Guest guest Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 Yehuda, Not much time right now, but I must disagree with you. If we are resigned to a 'Western mindset', we will never understand Chinese medicine properly, but will simply end up making Chinese medicine " in our own image " . And don't we have enough biomedicine already without turning tranditional medicines into another form of the same? I believe we need to create a 'virtual Chinese medicine mindset' by studying the classical medical texts and theory, and then translate that out clinically. There are accurate translations of terms and functions, and I don't know one reputable source left that still uses 'sedate' for the acupuncture treatment method of xie/drainage. With sedation there is no movement or circulation, and acupuncture/moxa always circulates the qi. Having said that, there is a lot in Chinese medicine that is universally understandable by both layperson and practitioner, i.e. hot, cold, supplement, drain, seasons, phases, etc. We just need to understand it in the original context before adapting it to conditions here in the West. The difficulty arises because of poor translation efforts at the beginning of the transmission of Chinese medicine to the West. It shows how easily poor translation can lead to long-term misunderstandings of root principles in our medicine. We are still using some of these terms and concepts today! This difficulty remains with many mainland Chinese translators, who do not adequately understand the target language and culture (English or other Western languages), and non-professional Western translators. Ideal is a team of native Chinese speakers who practice Chinese medicine who know English well with native English-speakers who know medical Chinese well. Lately, many texts have used this team approach to translation. Nigel Wiseman is a professional linguist, fluent in several languages. While other term choices may be valid for technical Chinese terms, I trust his judgment when it comes to English term choices. He has done the hard work and research, and if one is going to challenge his term choices, they need to have the chops to do so. . On May 7, 2009, at 11:38 AM, yehuda frischman wrote: > But returning to our original topic, let me posit another idea: > The medicine we practice in the English speaking Western world is > not the same as is practiced in the East, for the same reason: The > mindset that we bring to our practices is one that was formed by our > upbringing, education and environment. We think like Westerners, > whether we like it or not. Therefore, I would contend, that unless > we speak and think in Chinese when we see patients, we are fitting a > round peg into a square hole, by attempting to translate terms > literally, without considering the etymology of the English. Look > at Xie, Qing and Wen for example: When we look at the formula " Xie > Bai San, " it is translated as " Drain the White Powder. " Let's look > for a minute at the etymology of drain. Drain comes from the Middle > English term, " dreinen " which means to filter as in the quote by Sir > Francis Bacon, " Salt water, drained through twenty vessels of earth, > hath > become fresh. " This seems to fit nicely with the idea of gently > filtering the heat from the lungs which makes this formula so > effective for small children as opposed to " Qing " as in the formula > " Qing Fei Yin " which is translated as " Clear the Lungs Drink. " > Clear comes from the Old French " cler " which can mean free of > encumbrance. With this formula, phlegm is transformed and cleared > out, perhaps a little more aggressively. I can't comment on the tem > " Wen " because I am not familiar with its usage in Chinese, though I > would assume that it's implication is anesthesia. But if that's the > case, that would be very different than sedate. Anesthetize comes > from the Greek anaisthet which means without feeling. > > Let me summarize: 1. It would appear that Classic Chinese medicine > was more concerned with clinical signs rather than subjective > symptoms, in determining the terminological choices. 2. It is very > difficult, if not next to impossible for someone who is not equally > fluent in Chinese and English to clearly develop the mindset of the > ancient Chinese physician. It is difficult enough for the modern > Chinese physician/scholar. I would suggest as an ignorant outsider, > that this would be because the terminology is integrated and so > completely different from Western languages. 3. I would suggest > that as Westerners we need to take a two step process in proximating > what Chinese doctors meant in using Medical terminology: First, > Analyze carefully the context of the terms used in their original > text, and second, determine the etymological root of translated terms. > > Based upon the above three points, I come to a different conclusion > then heretofore: that the origin of the term sedate in English has > a very different connotation than the connotation of the term > anesthetize, and based upon the above discussion and research I > find it less objectionable to use it in the context that I chose, to > quiet the liver, which is very different than calming the liver. > > Thank you for your eminent challenge. Even if we agree to disagree > may our discussions have always have the same collegiality as Bais > Hillel and Bais Shammai: for the sake and pursuit of knowledge and > truth. > > Respectfully, > > > Yehuda Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine Pacific College of Oriental Medicine San Diego, Ca. 92122 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 I just remember Craig Mitchell's famous words at the CHA conference many years ago when he said, I thought if I learned Chinese things would be clearer. And also I remember my Chinese students who say that they prefer to read in English because the terminology is more precise to them than the original language. I totally agree with finding better words. No doubt about that. What I think is Western, if not English, is the desire for the precision of the language. I agree drain is often times better than sedate yet sometimes not. Especially as a student these terms are important but the more I practice the less the word takes precedent and more the action. Yes, with better words there would be less undoing the misunderstanding but I'm not sure that other misunderstandings are just as prevalent to the Chinese student. One of the delights I've found in the last few years is going back to those horribly translated Chinese books and understanding exactly what was going on and the depth there. doug , wrote: > > Dear friends and colleagues, >  > I want to let you in on an interesting conversation that I have begun with my esteemed friend from the south (relatively speaking, at least), Z'ev Rosenberg. Z'ev noted that I had used to term sedate in an inappropriate context, and so here is our conversation, thus far. I post this with the caveat that I would appreciate it if those of you who object to Nigel Wiseman's terminology, not bring up again this old cantankorous subject, as it has been addressed to death, and is not what we are discussing here, anyway.  Rather, the issue is what is our goal in translating--to convey a translation from Chinese which is as exact as possible, or to select a term in English whose etymology most closely represents what the Chinese term is conveying. Here goes: >  > Here was the comment that I  originally made: > > > " When we address a given imbalance, I think that the most important thing we need to do is look at the channels most affected, and most affecting, sedate one and tonify the other. Also to palpate, look and feel for tenderness, spasm, skin crease, lack of symmetry and weakness.  In my patients case, I sedated liver and tonified spleen and Dai, among other things. "   > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 Hi! Doug, I disagree with your Chinese students' preference of reading in English. I learned acupuncture and in the United State, but I always have to read Chinese text to make sure I got the good grasp of the concept. Maybe it is difficult to read Chinese classics. However I think it is essential to learn Chinese classics for following original track of thought from Chinese authors or their texts. It is easier to learn the basic concept in English, but there are a lot more within the classics, which can be missing during the translation. I remembered to be drilled to learn classics when I was in Taiwan. I have to pass the Chinese literature exam to translate classics to modern Chinese language in the high school and college. The bottom line is to find good translators who have good language skills of Chinese and English, with knowledge of Chinese medicine. Ta-Ya Lee, MSN, CRNP, MAc, LAc, MBA Johns Hopkins Community Physicians Wyman Park Internal Medicine Tel 410-338-3421 Fax 410-338-3413 Canton Crossing Integrative Medicine Tel 410-522-9940 Fax 410-522-9954 WARNING: E-mail sent over the Internet is not secure. Information sent by e-mail may not remain confidential. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 Doug, When do you think 'sedate' is a better translation than 'drain' for 'xie'? On May 7, 2009, at 2:57 PM, wrote: > > > I just remember Craig Mitchell's famous words at the CHA conference > many years ago when he said, I thought if I learned Chinese things > would be clearer. > And also I remember my Chinese students who say that they prefer to > read in English because the terminology is more precise to them than > the original language. > I totally agree with finding better words. No doubt about that. What > I think is Western, if not English, is the desire for the precision > of the language. I agree drain is often times better than sedate yet > sometimes not. Especially as a student these terms are important but > the more I practice the less the word takes precedent and more the > action. Yes, with better words there would be less undoing the > misunderstanding but I'm not sure that other misunderstandings are > just as prevalent to the Chinese student. One of the delights I've > found in the last few years is going back to those horribly > translated Chinese books and understanding exactly what was going on > and the depth there. > > doug > > - Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 I reporting what some students (not all) have said. Admittedly I am only teaching beginning students and as you say, " It is easier to learn the basic concept in English... " I am no way saying in my provocative comments that English could or should ever be the " lingua franca " of only that learning the authentic " word " is not the culprit. It is in the concept and that is not totally dependent on any one language or language skill set. And as you also say " but there are a lot more within the classics, which can be missing during the translation. " You have my complete agreement here. As I understand it, Chinese classics need to be translated into modern Chinese as well to be understood by the modern reader. Having done enough translation editing I know that one must be very careful not to simplify but also to identify redundancies and differentiate them from insights. Thanks for your comments, didn't mean to offend, Doug , " Ta-Ya Lee " <tlee19 wrote: > > Hi! Doug, > I disagree with your Chinese students' preference of reading in > English. > I learned acupuncture and in the United State, but I > always have to read Chinese text to make sure I got the good grasp of > the concept. Maybe it is difficult to read Chinese classics. However I > think it is essential to learn Chinese classics for following original > track of thought from Chinese authors or their texts. > It is easier to learn the basic concept in English, but there are a lot > more within the classics, which can be missing during the translation. > I remembered to be drilled to learn classics when I was in Taiwan. > I have to pass the Chinese literature exam to translate classics to > modern Chinese language in the high school and college. > The bottom line is to find good translators who have good language > skills of Chinese and English, with knowledge of Chinese medicine. > > Ta-Ya Lee, MSN, CRNP, MAc, LAc, MBA > Johns Hopkins Community Physicians > Wyman Park Internal Medicine > Tel 410-338-3421 Fax 410-338-3413 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 Hello Ta-Ya, I fully agree with you! I studied and worked in USA for many years but still much like reading in Chinese to acquire information about China. As to , actually not only I but also other peoples(TCM doctors) alway think that if one does not understand Chinese, we really doubt he/she can grasp the pith included in . As you already know that even to a native Chinese student in Chinese medicine, the language skill is required. By saying this, I hope not to upset those whose mother tongue is not Chinese, just want to stress the importance of the language skill. Pls take a look at our recent work, and to imagine how tough for us to translate these Chinese materials into English. I and my colleagues here are already exhausted in the job. http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XODkwMjAzNTY=.html With my education background as a graduate from one of the top ten univ. in USA and a pretigious univ. in China, from time to time I still feel lack of ability in doing the translation but reading the original. --- On Thu, 5/7/09, Ta-Ya Lee <tlee19 wrote: Ta-Ya Lee <tlee19 Re: Terminology and Etymology Thursday, May 7, 2009, 3:13 PM Hi! Doug, I disagree with your Chinese students' preference of reading in English. I learned acupuncture and in the United State, but I always have to read Chinese text to make sure I got the good grasp of the concept. Maybe it is difficult to read Chinese classics. However I think it is essential to learn Chinese classics for following original track of thought from Chinese authors or their texts. It is easier to learn the basic concept in English, but there are a lot more within the classics, which can be missing during the translation. I remembered to be drilled to learn classics when I was in Taiwan. I have to pass the Chinese literature exam to translate classics to modern Chinese language in the high school and college. The bottom line is to find good translators who have good language skills of Chinese and English, with knowledge of Chinese medicine. Ta-Ya Lee, MSN, CRNP, MAc, LAc, MBA Johns Hopkins Community Physicians Wyman Park Internal Medicine Tel 410-338-3421 Fax 410-338-3413 Canton Crossing Integrative Medicine Tel 410-522-9940 Fax 410-522-9954 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 Dear friends and colleagues,  I want to let you in on an interesting conversation that I have begun with my esteemed friend from the south (relatively speaking, at least), Z'ev Rosenberg. Z'ev noted that I had used to term sedate in an inappropriate context, and so here is our conversation, thus far. I post this with the caveat that I would appreciate it if those of you who object to Nigel Wiseman's terminology, not bring up again this old cantankorous subject, as it has been addressed to death, and is not what we are discussing here, anyway.  Rather, the issue is what is our goal in translating--to convey a translation from Chinese which is as exact as possible, or to select a term in English whose etymology most closely represents what the Chinese term is conveying. Here goes:  Here was the comment that I  originally made: " When we address a given imbalance, I think that the most important thing we need to do is look at the channels most affected, and most affecting, sedate one and tonify the other. Also to palpate, look and feel for tenderness, spasm, skin crease, lack of symmetry and weakness.  In my patients case, I sedated liver and tonified spleen and Dai, among other things. "   and here was Z'ev's concern:  " Just wanted to point out privately that there is no such thing as 'sedation' in Chinese acupuncture.  The terms are bu/supplement, and xie/drain.  Sedation means to numb, to put to sleep.  That is not what acupuncture does (unless you inject the point with lidocaine).  I know half the profession still uses these terms, but they are simply wrong. "  Yehuda:  " Thank you for the reminder. Unfortunately, because there is not standardized terminology, and in both lectures, articles and books bu and xie are translated as tonify and sedate, one tends to become a creature of habit.  That being said, consider if you would,  that the etymological source of " sedate " is the Latin: sedatus which means to compose, moderate, or quiet, which is pretty accurate as to what we are trying to do with an overactive liver, no? Maybe the exact translation of the term xie is drain, but are we attempting to lessen the volume of a replete liver, in terms of its content (as in draining a sink) or are we attempting to calm a hyperactive child, as it were?  It seems to me that the action would be more similar to the latter. The source of tonify on the other hand, is the Greek, Tonus, which means to stretch, as in a rope. Bu doesn't seem to convey that meaning, and in that case I would agree, that the action could more accurately be called supplementing.  I think that more important than exactly translating the terminology, sometimes it is important to choose a more interpretive translation when trying to convey a certain concept in a different language. I find that frequently in Hebrew, too, that when I translate exactly, the gist of the meaning is lost.  This is an interesting idea to exchange. I wouldn't mind posting it on CHA and TCM if you aren't opposed to it. "   Z'ev:  " Not opposed at all. . . One clarification that may be helpful is that with acupuncture/moxa we are dealing with channels primarily, and literally moving qi in specific ways, to and from channels and points.  The direct visceral relationships are not the same as with herbal medicine, i.e. shu gan, or calm the liver, which is different entirely.  Patients may feel more calm or relaxed during and after acupuncture, but this is a result of balancing the channels, not of a physiological 'sedation'.   The term for sedate or sedation in chinese is wen3 稳 . . ..  Now to continue our discussion:  This brings up another interesting idea to consider: do the terms that we use to describe therapeutic actions reflect the objective physiological change in the patient or their subjective sensation. It would seem to me that the Chinese are more concerned with the former, as reflected in changes in the pulse.  But returning to our original topic, let me posit another idea: The medicine we practice in the English speaking Western world is not the same as is practiced in the East, for the same reason: The mindset that we bring to our practices is one that was formed by our upbringing, education and environment. We think like Westerners, whether we like it or not. Therefore, I would contend, that unless we speak and think in Chinese when we see patients, we are fitting a round peg into a square hole, by attempting to translate terms literally, without considering the etymology of the English. Look at Xie, Qing and Wen for example: When we look at the formula " Xie Bai San, " it is translated as " Drain the White Powder. "   Let's look for a minute at the etymology of drain. Drain comes from the Middle English term, " dreinen " which means to filter as in the quote by Sir Francis Bacon, " Salt water, drained through twenty vessels of earth, hath become fresh. "  This seems to fit nicely with the idea of gently filtering the heat from the lungs which makes this formula so effective for small children as opposed to " Qing " as in the formula " Qing Fei Yin " which is translated as " Clear the Lungs Drink. "  Clear comes from the Old French " cler " which can mean free of encumbrance. With this formula, phlegm is transformed and cleared out, perhaps a little more aggressively. I can't comment on the tem  " Wen " because I am not familiar with its usage in Chinese, though I would assume that it's implication is anesthesia. But if that's the case, that would be very different than sedate. Anesthetize comes from the Greek anaisthet which means without feeling.  