24/05/08
日本英文学会第 80 回全国大会
広島大学東広島キャンパス

神もミューズもない ―「創造性」の言説と英語教育
秀明大学専任講師 北 和丈

1. 〜60 年代:「創造性」前史
1.1. ELT Journal: 制限と自由のはざまで(1)(1) A great deal has been written and said about the process of weaning learners of English fromcontrolled to free composition. This article describes a lesson which will bridge the gap
effectively and give the whole class something to take part in (Lott 1964: 102).
(2) In the usual exercise of this kind, consisting of a set of twenty or more sentences, related instructure but unconnected in theme, which have to undergo a structural change, attention isusually focused on part of the sentence only, and there is little incentive to consider thesentence as a whole either structurally or semantically (Spencer 1965: 156).
1.2. TESOL Quarterly: 制限と自由のはざまで(2)(3) What cannot be taught in one lesson, in several lessons, or even in one semester is the kindand range of ideas which will constitute the content of the so-called 'creative' composition.
While this is true for native speakers, it may unfortunately be even more true for many
language learners whose disadvantaged circumstances may not have given them theexperiences, concepts, and English language skills needed for expressional writing.
Recent research indicates that there exists a positive correlation between socio-economic level
and writing performance (Finocchiaro 1967: 43).
(4) For several years now at various professional meetings the question 'After pattern-drill what?' has been asked. The answer appears to be more pattern drill, but at the rhetoricalrather than at the syntactic level (Kaplan 1967: 15).
1.3. 『英語教育』: 和文英訳の黒い影(5) このような広汎な講読と週１回自作の short story の提出が求められる'Creative Writing'のコースを日本の大学で実施することは、現在の段階ではまだ無理のように思える。しかし、それ以前の段階、つまり米国の大学１年生の必修科目になっている'Freshman English'と呼ばれるもののなかで教えられる
theme writing ならば、日本の高校上級生・大学１・２年生の英作文の授業にも適応できるのではなかろうか。(長谷川 1964: 54)(6) …独創的な作文だからといって、いっさいの公式を無視して、自分勝手な文章を書いて良いということにはならない。基本的な型は型として徹底的にマスターする必要がある。
「型に入って型に出る」という茶道の教えは、そのままクリエイティブコンポジションにも十分通じる言葉であろう。(長谷川1965: 47)(7) 従来の和文英訳から自由作文への学習段階には大きなスキップがあった。これを認め学習者の習得段階に応じた Step を設け、徐々に自由作文に導びいて行く指導過程が必要である。文法事項や文型練習のための sentence 単位の writing 練習と communication をめざす free composition の中間的指導段階としての controlled writing の指導の必要を提唱する者である。(高田 1967: 10)
1

2. 70 年代:「創造性」の勃興
2.1. ELT Journal: 「人間」としての creativity(8) Writing ability is a skill in which creativity plays a much larger role than mastery of basic
structural patterns. The fact that a student can form grammatically correct sentences by nomeans ensures that he is capable of producing acceptable English prose. After the teacher
has presented the rudimentary guidelines of composition writing, the progress that thestudent makes is largely a function of his motivation and his innate creative ability (Clarke
1973: 44).
(9) Invention does not mean only producing forms according to a system; it means producing
original utterances as they are required. This is quite different from the games with
substitution tables and pattern practice which have been popular in recent years withunimaginative teachers and which are only modish variants of the old declension andparadigm recitations …Teachers tend to overlook the creative aspect of language learning
because the language has to be given entirely to learners. But it is the use of what they are
given that matters… There can be little interest in mimicry-memorisation or mechanicalexercises with uncontextualised sentences (Pattison 1976: 291).
(10) In bringing students from the first level (that of using learned phrases and patterns) to thesecond level (where he expresses his own ideas in spontaneous communication), mostteachers are reluctant to encourage a creative and adventurous attitude to the language.
Yet, although errors will no doubt be made, maybe we should allow our students more
freedom when using the TL, especially at the generalisation stage. This would encourage an
intrinsic curiosity about the TL itself and the language-learning process (Mugglestone 1977:
114-115).
2.2. TESOL Quarterly: Process Approach の萌芽(11) Instead the creative potential of teachers and school administrators, of students, oflegislators and the larger community must be given a chance to unfold and flourish in an
atmosphere that is free from the stifling restrictions of the philosophy of accountability ...
Freedom to learn is a necessary condition for the full development of the individual's
creative potentials. It included freedom from compulsory courses and curricula, freedom
from authority, freedom from the requirement of tests, examinations, and grades (Jakobovits
1973: 125).
(12) It is the symbolic representational system which processes the many complexities of syntax
through which formal features and arrangements of features attain vigorous life in theexpression of the infinite nuances of meaning. The student goes beyond the specificinstances in which he has seen the forms of language in operation into the creative use oflanguage in novel situations (Rivers 1973: 29).
(13) The literature on the teaching of composition in a second language seems to indicate that
there is a consensus as to how writing should be taught: while grammatical exercises are
rejected as having little to do with the act of writing, there is, at the same time, a great concern
with control and guidance ... The majority of approaches emphasize and focus upon practices
that have very little to do with the creative process of writing (Zamel 1976: 68).
2

