Machine Translationand English Education in Japan
Tom GALLYAn Unexpected AdvanceIn late 2016, the quality of the translations between Japanese andEnglish provided online for free by Google improved suddenly
and significantly. Until that time, machine translation (MT)between these two languages had been of limited use: when fed
natural texts—that is, texts that people had written to communicate directly with other people, without prior editing to make thetexts more easily translatable by computer—MT often produced
incomprehensible gibberish. The poor quality of MT had persisted, with limited improvement, for decades. Many people,
including this author, were doubtful that MT would ever be
broadly applicable, especially for languages as different as Japanese and English.
The recent advances in MT1 suggest that this pessimism was
misplaced. While MT can still fail, especially when the input text
contains semantic or syntactic ambiguities, the output is now
good enough for many practical purposes. People who need toread or write something in a second language are increasingly
using MT to translate to and from their first language rather thanstruggling with the second language directly. The ready availability of such translation tools has profound implications formany fields and endeavors, including English education in
Japan.
Although Japanese is the national language of Japan and theonly language needed in daily life by the majority of Japanesepeople, English is taught to all children in Japanese schools, witheach child spending hundreds of hours in English classes andself-study before entering high school. Nearly all children con43

KOMABA JOURNAL OF ENGLISH EDUCATION

tinue studying the language in high school, and most college anduniversity programs require students to take English classes aswell. Many adults also study English, either on their own or inadult-education schools or programs. One of the main justifications for devoting so much time, effort, and resources to trying tolearn this foreign language is to be able to communicate in English with people from other countries. That justification, however, is weakened if MT enables such communication to be done
easily, effectively, and in many languages in addition to English.
Practical communication, however, is not the only reason for thewidespread study of English. It has also been justified as a way
for Japanese people to gain insight into other countries and into
their own culture and language as well as a way to internationalize the once-isolated country. The process of rigorous English
study itself has been said to be a beneficial mental exercise, especially when emphasis is placed on grammar and on translating
between English and Japanese. These latter justifications might
be affected less by improved MT.
To understand better the possible future impacts ofimproved MT for English education in Japan, this paper examines the main justifications that have been given for universal
English education in Japan and discusses the implications ofMT’s advances for each of those justifications. To illustrate how
the justifications have been asserted and assumed, the author has
selected three representative contexts: controversies about English education that arose in the 1920s and 1970s and that still resonate today, and the most recent version of the government’s
Course of Study, or standard curriculum guidelines, for juniorhigh schools. As the improvements in MT seem likely to transform attitudes toward the utility and necessity of studying otherlanguages, it is hoped that this paper will offer a useful starting
point for further discussion and debate among educators, policymakers, and the general public about how to deal in the years
ahead with this new and rapidly developing technology.

Why Teach English?
English has been taught to all Japanese schoolchildren for solong that it might seem unnecessary to ask why. But the reasons
are not completely obvious, especially to the children them44

MACHINE TRANSLATION AND ENGLISH EDUCATION IN JAPANselves. While Japanese children usually begin studying English
systematically at the start of junior-high school, at age twelve,2most have little or no need for English outside the classroom. In
fact, for the large majority, Japanese is the only language used athome or in the community. If another language is used aroundthe children, it is more likely to be Chinese, Korean, Tagalog, orVietnamese than English.3 It might not be an exaggeration toclaim that, for many children, the main immediate need for English is to be able to read “Men” and “Women” signs on public
restrooms.
Since immediate practical use is not a viable justification forteaching all children English, a variety of other reasons havebeen offered, both explicitly and implicitly. These reasons can bedivided roughly into two categories, which provide a usefulframework for considering the potential impacts of MT on English education in Japan. The first, in Japanese, is called kyōyō,
which can be translated as “general knowledge and character
development.” Arguments for kyōyō as a reason for teaching
everyone English emphasize the personal benefits that systematic study of the language supposedly confers on children inboth the short and long term. The second category of reasons,called jitsuyō, refers to the use of the language for practical purposes. Because school-age children do not, for the most part,need English right away, the arguments for jitsuyō focus on children’s future potential need to use the language. It should be
noted that these two positions are not mutually exclusive: advocates of placing primary emphasis on kyōyō also tend to accept
jitsuyō as an additional valid reason and vice-versa.
The most historically rooted reason for learning foreign languages in Japan seems to have been jitsuyō: to acquire knowledge
from abroad. The first language to play this role was Chinese,
which was introduced to Japan about fifteen hundred years ago
and was the medium for the adoption of legal codes, religion,
and writing itself from the Asian mainland. During the Edo
Period (1600–1867), when Japan was cut off from most of theworld and foreign trade limited to merchants from China andHolland, the Dutch language was studied as a way to acquire
knowledge from Europe about science, technology, medicine,
geography, and other subjects. Dutch was also the medium bywhich Japan’s leaders learned about recent events in the wider
45