Let me summarize: 1. It would appear that Classic Chinese medicine was more concerned with clinical signs rather than subjective symptoms, in determining the terminological choices. 2. It is very difficult, if not next to impossible for someone who is not equally fluent in Chinese and English to clearly develop the mindset of the ancient Chinese physician. It is difficult enough for the modern Chinese physician/scholar. I would suggest as an ignorant outsider, that  this would be because the terminology is integrated and  so completely different from Western languages. 3. I would suggest that as Westerners we need to take a two step process in proximating what Chinese doctors meant in using Medical terminology: First, Analyze carefully the context of the terms used in their original text, and second, determine the etymological root of translated terms.   Based upon the above three points, I come to a different conclusion then heretofore: that the origin of the term sedate in English has a very different connotation than the connotation of the term anesthetize, and based upon the above discussion and research I find it less objectionable to use it in the context that I chose, to quiet the liver, which is very different than calming the liver.  Thank you for your eminent challenge. Even if we agree to disagree may our discussions have always have the same collegiality as Bais Hillel and Bais Shammai: for the sake and pursuit of knowledge and truth.  Respectfully,   Yehuda Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 On May 7, 2009, at 2:38 PM, yehuda frischman wrote: > The mindset that we bring to our practices is one that was formed > by our upbringing, education and environment. We think like > Westerners, whether we like it or not. I think each individual's mindset is, well, individual. Personally, I think I have a feel for eastern forms of medicine and ways of understanding the body that seem to have little to do with my upbringing, education and environment as a westerner. My own way of explaining this to myself, at least at this point in time, is that it has to do with embodiment. From my own sense of embodiment of acupuncture channels and Qi, I have no problem at all with the idea of " draining " or " redirecting " the flow of Qi. RoseAnne Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 Yehuda, Not much time right now, but I must disagree with you. If we are resigned to a 'Western mindset', we will never understand Chinese medicine properly, but will simply end up making Chinese medicine " in our own image " . And don't we have enough biomedicine already without turning tranditional medicines into another form of the same? I believe we need to create a 'virtual Chinese medicine mindset' by studying the classical medical texts and theory, and then translate that out clinically. There are accurate translations of terms and functions, and I don't know one reputable source left that still uses 'sedate' for the acupuncture treatment method of xie/drainage. With sedation there is no movement or circulation, and acupuncture/moxa always circulates the qi. Having said that, there is a lot in Chinese medicine that is universally understandable by both layperson and practitioner, i.e. hot, cold, supplement, drain, seasons, phases, etc. We just need to understand it in the original context before adapting it to conditions here in the West. The difficulty arises because of poor translation efforts at the beginning of the transmission of Chinese medicine to the West. It shows how easily poor translation can lead to long-term misunderstandings of root principles in our medicine. We are still using some of these terms and concepts today! This difficulty remains with many mainland Chinese translators, who do not adequately understand the target language and culture (English or other Western languages), and non-professional Western translators. Ideal is a team of native Chinese speakers who practice Chinese medicine who know English well with native English-speakers who know medical Chinese well. Lately, many texts have used this team approach to translation. Nigel Wiseman is a professional linguist, fluent in several languages. While other term choices may be valid for technical Chinese terms, I trust his judgment when it comes to English term choices. He has done the hard work and research, and if one is going to challenge his term choices, they need to have the chops to do so. . On May 7, 2009, at 11:38 AM, yehuda frischman wrote: > But returning to our original topic, let me posit another idea: > The medicine we practice in the English speaking Western world is > not the same as is practiced in the East, for the same reason: The > mindset that we bring to our practices is one that was formed by our > upbringing, education and environment. We think like Westerners, > whether we like it or not. Therefore, I would contend, that unless > we speak and think in Chinese when we see patients, we are fitting a > round peg into a square hole, by attempting to translate terms > literally, without considering the etymology of the English. Look > at Xie, Qing and Wen for example: When we look at the formula " Xie > Bai San, " it is translated as " Drain the White Powder. " Let's look > for a minute at the etymology of drain. Drain comes from the Middle > English term, " dreinen " which means to filter as in the quote by Sir > Francis Bacon, " Salt water, drained through twenty vessels of earth, > hath > become fresh. " This seems to fit nicely with the idea of gently > filtering the heat from the lungs which makes this formula so > effective for small children as opposed to " Qing " as in the formula > " Qing Fei Yin " which is translated as " Clear the Lungs Drink. " > Clear comes from the Old French " cler " which can mean free of > encumbrance. With this formula, phlegm is transformed and cleared > out, perhaps a little more aggressively. I can't comment on the tem > " Wen " because I am not familiar with its usage in Chinese, though I > would assume that it's implication is anesthesia. But if that's the > case, that would be very different than sedate. Anesthetize comes > from the Greek anaisthet which means without feeling. > Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine Pacific College of Oriental Medicine San Diego, Ca. 92122 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 Yehuda, Based on what your wrote, it seems " sedation " could fit with herbalism/formulaism as there are some herbs that do have sedative effects, however, " clearing " and " draining " can fit for certain categories as well. " Draining " and " unobstructing " does make a lot more sense for acupuncture channels/ points, while " sedating " is certainly an inaccurate term for opening / clearing the channels through acupuncture. Does Nigel Wiseman / Bensky / Unschuld / Scheid make that distinction... between acupuncture terminology and herbal terminology? K On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 11:38 AM, wrote: > > > Dear friends and colleagues, > > I want to let you in on an interesting conversation that I have begun with > my esteemed friend from the south (relatively speaking, at least), Z'ev > Rosenberg. Z'ev noted that I had used to term sedate in an inappropriate > context, and so here is our conversation, thus far. I post this with the > caveat that I would appreciate it if those of you who object to Nigel > Wiseman's terminology, not bring up again this old cantankorous subject, as > it has been addressed to death, and is not what we are discussing here, > anyway. Rather, the issue is what is our goal in translating--to convey a > translation from Chinese which is as exact as possible, or to select a term > in English whose etymology most closely represents what the Chinese term > is conveying. Here goes: > > Here was the comment that I originally made: > > " When we address a given imbalance, I think that the most important thing > we need to do is look at the channels most affected, and most affecting, > sedate one and tonify the other. Also to palpate, look and feel for > tenderness, spasm, skin crease, lack of symmetry and weakness. In my > patients case, I sedated liver and tonified spleen and Dai, among other > things. " > > and here was Z'ev's concern: > > " Just wanted to point out privately that there is no such thing as > 'sedation' in Chinese acupuncture. The terms are bu/supplement, and > xie/drain. Sedation means to numb, to put to sleep. That is not what > acupuncture does (unless you inject the point with lidocaine). I know half > the profession still uses these terms, but they are simply wrong. " > > Yehuda: > > " Thank you for the reminder. Unfortunately, because there is not > standardized terminology, and in both lectures, articles and books bu and > xie are translated as tonify and sedate, one tends to become a creature of > habit. > > That being said, consider if you would, that the etymological source > of " sedate " is the Latin: sedatus which means to compose, moderate, > or quiet, which is pretty accurate as to what we are trying to do with an > overactive liver, no? Maybe the exact translation of the term xie is drain, > but are we attempting to lessen the volume of a replete liver, in terms of > its content (as in draining a sink) or are we attempting to calm a > hyperactive child, as it were? It seems to me that the action would be > more similar to the latter. The