(14) The act of composition should become the result of a genuine need to express one's
personal feeling, experience or reaction, all this within a climate of encouragement …
While this instruction might still entail some indirect teaching concerning particular structuralproblems, language study and rhetorical considerations, the primary emphasis should beupon the expressive and creative process of writing. The experience of composing couldin this way have a purpose, that of communicating genuine thoughts and experiences.
ESL students could begin to appreciate English as another language to use, rather than just a
second language to learn (Zamel 1976: 74).
2.3. 『英語教育』:「自己表現」序章(15) 現代社会のもつ画一化、受動化、無気力化の状況に対処し、より能動的積極的な人間を形成しようとする立場や日毎にはん濫する情報に対応し、よりすぐれた情報処理能力を育成しようとする意図、あるいは、生きてはたらく学力の形成やより生産的創造的な能力をつちかう目的での追求などさまざまなニュアンスでの願いをこめて提唱されてきているが、要するに、いかにしてより積極的に自己を改造し発展させていく意欲と能力を身につけさせるか、いかにして自らの発意と努力で真理を探求していく子
どもを育てるかが主体的学習の課題であり目的である。(菊地 1972: 10)(16) 構造言語学に基盤を置く英語学習では、模倣の重要性を説いた。英語学習のある段階では模倣が必要であることはたしかである。しかし、それはもっとも重要なものではない。言語活動は、本来的には機械的な play-back の装置ではないからである。したがって、言語学習における創造性は、このような方法では開発されない。…このような構造言語学の考え方に対して、変形文法家はルールが支配する創造性(rule-governed creativity)という特性を言語の中に認めている。(吉田 1972: 27)(17) 人間の発話は、心理学、社会学、文化人類学の研究によって記述されるより大きなコミュニケーシ
ョンの context に関係している。したがって、その context に発話を関係させることによってのみその特性が明らかになる。この見方からすると、変形理論は話し手が言語を使うときの脳の機能の過程を説明しえたとは言えない。そのため言語習得を研究しようとすれば、linguistic competence と同様に
communicative competence に視点を合わせなければならない。この考えは、英語学習の創造性に有益なヒントを与えてくれる。(吉田 1972: 28)(18) 自己表現とはいわゆる自由英作文や英会話や和文英訳とは概念を異にしている。英語では
Self-expression あるいは creative writing とよばれ、それはたとえばアメリカの公教育の curriculum の中で、Communication という教科の１領域となっている。Self とはわがままや勝手ではなく、哲学者の言う Know yourself の Self に近い。(黒川 1973: 32)

