著者

Simon R. POTTER

出版者

The Association of Japanese Geographers

雑誌

地理学評論 (ISSN:13479555)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.76, no.12, pp.823-842, 2003-10-01 (Released:2008-12-25)

参考文献数

21

被引用文献数

1 1

---

Japan has a plenitude of maps on display to the public. Some of them are utilitarian “land diagrams” that have been designed simply to help people find places, but others also serve as advertisements or explanations and have pictorial embellishments. Six examples of the former and twelve of the latter are reproduced and commented on in this study, which aims to explain the artistic side of such maps by categorizing the types of illustrations (abstract symbols, symbolic resemblances, idealized portraits, realistic portraits, and cartoon characters) and to establish links between the contemporary embellished maps and Japanese maps from the past, as well as to styles of pictorial art that have flourished in the history of Japanese art.

著者

Simon R. POTTER

出版者

The Association of Japanese Geographers

雑誌

Geographical review of Japan, Series B (ISSN:02896001)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.74, no.1, pp.1-14, 2001-06-30 (Released:2008-12-25)

参考文献数

22

---

The history of Japanese cartography, not being well understood outside Japan, requires further attention for scholars who do not use Japanese, including expanding the existing body of foreign-language knowledge and further explanations. In this context, the present article examines the Japanese vocabulary for “map” and sheds light on how the Japanese have viewed maps as artifacts. After a brief on the English word “map, ” the Japanese words which have functioned as generic terms for “map” are discussed in regard to their origin, meanings, and usage, as well as the cultural forces that influenced their coinage and/or mainstream adoption. Following this is a demonstration that even today the question of what word to use for “map” in Japanese has not been settled, there being three commonly encountered words, two of which have semantic defects and the third being recently derived from “map.” The final section notes that the record indicates that the Japanese have not considered maps to be sufficiently distinct to require their own designation, as well as that content and an understanding of the relevant English vocabulary, not necessarily the Japanese, determine whether an artifact is a “map” or something else in English.