source of tonify on the other hand, > is the Greek, Tonus, which means to stretch, as in a rope. Bu doesn't seem > to convey that meaning, and in that case I would agree, that the action > could more accurately be called supplementing. > > I think that more important than exactly translating the terminology, > sometimes it is important to choose a more interpretive translation when > trying to convey a certain concept in a different language. I find that > frequently in Hebrew, too, that when I translate exactly, the gist of the > meaning is lost. > > This is an interesting idea to exchange. I wouldn't mind posting it on CHA > and TCM if you aren't opposed to it. " > > Z'ev: > > " Not opposed at all. . . > > One clarification that may be helpful is that with acupuncture/moxa we are > dealing with channels primarily, and literally moving qi in specific ways, > to and from channels and points. The direct visceral relationships are not > the same as with herbal medicine, i.e. shu gan, or calm the liver, which is > different entirely. Patients may feel more calm or relaxed during and after > acupuncture, but this is a result of balancing the channels, not of a > physiological 'sedation'. > > The term for sedate or sedation in chinese is wen3 ÎÈ . . .. > > Now to continue our discussion: > > This brings up another interesting idea to consider: do the terms that we > use to describe therapeutic actions reflect the objective physiological > change in the patient or their subjective sensation. It would seem to me > that the Chinese are more concerned with the former, as reflected in changes > in the pulse. > > But returning to our original topic, let me posit another idea: The > medicine we practice in the English speaking Western world is not the same > as is practiced in the East, for the same reason: The mindset that we bring > to our practices is one that was formed by our upbringing, education and > environment. We think like Westerners, whether we like it or not. > Therefore, I would contend, that unless we speak and think in Chinese when > we see patients, we are fitting a round peg into a square hole, by > attempting to translate terms literally, without considering the etymology > of the English. Look at Xie, Qing and Wen for example: When we look at the > formula " Xie Bai San, " it is translated as " Drain the White Powder. " Let's > look for a minute at the etymology of drain. Drain comes from the Middle > English term, " dreinen " which means to filter as in the quote by Sir Francis > Bacon, " Salt water, drained through twenty vessels of earth, hath > become fresh. " This seems to fit nicely with the idea of gently filtering > the heat from the lungs which makes this formula so effective for small > children as opposed to " Qing " as in the formula " Qing Fei Yin " which is > translated as " Clear the Lungs Drink. " Clear comes from the Old French > " cler " which can mean free of encumbrance. With this formula, phlegm is > transformed and cleared out, perhaps a little more aggressively. I can't > comment on the tem " Wen " because I am not familiar with its usage in > Chinese, though I would assume that it's implication is anesthesia. But if > that's the case, that would be very different than sedate. Anesthetize comes > from the Greek anaisthet which means without feeling. > > Let me summarize: 1. It would appear that Classic Chinese medicine was > more concerned with clinical signs rather than subjective symptoms, in > determining the terminological choices. 2. It is very difficult, if not > next to impossible for someone who is not equally fluent in Chinese and > English to clearly develop the mindset of the ancient Chinese physician. It > is difficult enough for the modern Chinese physician/scholar. I would > suggest as an ignorant outsider, that this would be because the > terminology is integrated and so completely different from Western > languages. 3. I would suggest that as Westerners we need to take a two > step process in proximating what Chinese doctors meant in using Medical > terminology: First, Analyze carefully the context of the terms used in their > original text, and second, determine the etymological root of translated > terms. > > Based upon the above three points, I come to a different conclusion then > heretofore: that the origin of the term sedate in English has a very > different connotation than the connotation of the term anesthetize, and > based upon the above discussion and research I find it less objectionable > to use it in the context that I chose, to quiet the liver, which is very > different than calming the liver. > > Thank you for your eminent challenge. Even if we agree to disagree may our > discussions have always have the same collegiality as Bais Hillel and Bais > Shammai: for the sake and pursuit of knowledge and truth. > > Respectfully, > > > Yehuda > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 My dear friend Z'ev, In my very humble and insignifcant opinion, I believe that the approach you are taking is dogmatic. Just because no one of stature chooses to use the term sedate to describe the phenomenon of calming an irritable and replete liver, doesn't mean that its use doesn't have merit. That is specifically why I, as an English speaker, chose to delve into the etymological root of the word, to understand as best as possible what the original intent may have been before modern usage bastardized it. And it seems to be a very appropriate word to describe a process that we undertake as clinicians. I would add, though, that I think that the main problem that we have is with action verbs. It is there that our controversy seems to be playing out. I admire your attempt to " think " Chinese, but as with Hebrew, which I am fluent in, it is a great leap to go from being able to read and even speak a foreign language, while still thinking in English, to get to the point where one actually thinks in the language. I still think in English, and sometimes make silly mistakes in translating literally, when engaging in Hebrew conversations. When I studied in Israel for two years, and lived in an all Hebrew speaking environment, it took me about 3 months before I actually realized that I was thinking in Hebrew. But that was when I was 22. As we age, we become less resilient and its much harder to get back that thought process now in my late 50s, though I speak to patients and family in Hebrew nearly daily. " Ah but I was so much older than, I'm younger than that now " The point I'm trying to make is that sure it's possible, but I would suggest that it's very, very difficult to get yourself to think in a foreign language, and especially, and especially for a Westerner, if that language is Chinese which is unlike any Western language, even more so than Hebrew. And without thinking in Chinese, I don't believe that it's possible to develop a Chinese mindset. That being said, I am not suggesting that it is appropriate to create a new Bio-medically savvy, interpretive Western Chinese medicine. If that evolves in the next 100 years, it may not be a bad thing, necessarily. But as our sages say, " Who is the wise person, the one who learns from all people. " We live in a world of tremendous opportunities to acquire information. There is tremendous connectivity and many are attempting all kinds of eclectic blendings of old and new. I feel that if we patiently are able to develop viable theory behind successful clinical practice than we can grow a wonderful branch onto the beautiful Chinese medical tree. But it has to be connected to the trunk, and it has to be connected to the roots. Otherwise it won't have the integrity or viability to survive. This is the foolishness of the New Age movement, in my opinion. Either it is rootless, or its roots come from paganism. I don't think it will last any longer than its flim flam salesmen who hawk their wares at health consciousness conventions, are around. There is much wisdom in the West as well as the East. Let us use the method that we have acquired wisdom, to continue to due so, but without the arrogance of claiming soemthing which we adapt is our birthright. Having said that, there is a lot in Chinese medicine that is universally understandable by both layperson and practitioner, i.e. hot, cold, supplement, drain, seasons, phases, etc. We just need to understand it in the original context before adapting it to conditions here in the West. As I said to RoseAnne, I am very concerned with the laxity in which terms are interchanged in English without precision. This is why I feel that understanding etymology is essential in this adaptation process. Unfortunately, we don't agree, otherwise, I don't think that you would have a problem with my usage of sedation as a term which implies calming, and different from anesthetizing. The difficulty arises because of poor translation efforts at the beginning of the transmission of Chinese medicine to the West. It shows how easily poor translation can lead to long-term misunderstandings of root principles in our medicine. We are still using some of these terms and concepts today! This difficulty remains with many mainland Chinese translators, who do not adequately understand the target language and culture (English or other Western languages), and non-professional Western translators. Ideal is a team of native Chinese speakers who practice Chinese medicine who know English well with native English-speakers who know medical Chinese well. Lately, many texts have used this team approach to translation. I agree with you, but being able to speak and think in English is not enough. Language needs to be studied with precision, and, as I said earlier, when terms connoting actions, meaning verbs are considered, it is essential the the source of the verb be considered in order to be viable. I would suggest that the same process needs to take place in Chinese--that