3. 80 年代前半:「創造性」の定着
3.1. ELT Journal: Communication との蜜月
(19) After all, much of the language we use in the real world is motivated by a desire forself-expression, as opposed to simply conveying information or 'getting things done'.
Communicating subjective ideas, personal impressions, and imagined situations are
creative activities, psychologically fulfilling and basic in much of human language use. We
are not talking here of creative language in a 'literary' sense, but of verbal responses which arepersonal and imaginative in nature. To the extent that we, as teachers, can stimulate such
responses in our learners, then to the same extent, we are eliciting authentic use of thelanguage (Baddock 1981: 230).
3

(20) Krashen … describes 'a monitor model of second language performance' in which'acquisition' is distinguished from 'learning'. 'Acquisition' arises as the result of processes of'creative construction' by which the learner internalizes the rules of the second language(L2) subconsciously; it takes place 'naturally' and is not amenable to instruction (Ellis 1982:
74).
(21) … it is only when learners are totally involved in an activity that they start to produce
language creatively. However, creative production is possible only when preceded bylearning which is rooted deep in learners' personalities. Teachers, then, have to establish a
non-threatening environment in the classroom which encourages meaningful learning andthe creative uses of English (Sano et al. 1984: 171).
3.2. TESOL Quarterly: Process Approach の確立(22) … the creative use of language is not 'the sole prerogative of the native speaker' … The
language learning process characterized in this way, as a process of making meaning,parallels exactly the process of composing. It is time for ESL teachers of composition to begin
to see the relationship between these two processes and to recognize that meaning is createdthrough language even when the language is written down (Zamel 1983: 184).
(23) Some ESL writing teachers are researchers who have become aware of the paradigm shift in
the first language writing instruction field have described how an ESL writing course canbenefit from this research by shifting its focus from the written product to the writing
process ... Such research alerts us to the need for writing instruction which teaches ESL
students that they can experience writing as a creative process for exploring andcommunicating meaning (Spack 1984: 651).
(24) The pattern that held for many, though not all, of these ESL writers was something like this:create text - read - create text - read - edit - read - create text - read - read- create text, and soon. Thus, language and the ideas expressed in that language emerged out of the student
writers' own creativity, not out of textbook instruction or teacher-supplied input. All ofthese student writers, even those laboring to produce text, were uncovering the language theyneeded to express ideas and at the same time discovering new ideas (Raimes 1985: 248).
3.3. 『英語教育』:「自己表現」時代の到来(25) 英米人のみならず諸外国の人々も理解できるような英語によって自己表現できることを思考する発信型教育が要求されてくることは確実であろう…英米文化にしばられない、多国籍化した英語を日本人が理解でき、さらに学習者が日本人として主体性のある英語で自己表現できるような英語教育を志向すべきであると考えている。(中山 1982: 21)(26) 本稿では、英語の授業が英語を「知る」部分とそれを「使う」部分の両方がなければならないこと。
そして、特に前者では、言葉の本質である意味を中心に据えた教え方が必要であること。そして後者では、学習者が主体になり自ら思うことや考えることを、間違いを恐れずに表現することが必要であることを主張した。(高見 1983: 14)(27) 言語は本来コミュニケーションのための手段であり、自己表現の仕方を教えることは、言語本来の目的にもかなっているわけである。近頃学習者中心の英語教育ということが叫ばれているが、自己表現
4