KOMABA JOURNAL OF ENGLISH EDUCATION

world. Japan’s opening to the world in the second half of the
19th century led to a further blossoming of foreign-language
study, especially of German, French, and English, as the country
hurried to catch up with Western powers economically, militarily, and culturally.
Although the main reason for learning foreign languages
was thus initially utilitarian, or jitsuyō, as foreign languages cameto be taught widely in schools and universities the reasoning
shifted. Even with Japan’s opening to the world, most students
did not have an immediate need to read texts in English or otherforeign languages, and important texts soon became available inJapanese translation. By that time, however, the teaching of English and other languages had become entrenched in the educational system, and an additional, kyōyō justification emerged: thatstudying foreign languages, especially English, benefitted students in their personal and intellectual development.

Fujimura’s Attack and Hoashi’s Defense
An example of such a kyōyō-based argument can be seen in arejoinder to a much-quoted polemic published in the May 1927
issue of the magazine Gendai. Written by Fujimura Tsukuru, aliterary scholar and professor at Tokyo Imperial University, thepiece was titled “The Urgency of Eliminating English Courses”4(Fujimura, 1927). Fujimura lamented the vast amount of time
devoted to studying foreign languages at the middle-school level(approximately ages 12 to 16). Because most students would notactually need English in the future and did not acquire sufficientability to use it for most practical purposes, he advocated eliminating the language requirement and called instead for establishing a national agency that would take over the task of translating texts written in other languages into Japanese. Fujimura’s
argument was thus jitsuyō-based: he assumed that the only reason to study English was as a practical tool; if young people
either did not actually have a need for this tool or would not
become proficient enough to use it, then they should not have to
study English.
The kyōyō rejoinder, published in Gendai two months later,
was written by Hoashi Riichirō, an American-educated philosopher and professor at Waseda University (Hoashi, 1927). Hoashi
46

MACHINE TRANSLATION AND ENGLISH EDUCATION IN JAPAN

based his argument in favor of English study on arguments foreducation in general. He rejected the notion that practicality
should be the only, or even the main, reason for teaching any
subject in the general school curriculum. The purpose of education, he wrote, was to impart “wide, varied interests and kyōyō”(p. 277). In the case of foreign languages, he emphasized in particular the study of literature, which he called “the richest material to study in order to build humanistic kyōyō” (p. 277). Rejecting Fujimura’s claim that the need for knowledge from abroad
could be met with a centralized translation service, Hoashi wrotethat people can appreciate literature only when they read it in
the original language. Hoashi also asserted that studying otherlanguages benefits students’ character development by exposing
them directly to knowledge and ideas from the wider world.

The Hiraizumi-Watanabe Debate
In the Fujimura-Hoashi dispute, the division between jitsuyō andkyōyō was clear, with Fujimura writing from jitsuyō assumptionsand Hoashi advocating for kyōyō. These two concepts can be seen
in a similar debate about the purpose of English education thattook place nearly five decades later, but the battlelines weredrawn differently. In 1974, the politician Hiraizumi Wataru
wrote a proposal for comprehensive reform of English educationin Japan (Hiraizumi, 1974). Since most Japanese students would
not need English in their later lives and, despite years of study,
did not actually become proficient in English in any case, headvocated offering intensive English courses only to the students
who wanted to study it. Under his proposal, the junior-highschool English requirement would be replaced with a short kyōyō
course on the languages and cultures of the world, and the English component of university entrance examinations would be
eliminated. By recognizing the personal-enrichment benefits of
exposure to foreign languages, Hiraizumi took a kyōyō stance like
Hoashi’s. But, like Fujimura, he also based part of his argument
on jitsuyō assumptions, as he argued for the elimination of the
English requirement in schools based in part on the lack of practical need.
Hiraizumi’s proposal attracted a harsh rebuttal from Watanabe Shōichi, a scholar of English literature and conservative47