the Radicals need to be considered when understanding the characters. Nigel Wiseman is a professional linguist, fluent in several languages. While other term choices may be valid for technical Chinese terms, I trust his judgment when it comes to English term choices. He has done the hard work and research, and if one is going to challenge his term choices, they need to have the chops to do so. . I am not in any way questioning the wisdom of the choices that an eminent scholar such as he may have chosen. But I am not interested in translating terms. I am interesting in understanding what idea is being conveyed, and what the terms mean. Looking in a dictionary to figure out arcane or scholarly English terminology does not explain to me what a given action is meant necessarily. That is why etymology is so important, and like I said, both ways, and if a term cannot be translated appropriately in one word, then it should be left with a description rather than a lame one word proximation which helps neither scholar nor clinician. Respectfully, --- On Thu, 5/7/09, <zrosenbe wrote: <zrosenbe Re: Terminology and Etymology Thursday, May 7, 2009, 12:30 PM Yehuda, Not much time right now, but I must disagree with you. If we are resigned to a 'Western mindset', we will never understand Chinese medicine properly, but will simply end up making Chinese medicine " in our own image " . And don't we have enough biomedicine already without turning tranditional medicines into another form of the same? I believe we need to create a 'virtual Chinese medicine mindset' by studying the classical medical texts and theory, and then translate that out clinically. There are accurate translations of terms and functions, and I don't know one reputable source left that still uses 'sedate' for the acupuncture treatment method of xie/drainage. With sedation there is no movement or circulation, and acupuncture/ moxa always circulates the qi. Having said that, there is a lot in Chinese medicine that is universally understandable by both layperson and practitioner, i.e. hot, cold, supplement, drain, seasons, phases, etc. We just need to understand it in the original context before adapting it to conditions here in the West. The difficulty arises because of poor translation efforts at the beginning of the transmission of Chinese medicine to the West. It shows how easily poor translation can lead to long-term misunderstandings of root principles in our medicine. We are still using some of these terms and concepts today! This difficulty remains with many mainland Chinese translators, who do not adequately understand the target language and culture (English or other Western languages), and non-professional Western translators. Ideal is a team of native Chinese speakers who practice Chinese medicine who know English well with native English-speakers who know medical Chinese well. Lately, many texts have used this team approach to translation. Nigel Wiseman is a professional linguist, fluent in several languages. While other term choices may be valid for technical Chinese terms, I trust his judgment when it comes to English term choices. He has done the hard work and research, and if one is going to challenge his term choices, they need to have the chops to do so. . On May 7, 2009, at 11:38 AM, yehuda frischman wrote: > But returning to our original topic, let me posit another idea: > The medicine we practice in the English speaking Western world is > not the same as is practiced in the East, for the same reason: The > mindset that we bring to our practices is one that was formed by our > upbringing, education and environment. We think like Westerners, > whether we like it or not. Therefore, I would contend, that unless > we speak and think in Chinese when we see patients, we are fitting a > round peg into a square hole, by attempting to translate terms > literally, without considering the etymology of the English. Look > at Xie, Qing and Wen for example: When we look at the formula " Xie > Bai San, " it is translated as " Drain the White Powder. " Let's look > for a minute at the etymology of drain. Drain comes from the Middle > English term, " dreinen " which means to filter as in the quote by Sir > Francis Bacon, " Salt water, drained through twenty vessels of earth, > hath > become fresh. " This seems to fit nicely with the idea of gently > filtering the heat from the lungs which makes this formula so > effective for small children as opposed to " Qing " as in the formula > " Qing Fei Yin " which is translated as " Clear the Lungs Drink. " > Clear comes from the Old French " cler " which can mean free of > encumbrance. With this formula, phlegm is transformed and cleared > out, perhaps a little more aggressively. I can't comment on the tem > " Wen " because I am not familiar with its usage in Chinese, though I > would assume that it's implication is anesthesia. But if that's the > case, that would be very different than sedate. Anesthetize comes > from the Greek anaisthet which means without feeling. > > Let me summarize: 1. It would appear that Classic Chinese medicine > was more concerned with clinical signs rather than subjective > symptoms, in determining the terminological choices. 2. It is very > difficult, if not next to impossible for someone who is not equally > fluent in Chinese and English to clearly develop the mindset of the > ancient Chinese physician. It is difficult enough for the modern > Chinese physician/scholar. I would suggest as an ignorant outsider, > that this would be because the terminology is integrated and so > completely different from Western languages. 3. I would suggest > that as Westerners we need to take a two step process in proximating > what Chinese doctors meant in using Medical terminology: First, > Analyze carefully the context of the terms used in their original > text, and second, determine the etymological root of translated terms. > > Based upon the above three points, I come to a different conclusion > then heretofore: that the origin of the term sedate in English has > a very different connotation than the connotation of the term > anesthetize, and based upon the above discussion and research I > find it less objectionable to use it in the context that I chose, to > quiet the liver, which is very different than calming the liver. > > Thank you for your eminent challenge. Even if we agree to disagree > may our discussions have always have the same collegiality as Bais > Hillel and Bais Shammai: for the sake and pursuit of knowledge and > truth. > > Respectfully, > > > Yehuda Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine Pacific College of Oriental Medicine San Diego, Ca. 92122 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 Thank you. You are confirming exactly my point. I assume that you are native Chinese and that you learned English as a second language. Please correct me if I am wrong. But the point is that I feel English speaker who are able to read and understand Chinese, but don't think Chinese miss out on the subtle nuances which every language conveys. It is as if each culture is a different species. I have a friend who is Chinese and who was born and raised in Singapore. She is perfectly bi-lingual, and was raised on both languages, but when she went to China, everyone she met knew that she was a gringo, a foreigner. By the way she spoke Mandarin, by the way she dressed, and even by the way she walked. Its just the way it is, and it doesn't mean that English speaking practitioners or students of Chinese classics can't develop scholarship or clinical excellence which exceeds that of scholars and practitioners in China. But the practice may be different, and the scholarship will be unique. But this endeavor, this pursuit of excellence I feel must be predicated on three requirements and prerequisites-- 1. scholarship on the highest level, of original texts (much as Z'ev and others are pursuing) and learning directly from scholars. 2. Absolute integrity to sources, in the pursuit of truth, and 3. The humility to recognize one's limitations which comes with greatness. respectfully, --- On Thu, 5/7/09, Steve Qi <wxy123w wrote: Steve Qi <wxy123w Re: Re: Terminology and Etymology , tlee19 Thursday, May 7, 2009, 6:07 PM Hello Ta-Ya, I fully agree with you! I studied and worked in USA for many years but still much like reading in Chinese to acquire information about China. As to , actually not only I but also other peoples(TCM doctors) alway think that if one does not understand Chinese, we really doubt he/she can grasp the pith included in . As you already know that even to a native Chinese student in Chinese medicine, the language skill is required. By saying this, I hope not to upset those whose mother tongue is not Chinese, just want to stress the importance of the language skill. Pls take a look at our recent work, and to imagine how tough for us to translate these Chinese materials into English. I and my colleagues here are already exhausted in the job. http://v.youku. com/v_show/ id_XODkwMjAzNTY= .html With my education background as a graduate from one of the top ten univ. in USA and a pretigious univ. in China, from time to time I still feel lack of ability in doing the translation but reading the original. --- On Thu, 5/7/09, Ta-Ya Lee <tlee19 (AT) jhmi (DOT) edu> wrote: Ta-Ya Lee <tlee19 (AT) jhmi (DOT) edu> Re: Terminology and Etymology Thursday, May 7, 2009, 3:13 PM Hi! Doug, I disagree with your Chinese students' preference of reading in English. I learned acupuncture and in the United State, but I always have to read Chinese text to make sure I got the good grasp of the concept. Maybe it is difficult to read Chinese classics. However I think it is essential to learn Chinese classics for following original track of thought from Chinese authors or their texts. It is easier to learn the basic concept in English, but there are a lot