been served and there is a new issue to be solved, then amend the tradition, just as Mabuni and the other pioneers did when they sought to increase the popularity of Karate in the 1930's. 

Kind regards

Jeff

ky0han
ky0han's picture

Hi everyone,

just a quick note on Funakoshis Tani Otoshi. The Tani Otoshi he demonstrates in his 1935 Karate Do Kyohan is a new Tani Otoshi. Before that he used the name Tani Otoshi for another throw in his previous two publications in 1922 and 1925. The throw he formerly labeled as Tani Otoshi is called Saka-Zuchi in 1935.

The labeling of movements, forming techniques is a rather new thing, like Mabuni wrote. Before that a master told his student "put your left leg here, move your right arm from here to there and the other arm this way." That works fine with one or two students but not with 30.

When you label a movement and teach it, so everybody knows how to move when a "technique" is announced, you can safe a lot of time instructing students to move the way you want them to move.

Regards Holger

Dale Parker
Dale Parker's picture

Are we certain Tani Otoshi wasnt just the common term used by Gichin to bounce Chojiro around?

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

jeffc wrote:
Looking back this would appear to have been a successful method of allowing the new students learn the art.  Following this principle, arguably, if Mabuni was trying to export Karate from Okinawa to England, he would have sought to come up with a single English term for each technique and principle to allow to successful transmission of knowledge from the Okinawa art to English speaking students.  Similarly, if his intention was to export the art to Russia, he would have sought to use Russian terms to allow the students to learn most effectively.

Very true! I do think that process has continued though as the various nationalities have started using native terms in addition to the common Japanese terms i.e. “mawashi geri” is used along side “roundhouse kick”. So we are definitely doing that, but also keeping what has became the “international standard” along side it.

One very specific example that comes to mind is my using the term “Cross Buttocks Throw” (from Cumberland and Westmorland Wrestling) in preference to the Japanese “Koshi-Garuma” or “Hip Wheel”. It’s a local term that I prefer to make use of. My students – being fellow Cumbrians – hardly ever use the Japanese term. The Cumbrianization of karate? :-)

 

jeffc wrote:
I do, however, think it is slightly short-sighted to mindlessly follow the tradition that Kenwa Mabuni et al established in the 1930's, without considering the purpose for establishing these traditions in the first-place.  If the reason remains valid then continue with the tradition.  If the purpose has already been served and there is a new issue to be solved, then amend the tradition, just as Mabuni and the other pioneers did when they sought to increase the popularity of Karate in the 1930's.

Totally agree. I think we are doing that through the instruction of local / national terms. Are there any groups out there who only stick to Japanese terminology and who never use their native equivalents (out side of Japan obviously!)?

All the best,

Iain

Iain Abernethy
Iain Abernethy's picture

ky0han wrote:
just a quick note on Funakoshis Tani Otoshi. The Tani Otoshi he demonstrates in his 1935 Karate Do Kyohan is a new Tani Otoshi. Before that he used the name Tani Otoshi for another throw in his previous two publications in 1922 and 1925. The throw he formerly labelled as Tani Otoshi is called Saka-Zuchi in 1935.

That’s true and, to make matters more confusing for westerners, the name of that throw is often transliterated a little differently. What you have called “Saka Zuchi” is also transliterated as “Sakatsuchi” (in the Kodansha translation) and “Gyaku Zuchi” (in the Neptune Publications translation).

So what we have here is:

Tani Otoshi (pre Kyohan) = Saka Zuchi = Sakatsuchi = Gyaku Zuchi

And:

Tani Otoshi (pre Kyohan) ≠ Tani Otoshi (Kyohan)

As well as:

Tani Otoshi (Kyohan) = Ippon Seionage (judo)

And

Tani Otoshi (Kyohan) ≠ Tani Otoshi (Judo)

And

Tani Otoshi (pre Kyohan) ≠ Tani Otoshi (Judo)

We can see why using terms like “one arm shoulder throw” and “upside down hammer” are often used in preference to the Japanese :-)

All the best,

Iain

ky0han
ky0han's picture

Iain Abernethy wrote:
That’s true and, to make matters more confusing for westerners, the name of that throw is often transliterated a little differently. What you have called “Saka Zuchi” is also transliterated as “Sakatsuchi” (in the Kodansha translation) and “Gyaku Zuchi” (in the Neptune Publications translation).

Sakatsuchi is not correct as far as I know (disclaimer - I am not an expert so don't quote me on this). It is Tsuki Waza but Oi Zuki, Keri Waza but Mae Geri, Tachi Waza but Zenkutsu Dachi. Same applies to Saka Zuchi.

Gyaku Zuchi is comprehensible due to the fact that it is the on'yomi (on reading) of the same Kanji used, were Saka would be the kun'yomi (kun reading). It is the same Kanji used in Gyaku Zuki (not tsuki ;-)).

On the whole you are totally right. That just adds to the confusion.

Regards Holger

Steve Gombosi
Steve Gombosi's picture

jeffc wrote:

Did the Okinawans use the Chinese names when teaching the Chinese arts that they learned in China?  Did the Japanese use the Okinawan terms when learning the Okinawan art?  So why are the Japanese terms now so precious?

Just playing Devil's advocate!

Jeff ;-)

I once heard Nagamine Takayoshi  joke that, in the old days, all the techniques had the same name: "Now, do this." 

I don't think the nomenclature is "precious", per se. I think it's useful and I think there are pragmatic reasons for having a standardized technical vocabulary for a discipline whose practitioners are scattered all over the globe and may speak a variety of languages. Those reasons probably didn't apply in an 18th Century Okinawan village - and they certainly didn't apply in the early 20th Century in hyper-nationalistic Japan when a few intrepid teachers were trying to get their obscure Okinawan folk art recognized as "real Japanese budo".

Whether that terminology is derived from Japanese, Portuguese, or Swahili is immaterial as far as I'm concerned.  I would, for example, never begrudge the Gracies the term "omoplata", even though I have only the vaguest idea of what an "omoplata" is or how it's executed. I suspect that a GJJ practitioner anywhere in the world would immediately know what it is, and be able to do it without confusion or hesitation, regardless of where he/she was training and regardless of his/her preferred language - just as I would expect a fencer to know what a "ballestra" is.