KOMABA JOURNAL OF ENGLISH EDUCATION

polemicist. Writing in the April 1975 issue of the magazine
Shokun!, Watanabe insisted on giving priority to what hedescribed as the traditional Japanese purpose for learning foreign languages—“reading original texts accurately” (Watanabe,
1975, p. 29)—which he traced back to Prince Shōtoku’s reading
and annotation of Chinese versions of Buddhist sutras in the latesixth and early seventh centuries. This focus on close reading oforiginal texts, he argued, was the foundation for the study ofChinese texts during the Edo Period and for the translation into
Japanese of texts in English and other European languages in the
Meiji Period and later. Watanabe’s argument had a jitsuyō basis,
as he regarded reading ability as useful for the practical purposeof learning from overseas, but he also recognized the kyōyō benefits of reading foreign literature in the original (p. 34).
Another component of Watanabe’s argument was that thetraditional focus on translation in language education brought
benefits beyond understanding the language being studied: Japanese students who learn English by translating to and fromJapanese, he claimed, also became more proficient in their first
language (pp. 35–36). He also argued that the process of translation itself, as well as that of grappling with the rules of English
grammar, was “a martial art requiring the ultimate mental exertion” and thus benefitted students’ cognitive development (p.
35). These arguments also have both kyōyō and jitsuyō aspects, as
improved first-language ability and sharper reasoning abilities
would presumably both enrich children’s personal character andenable them better to achieve more in the future.

Official Reasons
Aside from arguments about whether English should be taught toall children in Japan, one possible answer to the question of why
English is taught to all children is simple: the teaching of English
is required by law and by government regulation. Article 26 of
the Constitution of Japan mandates education for all children in
Japan and states that “All people shall have the right to receive
an equal education correspondent to their ability, as provided bylaw.” Laws such as the Basic Act on Education and the School
Education Law describe in general how that education should be
provided, and the education ministry issues detailed, subject-by48

MACHINE TRANSLATION AND ENGLISH EDUCATION IN JAPANsubject standards, called Courses of Study, that all schools inJapan are expected to follow when preparing their curricula. Oneof those Courses of Study is titled “Foreign Languages,” though
in fact it deals almost exclusively with English.
The most recent Course of Study for junior high schools was
issued in March 2017. The ten-page section on foreign languages
describes both the general goals for English education and theindividual linguistic and pragmatic points that must be taught(Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology,
2017a). A few months later, a much longer document explaining
the Course of Study in depth was issued (Ministry of Education,
Culture, Sports, Science and Technology, 2017b), and it is in thelatter document that both jitsuyō and kyōyō arguments for theteaching of English can be seen. An example from the jitsuyō side
is “With the rapid progress of globalization, the ability to communicate in foreign languages is expected to be necessary in avariety of situations throughout people’s lives rather than, as
previously, being limited to only some industries or types ofwork” (p. 5). On the kyōyō side, the document also mentions
goals such as “further fostering qualities and capabilities such as
thinking ability, judgment ability, expressive ability, etc. and theability to engage in study, the students’ personal character, etc.”(p. 6) and the importance of learning about the “culture behindthe foreign language” (p. 10). The inclusion of both jitsuyō andkyōyō justifications in the most important official statement ofeducational policy—a policy that, while often criticized, does
attempt to reflect a broad consensus about the goals that can andshould be pursued for English education in Japan—shows thatboth justifications must be considered when thinking about the
future impacts of MT.

