vocab book RE: Steve

[Guest guest]

Hi Steve

 

It is good to hear about that book what is the name of it as I would like to

read it. I also reccomend you read " Unification or Western Medicine &

Traditional " . Like the book your explaining he has managed to

translate TCM very effectively without all the confusing terminology why still

keeping the essense. I agree to often the solution is to water the theory down,

this a waste as you lose the complexity of TCM that makes it such an effective

and adaptable science.

 

Regards

 

Manu

 

Steven Slater <laozhongyi wrote:

 

 

On 03/10/2004, at 1:57 PM, skip8080 wrote:

>

> As i learn more about chinese language , I find wiseman to be

> " over-translated " ..I find myself looking

> up the definitions of his english terms in n english dictionary!

> but yes, the standardized TCM vocabulary maybe is not eloquent enough.

> I just cant bring myself to say " vacuous " when i mean " xu " .. ( :

> Skip

>

>

 

Hi Skip,

 

Wiseman is not over-translated at all IMO. It may initially seem so

because there are so many more terms and each one has its own English

word; this is in direct contrast to the previous " dumbed-down " approach

to translating Chinese medicine that most of us learnt in school. For

example, most are probably familiar with the term " tonify " , but perhaps

not with the numerous sub-groups of this term which Wiseman actually

translates such as " nourish " , " boost " , " warm " , " support " etc. These

terms are commonly used in Chinese and once learned actually begin to

reveal the inherent logic in TCM that was always missing when we are

limited by a simplified vocabulary.

 

I certainly understand your problems with terms like vacuity and

repletion for xu and shi (I am still attached to some degree to

deficieny and excess myself).......but this is ok too. The point is

that you know what the Chinese is or can look it up. The previous

practices of just saying " deficiency " for all related concepts of " xu "

or " tonify " for all related conepts of " bu " are terribly simplified and

lead to confusion in later practice or prevent one from really getting

to know the medicine as it actually is. There are several types and

terms of " xu " and " bu " related concepts; which before Wiseman came

along were simplified and lumped into " deficiency " and " tonify " . I am

confident that as you learn more about the Chinese language you will

pick up on some of the subtleties of terminology which are never

translated by other authors, but are nonetheless the standard in

Chinese medicine language used in Chinese.

 

Regarding having to look up definitions of his English terms in an

English dictionary; this is in many cases a deliberate strategy by

Wiseman to stop English speakers from assuming the exact meaning in

common English is what the term means in the context of TCM. What you

need to do is look up the definition of the term in his dictionary to

find the meaning. This is necessary in any science or profession;

common English terms are often used but have very specific meaning is

the context of the profession.

 

Wiseman's approach is not perfect and will improve over

time.........but it is the only system available that actually comes

close to the original Chinese in English to my knowledge.

 

Best Wishes,

 

Steve