more within the classics, which can be missing during the translation. I remembered to be drilled to learn classics when I was in Taiwan. I have to pass the Chinese literature exam to translate classics to modern Chinese language in the high school and college. The bottom line is to find good translators who have good language skills of Chinese and English, with knowledge of Chinese medicine. Ta-Ya Lee, MSN, CRNP, MAc, LAc, MBA Johns Hopkins Community Physicians Wyman Park Internal Medicine Tel 410-338-3421 Fax 410-338-3413 Canton Crossing Integrative Medicine Tel 410-522-9940 Fax 410-522-9954 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 My dear friend Yehuda, A couple of points here: 1) I was responding to your original example, which was an acupuncture treatment performed in your clinical program. There isn't any way that one can translate xie as 'sedate' in acupuncture. Nearly all modern translators, including those working with Eastland Press, have abandoned sedate as an equivalent for xie. Sedate is wrong etymologically and clinically speaking. It leads to a serious misconception as to how acupuncture and moxabustion work. 2) In herbal medicine, certainly one can describe liver drainage in different ways and use different terms and/or approaches, but again one wouldn't translate xie as sedate or sedation. I don't think you'd find one Chinese dictionary, either medical or general, that would do so. There are terms such as calm or level/ping2 平 , subdue/qian2 潜, or settle or calm/zhen4 镇. 3) Certainly flexibility in translation is important, but there are rules to language and term choice. My only point is that sedate or sedation is never the correct choice for xie, especially in acupuncture, and I will not budge on that, 'dogmatic' as it may be. . . On May 7, 2009, at 8:21 PM, yehuda frischman wrote: > > My dear friend Z'ev, > > In my very humble and insignifcant opinion, I believe that the > approach you are taking is dogmatic. Just because no one of stature > chooses to use the term sedate to describe the phenomenon of calming > an irritable and replete liver, doesn't mean that its use doesn't > have merit. That is specifically why I, as an English speaker, > chose to delve into the etymological root of the word, to understand > as best as possible what the original intent may have been before > modern usage bastardized it. And it seems to be a very appropriate > word to describe a process that we undertake as clinicians. I would > add, though, that I think that the main problem that we have is with > action verbs. It is there that our controversy seems to be playing > out. Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine Pacific College of Oriental Medicine San Diego, Ca. 92122 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 7, 2009 Report Share Posted May 7, 2009 I really hate to put my two cents in her anymore. but a great chinese teacher said to me 40 years ago, don't waste time learning chinese now, I am telling you what you need to know in english. so whatever --- On Thu, 5/7/09, wrote: Re: Terminology and Etymology Thursday, May 7, 2009, 5:57 PM I just remember Craig Mitchell's famous words at the CHA conference many years ago when he said, I thought if I learned Chinese things would be clearer. And also I remember my Chinese students who say that they prefer to read in English because the terminology is more precise to them than the original language. I totally agree with finding better words. No doubt about that. What I think is Western, if not English, is the desire for the precision of the language. I agree drain is often times better than sedate yet sometimes not. Especially as a student these terms are important but the more I practice the less the word takes precedent and more the action. Yes, with better words there would be less undoing the misunderstanding but I'm not sure that other misunderstandings are just as prevalent to the Chinese student. One of the delights I've found in the last few years is going back to those horribly translated Chinese books and understanding exactly what was going on and the depth there. doug , @.. .> wrote: > > Dear friends and colleagues, >  > I want to let you in on an interesting conversation that I have begun with my esteemed friend from the south (relatively speaking, at least), Z'ev Rosenberg. Z'ev noted that I had used to term sedate in an inappropriate context, and so here is our conversation, thus far. I post this with the caveat that I would appreciate it if those of you who object to Nigel Wiseman's terminology, not bring up again this old cantankorous subject, as it has been addressed to death, and is not what we are discussing here, anyway.  Rather, the issue is what is our goal in translating- -to convey a translation from Chinese which is as exact as possible, or to select a term in English whose etymology most closely represents what the Chinese term is conveying. Here goes: >  > Here was the comment that I  originally made: > > > " When we address a given imbalance, I think that the most important thing we need to do is look at the channels most affected, and most affecting, sedate one and tonify the other. Also to palpate, look and feel for tenderness, spasm, skin crease, lack of symmetry and weakness.  In my patients case, I sedated liver and tonified spleen and Dai, among other things. "   > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 Dear Z'ev,  " 1) I was responding to your original example, which was an acupuncture treatment performed in your clinical program. "  I got lost in the woods--can you clarify what this statement is referring to? There isn't any way that one can translate xie as 'sedate' in acupuncture. Nearly all modern translators, including those working with Eastland Press, have abandoned sedate as an equivalent for xie. Sedate is wrong etymologically and clinically speaking. It leads to a serious misconception as to how acupuncture and moxabustion work. Unfortunately, you misunderstood my point as well as my intention. You are working backwards: I am not, in the least contending that sedate is a translation of xie. Rather, concerning this point I am asking two questions, one of which I answer and one of which I don't. Let me state them again:  1.  My original statement was that I feel that when I am describing the pattern of edginess and exhuberance of the liver in a patient, which is a state of repletion, the descripton that I gave was sedation, meaning calming. I found support for this English speaker's description from the etymological root of sedate: sedatus which means to compose, moderate, or quiet. The point is that I was not translating a Chinese term, but rather describing a clinical state. Any disagreement?  2. I questioned the wisdom of using the term " drain " as the translation of Xie, based upon the same concept. If one looks at the etymological root of drain, one finds that is comes from the Middle English term, " dreinen " which means to filter. If you recall, I brought an example of its usage  by Sir Francis Bacon, in the quote " Salt water, drained through twenty vessels of earth, hath become fresh. "  This implies a gentle filtering, rather than the current English connotation of draining out water from a sink, which has a more aggressive connotation to my understanding.  I am therefore not making any suggestions per se as to what Xie should be translated by, but wonder what those such as Wiseman and Bensky were thinking when they  chose to translate xie as drain, which has a different modern connotation from its etymological root. If their intention was to express the original meaning then maybe a better translation might be filter, and if their intention was to express the modern connotation than maybe a better translation might be something which connotes removing liquid.  All I ask for is clarity which I don't get from the word drain, to describe accurately what the action of xie is.   2) In herbal medicine, certainly one can describe liver drainage in different ways and use different terms and/or approaches, but again one wouldn't translate xie as sedate or sedation. I don't think you'd find one Chinese dictionary, either medical or general, that would do so. There are terms such as calm or level/ping2 平 , subdue/qian2 潜, or settle or calm/zhen4 镇.  Again, no argument. I am not attempting to define or translate xie. On the contrary I am asking for clarity. But here again, you are reinforcing the problem that I have. We need to understand ourselves first, and then we need to teach our students the specific inuendos and differences between the actions which are expressed by the words ping, qian, zhen, as well as the other two mentioned in our discussions qing and of course xie.  Certainly flexibility in translation is important, but there are rules to language and term choice. My only point is that sedate or sedation is never the correct choice for xie, especially in acupuncture, and I will not budge on that, 'dogmatic' as it may be. . .  Z'ev, the dogmatism I was referring to was to accept translations lock, stock and barrel, without considering other options. Even scholars make mistakes, and if the connotation of a term can be conveyed better by a different word, I am suggesting that it should be considered. But again, for the 3rd time, I never suggested that the correct translation of xie as sedate.     Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 Dear Roseanne, I completely respect what you are saying, and perhaps you are able to apply a precision understanding to the complex poetic language of Chinese medical language. My impression in the years I was in school, as well as the years I have been in practice is that most people thrive on the vagueness of the English translated terminology, most not having a clue as to the precise differences in terms used. And that bothers me. I love the poetry of the language used, I love the forgiveness that formulas and acupuncture prescriptions offer us, so that if we don't get it exactly right, often they work, nonetheless. But that lack of precision can lead to complacency. Just like cookbook Chinese medicine and acupuncture works most of the time, so two does a lack of precision in skill or knowledge. That, in my view, is the root of mediocrity and I feel two many of us have found that acceptable. I don't and that's one of the reasons why we are engaging in the conversation on this subject. Respectfully, --- On Thu, 5/7/09, RoseAnne Spradlin <ra6151 wrote: RoseAnne Spradlin <ra6151 Re: Terminology and Etymology Chinese Medicine Thursday, May 7, 2009, 12:29 PM On May 7, 2009, at 2:38 PM, yehuda frischman wrote: > The mindset that we bring to our practices is one that was formed > by our upbringing, education and environment. We think like > Westerners, whether we like it or not. I think each individual's mindset is, well, individual. Personally, I think I have a feel for eastern forms of medicine and ways of understanding the body that seem to have little to do with my upbringing, education and environment as a westerner. My own way of explaining this to myself, at least at this point in time, is that it has to do with embodiment. From my own sense of embodiment of acupuncture channels and Qi, I have no problem at all with the idea of " draining " or " redirecting " the flow of Qi. RoseAnne Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 My dear friend Z'ev, In my very humble and insignifcant opinion, I believe that the approach you are taking is dogmatic. Just because no one of stature chooses to use the term sedate to describe the phenomenon of calming an irritable and replete liver, doesn't mean that its use doesn't have merit. That is specifically why I, as an English speaker, chose to delve into the etymological root of the word, to understand as best as possible what the original intent may have been before modern usage bastardized it. And it seems to be a very appropriate word to describe a process that we undertake as clinicians. I would add, though, that I think that the main problem that we have is with action verbs. It is there that our controversy seems to be playing out. I admire your attempt to " think " Chinese, but as with Hebrew, which I am fluent in, it is a great leap to go from being able to read and even speak a foreign language, while still thinking in English, to get to the point where one actually thinks in the language. I still think in English, and sometimes make silly mistakes in translating literally, when engaging in Hebrew conversations. When I studied in Israel for two years, and lived in an all Hebrew speaking environment, it took me about 3 months before I actually realized that I was thinking in Hebrew. But that was when I was 22. As we age, we become less resilient and its much harder to get back that thought process now in my late 50s, though I speak to patients and family in Hebrew nearly daily. " Ah but I was so much older than, I'm younger than that now " The point I'm trying to make is that sure it's possible, but I would suggest that it's very, very difficult to get yourself to think in a foreign language, and especially, and especially for a Westerner, if that language is Chinese which is unlike any Western language, even more so than Hebrew. And without thinking in Chinese, I don't believe that it's possible to develop a Chinese mindset. That being said, I am not suggesting that it is appropriate to create a new Bio-medically savvy, interpretive Western Chinese medicine. If that evolves in the next 100 years, it may not be a bad thing, necessarily. But as our sages say, " Who is the wise person, the one who learns from all people. " We live in a world of tremendous opportunities to acquire information. There is tremendous connectivity and many are attempting all kinds of eclectic blendings of old and new. I feel that if we patiently are able to develop viable theory behind successful clinical practice than we can grow a wonderful branch onto the beautiful Chinese medical tree. But it has to be connected to the trunk, and it has to be connected to the roots. Otherwise it won't have the integrity or viability to survive. This is the foolishness of the New Age movement, in my opinion. Either it is rootless, or its roots come from paganism. I don't think it will last any longer than its flim flam salesmen who hawk their wares at health consciousness conventions, are around. There is much wisdom in the West as well as the East. Let us use the method that we have acquired wisdom, to continue to due so, but without the arrogance of claiming soemthing which we adapt is our birthright. Having said that, there is a lot in Chinese medicine that is universally understandable by both layperson and practitioner, i.e. hot, cold, supplement, drain, seasons, phases, etc. We just need to understand it in the original context before adapting it to conditions here in the West. As I said to RoseAnne, I am very concerned with the laxity in which terms are interchanged in English without precision. This is why I feel that understanding etymology is essential in this adaptation process. Unfortunately, we don't agree, otherwise, I don't think that you would have a problem with my usage of sedation as a term which implies calming, and different from anesthetizing. The difficulty arises because of poor translation efforts at the beginning of the transmission of Chinese medicine to the West. It shows how easily poor translation can lead to long-term misunderstandings of root principles in our medicine. We are still using some of these terms and concepts today! This difficulty remains with many mainland Chinese translators, who do not adequately understand the target language and culture (English or other Western languages), and non-professional Western translators. Ideal is a team of native Chinese speakers who practice Chinese medicine who know English well with native English-speakers who know medical Chinese well. Lately, many texts have used this team approach to translation. I agree with you, but being able to speak and think in English is not enough. Language needs to be studied with precision, and, as I said earlier, when terms connoting actions, meaning verbs are considered, it is essential the the source of the verb be considered in order to be viable. I would suggest that the same process needs to take place in Chinese--that the Radicals need to be considered when understanding the characters. Nigel Wiseman is a professional linguist, fluent in several languages. While other term choices may be valid for technical Chinese terms, I trust his judgment when it comes to English term choices. He has done the hard work and research, and if one is going to challenge his term choices, they need to have the chops to do so. . I am not in any way questioning the wisdom of the choices that an eminent scholar such as he may have chosen. But I am not interested in translating terms. I am interesting in understanding what idea is being conveyed, and what the terms mean. Looking in a dictionary to figure out arcane or scholarly English terminology does not explain to me what a given action is meant necessarily. That is why etymology is so important, and like I said, both ways, and if a term cannot be translated appropriately in one word, then it should be left with a description rather than a lame one word proximation which helps neither scholar nor clinician. Respectfully, --- On Thu, 5/7/09, <zrosenbe wrote: <zrosenbe Re: Terminology and Etymology Thursday, May 7, 2009, 12:30 PM Yehuda, Not much time right now, but I must disagree with you. If we are resigned to a 'Western mindset', we will never understand Chinese medicine properly, but will simply end up making Chinese medicine " in our own image " . And don't we have enough biomedicine already without turning tranditional medicines into another form of the same? I believe we need to create a 'virtual Chinese medicine mindset' by studying the classical medical texts and theory, and then translate that out clinically. There are accurate translations of terms and functions, and I don't know one reputable source left that still uses 'sedate' for the acupuncture treatment method of xie/drainage. With sedation there is no movement or circulation, and acupuncture/ moxa always circulates the qi. Having said that, there is a lot in Chinese medicine that is universally understandable by both layperson and practitioner, i.e. hot, cold, supplement, drain, seasons, phases, etc. We just need to understand it in the original context before adapting it to conditions here in the West. The difficulty arises because of poor translation efforts at the beginning of the transmission of Chinese medicine to the West. It shows how easily poor translation can lead to long-term misunderstandings of root principles in our medicine. We are still using some of these terms and concepts today! This difficulty remains with many mainland Chinese translators, who do not adequately understand the target language and culture (English or other Western languages), and non-professional Western translators. Ideal is a team of native Chinese speakers who practice Chinese medicine who know English well with native English-speakers who know medical Chinese well. Lately, many texts have used this team approach to translation. Nigel Wiseman is a professional linguist, fluent in several languages. While other term choices may be valid for technical Chinese terms, I trust his judgment when it comes to English term choices. He has done the hard work and research, and if one is going to challenge his term choices, they need to have the chops to do so. . On May 7, 2009, at 11:38 AM, yehuda frischman wrote: > But returning to our original topic, let me posit another idea: > The medicine we practice in the English