Other Justifications?
Before we consider the possible impacts of MT, however, brief
mention must be made of two additional reasons why Japanesechildren all study English: testing and inertia.
For most children, and quite a few adults, the immediate
motivation to study English is strictly neither kyōyō nor jitsuyō
but rather to score highly on tests. Nearly all high schools anduniversities include English in their entrance exams, and many
49

KOMABA JOURNAL OF ENGLISH EDUCATION

companies consider scores on standardized tests such as TOEIC
or EIKEN when making decisions about hiring, salaries, andpromotions. While the testing culture in Japan sometimes seems
to be its own justification, with people studying for tests because
they like studying for and passing tests, the primary reasons forthe great emphasis on English-language testing in Japan are, one
hopes, similar to the justifications given for teaching and learning English—that is, to evaluate test-takers’ practical skills(jitsuyō) as well as their general knowledge and ability (kyōyō).
Whatever impacts MT might have on the kyōyō and jitsuyō justifications should, directly or indirectly, apply to testing as well.
Inertia is simply the argument that English should continue
to be taught because English has always been taught. Whileseemingly less rooted in principle than the other justifications,this argument is in fact made explicitly in the explanation of thegovernment’s 2017 Course of Study, which states that English is
the foreign language taught in almost all schools not only
“because English is used worldwide as a means of communication” but also “because it is English that has been studied until
now in almost all schools” (p. 97).
As a practical reason for teaching all children English, theinertia argument is powerful. Even if MT were to obviate mostjitsuyō reasons for learning English, and even if people came tobelieve that the kyōyō benefits of learning English could beobtained through the study of other languages or subjects, theslow pace of curricular reform, the entrenched interests of English-language educators, and the widespread cultural assumptions about the importance of studying English mean that thelanguage will likely continue to be taught in schools and universities for decades, just as Latin remained a central part of school
curricula in the West long after its utility had nearly disappeared(Gally, 2012).
In principle, however, inertia is an extraordinarily weak reason to keep teaching English to everyone. Children, in particular,
would be unconvinced by the assertion that they should study
English just because everyone has always studied English, especially if they can see that adults have come to rely on MT forpractical purposes. Adults, too, would increasingly resent having had to devote so much of their youth to a language for which
they see little or no need. It is already difficult to motivate chil50

MACHINE TRANSLATION AND ENGLISH EDUCATION IN JAPANdren in Japan to study English; MT is likely to make it even morechallenging.

The Implications of Machine Translation
Since at least the 1920s, major discourses about why English
should be taught to all Japanese children have framed the language both as a practical tool and as a means for personalenrichment. In disputes about the purpose of English education,some advocates, such as Fujimura and Hoashi, have tended totake one side of the argument. Others, such was Hiraizumi and
Watanabe, have argued from both perspectives. While government education policy, as shown by the most recent Course of
Study and its exegesis, has focused on practical communication,it has also continued to value liberal-education principles. Whenconsidering how continued advances in MT might affect English
education in Japan, one should thus look at possible impacts on
both types of justification.
The development of usable machine translation systems
marks a watershed for second-language learners and users.
While previous technological advances, such as audio and video
recording, electronic dictionaries, and Internet search engines,
streamlined language learning to some extent, in order to understand and be understood by speakers and writers of another language one still had to go through the arduous process of studying and practicing that language’s grammar and vocabulary. MT
is now beginning to enable this understanding and being understood using only one’s first language. This advance raises thequestion of whether it will be worthwhile anymore to require
most children to devote years to studying and practicing a second language, especially if the language is, like English in Japan,
a foreign tongue for which most people have little or no use indaily life.
The implications of improved MT for English education in
Japan therefore seem most profound for practical, or jitsuyō, purposes. In the 1920s, for example, Fujimura Tsukuru assumed thatthe purpose of learning English was to obtain information fromtexts written in English; if Japanese translations of those texts
were available, he wrote, then there was no reason to study English. As MT becomes able to produce translations close in quality
51