を重視した指導こそ、生徒自身を主人公にした場面をつくり、生徒を生き生きとさせるものである。(奥津 1985: 20)。

4. 80 年代後半〜: 批判のまなざし
4.1. ELT Journal: Creativity 再考(28) The theories of Chomsky, which have so dominated the study of first language acquisition
for thirty-five years, exclusively emphasize the creativity of language, focusing on utterancesthat are neither known by heart nor repetitions. The process of language acquisition is
described exclusively as the development within the individual of a linguistic competence, atacit knowledge of rules which enables the individual to generate utterances which are put
together for the first and only time ... repetition of form, learning by heart, and imitation areassociated with the misguided behaviourist past (Cook 1994: 135-136).
(29) The debate about the value of personally expressive and creative language is of course
hardly new: indeed, in certain forms it goes back as far as Plato. One of the recent forms ofthe debate which was particularly significant in Australia was the process writing versus genre
debate of the 1970s and 1980s. Process writing, associated with progressivist educational
theories and particularly with the work of Graves ... argued that students learning to write
should be given a completely free hand to express their creativity without intervention or
correction by the teacher (Gadd 1998: 229-230).
4.2. TESOL Quarterly:「他者」の逆襲(30) One reason for this focus on text appropriation was the result of a distorted view of the
product/process dichotomy. Although most ESL teachers regularly integrated process andproduct approaches in their writing classrooms, researchers often sought to castigate theproduct of writing (and its absolute focus on the mechanical, the accurate, the 'recipe' rhetoric)in favor of the creative, intellectually stimulating autonomy of process writing ... At its
most extreme, teacher intervention in student writing processes was seen as culturally
imperialistic, an attempt to teach ESL students that U.S. academic rhetoric was somehow
superior to other cultural rhetorics ... Carried further, these attitudes inextricably linked
process writing with personal and expressive writing and academic writing solely withproduct-based pedagogy (Reid 1994: 276).
(31) Recently, fellow African, Okara (1990) has contested Ngugi's position and argued for theneed to negotiate with English and its discourse for richer expression, with the fullconsciousness of one's local discourses, thus creatively constructing an alternate English
discourse that is ideologically and rhetorically satisfying (Canagarajah 1993: 304).
(32) … authors tend to emphasize cultural differences between ESL learners' social andeducational background and that of the largest language community, arguing that Asian
culture generally values collectivism and discourages individual self-expression, creativity,and critical thinking whereas Western culture displays the opposite characteristics (Kubota
1999: 10).
(33) According to American … British … and Canadian … commentators, CLT was essentiallyconcerned with the concepts of negotiation, interpretation, and expression. They and5others point out that underscoring the creative, unpredictable, and purposeful use oflanguage as communication were classroom practices largely woven around sharing
information and negotiating meaning. This is true not only of oral communication but alsoof reading and writing (Kumaravadivelu 2006: 61).
4.3. 『英語教育』:「自己表現」の行方(34) 学習したことが実際に使えてこそ、真の学力と言える。創造性、発展性が備わってはじめて生きた道具となる。こうした言語観・学力観に立って、生徒たちが犯す誤りには多少目をつぶってでも、どんどん言語使用させることである(宮田 1989: 16)。
(35) まず自己表現の文章をたくさん書かせ、そこからパラグラフの外形、関連の強い内容だけで構成することに気づかせる。次に物語や思い出などを書かせ、時間の流れに応じて書く方法を教える。その次に説明文や議論などでトピック・センテンスを教えるなどの基礎的な事項から気づかせてゆき、型にはめて創造力を抑圧しないよう注意しなければならない(佐野 1997: 10)。
(36) けれども、私は自己表現とは、自分の選択した語彙を使って、自分の英語を言ったり書いたりすることなのであると思っている。であればトピックは自分自身のことでも何でもよいはずである。つまり、「自己」表現といちいち「自己」とつけなくても、「表現」で十分ではないだろうか(金谷 2002: 8)。
(37) 「ライティングは『自己表現』活動である」とよく言われるが、私は『自己表現』という狭い枠に捉われていてはならないと思う。はじめは自分の身の回りの出来事を表現することから始めたとしても、そうした一人称("I")で表される主観的な陳述から、もっと広い見地からの客観的な考察を可能とする活動にもっていくべきだろうと思う(大井 2005: 31)。

