(40)Is it wrong, grammatically, to say "No More Hiroshima"?

Technically, the plural form is correct, but the singular form has come to be accepted.

"No More Hiroshima" is a kind of slogan representing the nuclear abolition movement. Though this phrase is often used, is it grammatically correct? I looked into this question.

First, I examined articles in old Chugoku Shimbun newspapers. To my surprise, I found Hiroshima used in the plural form: "No More Hiroshimas." It appeared on the front page of the Chugoku Shimbun on August 1, 1948, three years after the atomic bombing. The article stated that "The city, which was said would be barren earth for 75 years, has begun rising again as a city of peace with a cry of 'No More Hiroshimas!'" At the memorial ceremony on August 6 that year, this slogan, using the plural form, was displayed in English on a large sign.

I then asked Adam Beck, 46, an American who writes a column for English learners in the Japanese version of Peace Seeds, for his opinion. Adam explained that the expression "no more" would normally be followed by an object in the plural form. In other words, "Hiroshimas" is grammatically correct.

In fact, "Hiroshimas" was regularly used in Japanese newspapers until around 1955, when the singular form, "Hiroshima," began to appear more frequently. Kunihiro Shimazu, 66, a professor at Hijiyama University in Hiroshima, has been engaged in A-bomb and peace-related issues for many years. He believes it would be hard to point to specific incidents or arguments regarding this change; rather, it was more natural to use the singular form in Japanese because the plural form feels odd when written in Japanese katakana.

A sign with "NO MORE HIROSHIMAS" can be seen at the Peace Memorial Ceremony of August 6, 1948.

What is the history behind "No More Hiroshimas"?

According to Satoru Ubuki, 62, a professor at Hiroshima Jogakuin University who wrote the official history of the city, the first "No More Hiroshimas" appeared in an article of the Pacific Stars and Stripes, a newspaper published for U.S. military stationed abroad, on March 5, 1948. The article notes that Reverend Kiyoshi Tanimoto of Nagarekawa Church in Hiroshima called for a campaign to make August 6 "World Peace Day" with the hope that there would be "no more Hiroshimas."

This article was written by a reporter for United Press International, Rutherford M. Poats. Mr. Ubuki says it was the oldest mention of "Hiroshimas" among all the references he could confirm.

Before this article was found, it was believed that Wilfred Burchett, an Australian journalist, conceived the phrase "No More Hiroshimas" in an article dispatched from Hiroshima one month after the bombing for the "Daily Express," a British newspaper.

However, when the article was later checked by Hiroshima Prefecture, the phrase could not be found in the article. This fact was noted in the Chugoku Shimbun on January 19, 1972.

It seems the truth is that after the article by Mr. Poats appeared, a group led by Rev. Tanimoto developed the "No More Hiroshimas campaign" to establish August 6 as a day of remembrance. As the campaign grew, the slogan spread.

Finally, to answer the question this article posed, as to whether the singular or plural of "Hiroshima" should be used, I close with the thoughts of Hiroyuki Miyagawa, 79, an A-bomb survivor and a former English teacher at Motomachi High School in Hiroshima. Mr. Miyagawa told me that, strictly speaking, the plural form should be used, but since Hiroshima is a proper noun, the plural form feels unnatural. So, even if the singular form is wrong grammatically, it still effectively conveys the message of never repeating the tragedy. In this light, he believes use of the singular "Hiroshima" is therefore acceptable. (Keisuke Yoshihara, staff writer)