KOMABA JOURNAL OF ENGLISH EDUCATION

and accuracy to that produced by human translators—and much
more quickly and cheaply—then Fujimura’s argument in favorof eliminating the English-education requirement becomes stronger.
Today, of course, reading to acquire information is not the
only practical reason given for Japanese people to learn English;
the need to speak, understand, and write the language in order
to interact with people who do not know Japanese is also used tojustify universal English education. However, MT software isalready making it possible for people who do not share a common language to communicate with each other in both speech
and writing. As the accuracy of MT continues to improve, and as
people learn how to use it effectively, the arguments for requiring all Japanese children to spend hundreds or thousands ofhours trying to acquire communicative ability in English become
weaker and weaker.
In contrast, the kyōyō arguments for studying English seem,at first glance, more impervious to MT’s advances. The value ofreading English-language literature in the original, as pointed
out by Hoashi, is not diminished by the availability of translations, whether human- or machine-made. Similarly, MT would
have no effect on the benefits to one’s personal development ofbeing able to understand English-speaking countries and cultures directly rather than through translation. Watanabe’s argument about the cognitive benefit of learning English grammar
and about students’ increased awareness of Japanese if they haveto translate to and from English would also continue to hold, as
would the points in the Course of Study about fostering thinking
ability or personal character. English educators worried about
MT’s threat to their jobs might therefore seem well advised to try
to protect their status by emphasizing kyōyō arguments for English’s central role in school curricula.
But kyōyō arguments for the universal teaching of English
are also threatened by MT, because every argument in favor of
studying English applies mutatis mutandis to the study of otherforeign languages. A Japanese child would presumably benefit
just as much by learning to read Chinese literature in the original, by struggling with the grammar of Arabic, or by translating
between Russian and Japanese. The kyōyō arguments put forward by people like Hoashi or Watanabe assume implicitly that52

MACHINE TRANSLATION AND ENGLISH EDUCATION IN JAPAN

it is valuable for Japanese children to study English not only for
its own sake but also because English is an international lingua
franca. As people throughout the world increasingly use MT tocommunicate across language barriers for work and personal
purposes, English’s role as a lingua franca will diminish. While
many individuals will continue to gain valuable knowledge,
insights, and discernment from devoting years to studying foreign languages, the arguments for teaching all Japanese children
English for almost all of their school years will become increasingly untenable.

Notes
1. These and related advances are explained in layman’s terms in LewisKraus (2016) and the article “Finding a voice” (2017). A detailed technical explanation appears in Wu et al. (2016). While it is impossible topredict how quickly MT will continue to improve, the shift from statistical to neural MT described in these sources seems to have broken
through some stubborn barriers that had been inhibiting MT’s progress. Continued advances in other areas of artificial intelligence arelikely to benefit MT as well. The discussion in this paper therefore
assumes that MT will become increasingly useful in the years ahead
for both written translation and spoken interpretation.
2. Beginning in 2020, regular instruction in English will start two years
earlier, in the fifth grade of elementary school (age 10).
3. This assertion is based on the citizenships of resident foreigners and on
the countries of origin of foreigners entering the country. At the end of
2016, there were 843,740 resident foreigners who were citizens ofChina (including Hong Kong), 106,979 of Taiwan, 527,077 of South
Korea, 271,969 of the Philippines, 203,653 of Vietnam, and 183,583 ofBrazil, compared with 94,447 citizens of the United States, 38,900 ofAustralia, and 25,890 of the U.K. (Statistics Bureau, 2017b). The number of foreigners entering Japan for stays of 90 days or less in 2016
were 5,980,210 from China and Hong Kong, 3,892,262 from Taiwan,
and 4,890,620 from South Korea, compared with 1,152,686 from the
U.S., 418,722 from Australia, and 260,785 from the United Kingdom(Statistics Bureau, 2017a). While citizenship does not, of course, correlate completely with language spoken, the overall trend matches theexperience of most people in Japan today: If one overhears someone
speaking a language other than Japanese in a public place, it is more
likely to be Chinese, Korean, or another Asian language than English.
4. The translations from Japanese of this title and of other titles and quotations are the author’s.