[参考文献]
大井恭子 2005 「これからのライティング指導-教室指導の留意点-[発信させるライティング指導]」，『英語教育』54(6): 28-31.
奥津文夫 1985 「自己表現の仕方と喜びを教える[こうすれば授業は活性化する]」，『英語教育』33(13):20-22.
金谷憲 2002 「自己表現活動のハードルとその乗り越え方[明日からできる自己表現活動]」，『英語教育』
51(8): 8-11.
菊地啓 1972 「主体的学習と学び方学習[英語学習の主体化と学び方学習]」，『英語教育』21(10): 10-13.
黒川泰男 1973 「自己表現活動の実践=高校[英語による自己表現]」，『英語教育』22(3): 32-35.
佐野正之 1997 「ライティング指導を見直す-和文英訳からパラグラフ・ライティングまで-[創造的なラ
イティング指導]」，『英語教育』46(10): 8-10.
高田諭 1967 「Free Composition をめざす Controlled Writing」 『英語教育』16(3): 8-10.
高見健一 1983 「やる気を起こさせる工夫[やる気を育てる英語の授業]」，『英語教育』32(9): 12-14.
中山行弘 1982 「英語の多国籍化のすすめ-「日本は EFL 国だ」という神話-[これからの"日本人の英語"は]」，『英語教育』31(2): 20-21.
長谷川潔 1964 「クリエイティブ コンポジション（１）」，『英語教育』 13(7): 54-56.
長谷川潔 1965 「クリエイティブ コンポジション（４）」，『英語教育』13(10): 45-47.
宮田学 1989 「ライティング指導と生徒の誤文[これからのライティング指導]」，『英語教育』38(5):16-17.
吉田一衛 1972 「英語学習の主体化と創造性[英語学習の主体化と学び方学習]」，『英語教育』21(10):26-29.
Baddock, B. J. 1981. Creative language use in communicative activities. ELT Journal 35(3):230-231.
6

Canagarajah, A. S. 1993. Up the garden path: second language writing approaches, local
knowledge, and pluralism. TESOL Quarterly 27(2): 301-306.
Clarke, M. A. 1973. Individualsing instruction in the composition class. ELT Journal 28(1):43-46.
Cook, G. 1994. Repetition and learning by heart: an aspect of intimate discourse, and its
implications. ELT Journal 48(2): 133-141.
Ellis, R. 1982. Informal and formal approaches to communicative language teaching. ELT
Journal 36(2): 73-81.
Finocchiaro, M. 1967. Secondary school composition: problems and practices. TESOL Quarterly
1(3): 40-46.
Gadd, N. 1998. Towards less humanistic English teaching. ELT Journal 52(3): 223-234.
Jakobovits, L. A. 1973. Freedom to teach and free do to learn. TESOL Quarterly 7(2): 117-126.
Kaplan, R. B. 1967. Contrastive rhetoric and the teaching of composition. TESOL Quarterly 1(4):10-16.
Kubota, R. 1999. Japanese culture constructed by discourse: implications for applied linguistics
research and ELT. TESOL Quarterly 33(1): 9-35.
Kumaravadivelu, B. 2006. TESOL methods: changing tracks, challenging trends. TESOL
Quarterly 40(1): 59-81.
Lott, B. 1964. Guided composition. ELT Journal 18(3): 102-104.
Mugglestone, P. 1977. The primary curiosity motive. ELT Journal 31(2): 111-116.
Pattison, B. 1976. Organizing motivation. ELT Journal 30(4): 286-293.
Raimes, A. 1985. What unskilled ESL students do as they write: a classroom study of composing.
TESOL Quarterly 19(2): 229-258.
Reid, J. 1994. Responding to ESL students' texts: the myths of appropriation. TESOL Quarterly
28(2): 273-292.
Rivers, W. M. 1973. From linguistic competence to communicative competence. TESOL Quarterly7(1): 25-34.
Sano, M., M. Takahashi and A. Yoneyama. 1984. Communicative language teaching and local
needs. ELT Journal 38(3): 170-177.
Spack, R. 1984. Invention strategies and the ESL college composition student. TESOL Quarterly
18(4): 649-670.
Spencer, D. H. 1965. The types of guided composition exercise. ELT Journal 19(4): 156-158.
Zamel, V. 1976. Teaching composition in the ESL classroom: what we can learn from research in
the teaching of English. TESOL Quarterly 10(1): 67-76.
Zamel, V. 1983. The composing processes of advanced ESL students: six case studies. TESOL
Quarterly 17(2): 165-187.

7