著者

向井 敦子 深谷 澄男

出版者

国際基督教大学

雑誌

国際基督教大学学報. I-A, 教育研究 (ISSN:04523318)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.33, pp.83-125, 1991-03

---

Figure 1 shows singular and plural forms of English personal pronouns and their corresponding present forms of be verb. An inexperienced student of English said there was something unacceptable in the figure. Please look over the figure to guess his question. His question is why the singular form in the second person is identical with the plural, though the singular form in the first and the third person is distinguished from the plural. Another question is why 'Are' is used after 'You' even in the singular form. Shouldn't 'Are' as a be verb follow the plural form of a subject? These questions given by the innocent student have strongly stimulated the authors. If the singular form of 'You' simultaneously implies plurality, who and who are held in the mind of a speaker? Let's suppose the interpersonal situation, where Jack and Betty are in the discourse. When Jack is conscious of himself as a speaker, 'You' for Jack is naturally Betty. When Jack is aware that Betty expresses herself as a speaker, Jack inevitably stands as 'You' for Betty. This implies that the two persons' discourse begins with the complementary consciousness of 'You', and goes on with the recurrent exchnage of 'You'. The use of 'You' is well correspond to the use of Japanese word 'Jibun'. 'Jibun', as well as 'You', has two aspects. In one aspect, 'Jibun' expresses oneself as an actor. And in the other aspect, 'Jibun' realizes oneself as a mediator that makes it possible for the other person to express oneself. When 'Jibun' becomes conscious of expressing oneself as the second person, 'Jibun' gets aware of realizing oneself as the first person. Therefore, 'Jibun' or 'You' can be recognized as a complementary and recurrent unity, which is ready to express oneself in one context, and which is ready to realize oneself in the other context. The singular form of 'You' may reflect the unity of recurrence, and the sense of plurality of 'You' may reflect the complementarity of the two possible aspects. Next, let's take a view of the interpersonal situation, where Betty, Jack, and Tom are in the discourse. Here, the singular form of the second person will be symbolized as 'You', and the plural form as 'You'. When Betty calls herself as 'I', Jack or Tom is 'You', or Jack and Tom are 'YOU'. In the three persons' discourse, 'You' for Betty remains uncertain till Betty decisively points out either Jack or Tom. When Betty chooses Jack as 'You' or 'WE', Tom is inevitably signified as 'not You' or 'THEY' in her mind. From this, 'YOU' can be recognized as a possible state which may divide into 'WE' or 'THEY'. In this sense, 'I' is the first person or a subject, and 'YOU' is the third person or an object. Because 'YOU' judged as 'WE' is subordinate to the subjectiveness of 'I', and 'YOU' judged as 'THEY' is opposed to the subjectiveness. Both subordinates and opponents are not 'You' after all. Then, we can define 'Self' as 'i' who recurrently and complementarily generates from 'You', and 'Ego' as 'I' who subjectively and decisively classifies 'YOU' as subordinates or opponents. In other words, the consciousness of 'You' is a process of self-expression, and the signification of 'YOU' is a processing of ego-realization. These two aspects are also complementarily integrated into 'Jibun'. Hypothesis 1 takes the point of view of a baby in the interaction with its mother, and gives some assumptions on how to realize its 'demanding-ego'. Reversely, hypothesis 2 takes a point of view of a mother in the interaction with her baby, and gives some assumptions on how to express her 'contacting-self'. The demanding-ego illusionary develops its internal subjectiveness in the support of 'You', so that 'I' can dependently occupy the center of its phenomenal world. On the other hand, the contacting-self realistically acquires its external objectiveness for the support of 'You', so that 'i' can dependently share its ecological world. 'I' demands and expects how the world should go on, and so 'I' must be very conscious what might be assimilated by 'YOU' in the reflection. This process is called as feedback' in the figure 4. 'i' contacts and foresees how the world can go on, and so 'i' must investigate what can be accommodated by 'You' in the trial. This process is called as 'feedforward' in the figure 4. 'YOU' demonstrates standards to be accommodated for regulating the demanding-ego. And 'You' illustrates clues to be assimilated for planning the contacting-self. These recurrently on-going processes are integrated and illustrated into a kind of cybernetic system in the figure 4.