53

KOMABA JOURNAL OF ENGLISH EDUCATION

References
Finding a voice. (2017, January 5). The Economist. Retrieved from http://
www.economist.com/
Fujimura, T. [藤村作]. (1927, May). Eigoka haishi no kyūmu [英語科廃止の急務
The urgency of eliminating English courses]. Gendai [現代]. Reprinted in
Kawasumi, T. (Ed.). (1978). Shiryō Nihon Eigakushi 2: Eigo kyōiku
ronsōshi [資 料 日 本 の 英 学 史 2 英 語 教 育 論 争 史 The history of Englishrelated studies in Japan 2: The history of English-education controversies] (pp. 251–262). Tokyo: Taishūkan Shoten [大修館書店], 1978.
Gally, T. (2012). Disputes about language teaching, past and present. In Professor Paul Rossiter Festschrift Editorial Committee (Ed.), West to East,
East to West: Studies in the Field of English Education Dedicated to Professor
Paul Rossiter on His Retirement (pp. 25–40). Tokyo: Seibido [成美堂].
Hiraizumi, W. [平 泉 渉]. (1974). Gaikokugo kyōiku no genjō to kaikaku nohōkō — hitotsu no shian [外国語教育の現状と改革の方向 ― 一つの試案 The
current state and direction of reforms of foreign-language education:
An attempt at a proposal]. Reprinted in Hiraizumi, W. [平泉渉], & Watanabe, S. [渡 部 昇 一]. (1975). Eigo kyōiku daironsō [英 語 教 育 大 論 争 Big
argument about English education] (pp. 9–14). Tokyo: Bungei Shunjū[文藝春秋].
Hoashi, R. [帆足理一郎]. (1927, July). Haishi ni wa hantai de aru [廃止には反対で あ る I am opposed to abolition]. Gendai [現 代]. Reprinted in Kawasumi, T. (Ed.). (1978). Shiryō Nihon Eigakushi 2: Eigo kyōiku ronsōshi[資料日本の英学史 2 英語教育論争史 The history of English-related studies in Japan 2: The history of English-education controversies] (pp.
274–283). Tokyo: Taishūkan Shoten [大修館書店], 1978.
Lewis-Kraus, G. (2016, December 16). The great A.I. awakening. The New
York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com/
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT).
(2017a, March). Chūgakkō gakushū shidō yōryō [中 学 校 学 習 指 導 要 領
Course of study for junior-high schools]. Retrieved September 15, 2017,from http://www.mext.go.jp/
Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT).
(2017b, July). Chūgakkō gakushū shidō yōryō kaisetsu: Gaikokugo hen[中 学 校 学 習 指 導 要 領 解 説 外 国 語 編 Explanation of course of study forjunior-high schools: Foreign languages]. Retrieved September 15, 2017,from http://www.mext.go.jp/
Statistics Bureau, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications [総 務 省
統 計 局]. (2017a). Kokuseki-chiiki betsu nyūkoku gaikokujin no zairyū
shikaku [国 籍・地 域 別 入 国 外 国 人 の 在 留 資 格 Status of residence of foreigners entering the country by nationality and region]. Retrieved September 12, 2017, from http://www.e-stat.go.jp/
Statistics Bureau, Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications [総 務 省
統 計 局]. (2017b). Kokuseki-chiiki betsu zairyū shikaku (sairyū

54

MACHINE TRANSLATION AND ENGLISH EDUCATION IN JAPAN

mokuteki) betsu sōzairyū gaikokujin [国籍・地域別 在留資格 (在留目的) 別
総 在 留 外 国 人 Total number of resident foreigners by nationality andregion and by status of residence (purpose of residence)]. Retrieved
September 12, 2017, from http://www.e-stat.go.jp/
Watanabe, S. [渡 部 昇 一]. (1975). Bōkoku no “Eigo kyōiku kaikaku shian”—
Hiraizumi Wataru-shi no kaikaku shian o hihan suru [亡国の「英語教育改革試案」― 平泉渉氏の改革試案を批判する A doomed nation’s “attempted
proposal for English education reform”: Criticizing Hiraizumi Wataru’s attempted proposal for reform]. Reprinted in Hiraizumi, W. [平 泉渉], & Watanabe, S. [渡部昇一]. (1975). Eigo kyōiku daironsō [英語教育大論争 Big argument about English education] (pp. 15–50). Tokyo: Bungei
Shunjū [文藝春秋].
Wu, Y., Schuster, M., Chen, Z., Le, Q. V., Norouzi, M., Macherey, W., … &Klingner, J. (2016). Google’s neural machine translation system: Bridging the gap between human and machine translation. arXiv:1609.08144[cs.CL].

55