speaking Western world is > not the same as is practiced in the East, for the same reason: The > mindset that we bring to our practices is one that was formed by our > upbringing, education and environment. We think like Westerners, > whether we like it or not. Therefore, I would contend, that unless > we speak and think in Chinese when we see patients, we are fitting a > round peg into a square hole, by attempting to translate terms > literally, without considering the etymology of the English. Look > at Xie, Qing and Wen for example: When we look at the formula " Xie > Bai San, " it is translated as " Drain the White Powder. " Let's look > for a minute at the etymology of drain. Drain comes from the Middle > English term, " dreinen " which means to filter as in the quote by Sir > Francis Bacon, " Salt water, drained through twenty vessels of earth, > hath > become fresh. " This seems to fit nicely with the idea of gently > filtering the heat from the lungs which makes this formula so > effective for small children as opposed to " Qing " as in the formula > " Qing Fei Yin " which is translated as " Clear the Lungs Drink. " > Clear comes from the Old French " cler " which can mean free of > encumbrance. With this formula, phlegm is transformed and cleared > out, perhaps a little more aggressively. I can't comment on the tem > " Wen " because I am not familiar with its usage in Chinese, though I > would assume that it's implication is anesthesia. But if that's the > case, that would be very different than sedate. Anesthetize comes > from the Greek anaisthet which means without feeling. > > Let me summarize: 1. It would appear that Classic Chinese medicine > was more concerned with clinical signs rather than subjective > symptoms, in determining the terminological choices. 2. It is very > difficult, if not next to impossible for someone who is not equally > fluent in Chinese and English to clearly develop the mindset of the > ancient Chinese physician. It is difficult enough for the modern > Chinese physician/scholar. I would suggest as an ignorant outsider, > that this would be because the terminology is integrated and so > completely different from Western languages. 3. I would suggest > that as Westerners we need to take a two step process in proximating > what Chinese doctors meant in using Medical terminology: First, > Analyze carefully the context of the terms used in their original > text, and second, determine the etymological root of translated terms. > > Based upon the above three points, I come to a different conclusion > then heretofore: that the origin of the term sedate in English has > a very different connotation than the connotation of the term > anesthetize, and based upon the above discussion and research I > find it less objectionable to use it in the context that I chose, to > quiet the liver, which is very different than calming the liver. > > Thank you for your eminent challenge. Even if we agree to disagree > may our discussions have always have the same collegiality as Bais > Hillel and Bais Shammai: for the sake and pursuit of knowledge and > truth. > > Respectfully, > > > Yehuda Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine Pacific College of Oriental Medicine San Diego, Ca. 92122 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 I agree, and I think that that is part of the problem--a distinction is not made in terms of actions relative to the two very different therapies. And it goes without saying, that this fallacy of herbal actions being identical with acupuncture actions is being perpetuated in every school of Chinese medicine that I know of, whether in the US, anywhere else in the Western world, and, of course, in China as well. We all have had professors from China who equate the two. And it's a terrible mistake, and another example of the complacent vagueness of our medicine, in my opinion.   --- On Thu, 5/7/09, <johnkokko wrote: <johnkokko Re: Terminology and Etymology Chinese Medicine Thursday, May 7, 2009, 12:36 PM Yehuda, Based on what your wrote, it seems " sedation " could fit with herbalism/formulais m as there are some herbs that do have sedative effects, however, " clearing " and " draining " can fit for certain categories as well. " Draining " and " unobstructing " does make a lot more sense for acupuncture channels/ points, while " sedating " is certainly an inaccurate term for opening / clearing the channels through acupuncture. Does Nigel Wiseman / Bensky / Unschuld / Scheid make that distinction. .. between acupuncture terminology and herbal terminology? K On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 11:38 AM, >wrote: > > > Dear friends and colleagues, > > I want to let you in on an interesting conversation that I have begun with > my esteemed friend from the south (relatively speaking, at least), Z'ev > Rosenberg. Z'ev noted that I had used to term sedate in an inappropriate > context, and so here is our conversation, thus far. I post this with the > caveat that I would appreciate it if those of you who object to Nigel > Wiseman's terminology, not bring up again this old cantankorous subject, as > it has been addressed to death, and is not what we are discussing here, > anyway. Rather, the issue is what is our goal in translating- -to convey a > translation from Chinese which is as exact as possible, or to select a term > in English whose etymology most closely represents what the Chinese term > is conveying. Here goes: > > Here was the comment that I originally made: > > " When we address a given imbalance, I think that the most important thing > we need to do is look at the channels most affected, and most affecting, > sedate one and tonify the other. Also to palpate, look and feel for > tenderness, spasm, skin crease, lack of symmetry and weakness. In my > patients case, I sedated liver and tonified spleen and Dai, among other > things. " > > and here was Z'ev's concern: > > " Just wanted to point out privately that there is no such thing as > 'sedation' in Chinese acupuncture. The terms are bu/supplement, and > xie/drain. Sedation means to numb, to put to sleep. That is not what > acupuncture does (unless you inject the point with lidocaine). I know half > the profession still uses these terms, but they are simply wrong. " > > Yehuda: > > " Thank you for the reminder. Unfortunately, because there is not > standardized terminology, and in both lectures, articles and books bu and > xie are translated as tonify and sedate, one tends to become a creature of > habit. > > That being said, consider if you would, that the etymological source > of " sedate " is the Latin: sedatus which means to compose, moderate, > or quiet, which is pretty accurate as to what we are trying to do with an > overactive liver, no? Maybe the exact translation of the term xie is drain, > but are we attempting to lessen the volume of a replete liver, in terms of > its content (as in draining a sink) or are we attempting to calm a > hyperactive child, as it were? It seems to me that the action would be > more similar to the latter. The source of tonify on the other hand, > is the Greek, Tonus, which means to stretch, as in a rope. Bu doesn't seem > to convey that meaning, and in that case I would agree, that the action > could more accurately be called supplementing. > > I think that more important than exactly translating the terminology, > sometimes it is important to choose a more interpretive translation when > trying to convey a certain concept in a different language. I find that > frequently in Hebrew, too, that when I translate exactly, the gist of the > meaning is lost. > > This is an interesting idea to exchange. I wouldn't mind posting it on CHA > and TCM if you aren't opposed to it. " > > Z'ev: > > " Not opposed at all. . . > > One clarification that may be helpful is that with acupuncture/ moxa we are > dealing with channels primarily, and literally moving qi in specific ways, > to and from channels and points. The direct visceral relationships are not > the same as with herbal medicine, i.e. shu gan, or calm the liver, which is > different entirely. Patients may feel more calm or relaxed during and after > acupuncture, but this is a result of balancing the channels, not of a > physiological 'sedation'. > > The term for sedate or sedation in chinese is wen3 稳 . . .. > > Now to continue our discussion: > > This brings up another interesting idea to consider: do the terms that we > use to describe therapeutic actions reflect the objective physiological > change in the patient or their subjective sensation. It would seem to me > that the Chinese are more concerned with the former, as reflected in changes > in the pulse. > > But returning to our original topic, let me posit another idea: The > medicine we practice in the English speaking Western world is not the same > as is practiced in the East, for the same reason: The mindset that we bring > to our practices is one that was formed by our upbringing, education and > environment. We think like Westerners, whether we like it or not. > Therefore, I would contend, that unless we speak and think in Chinese when > we see patients, we are fitting a round peg into a square hole, by > attempting to translate terms literally, without considering the etymology > of the English. Look at Xie, Qing and Wen for example: When we look at the > formula " Xie Bai San, " it is translated as " Drain the White Powder. " Let's > look for a minute at the etymology of drain. Drain comes from the Middle > English term, " dreinen " which means to filter as in the quote by Sir Francis > Bacon, " Salt water, drained through twenty vessels of earth, hath > become fresh. " This seems to fit nicely with the idea of gently filtering > the heat from the lungs which makes this formula so effective for small > children as opposed to " Qing " as in the formula " Qing Fei Yin " which is > translated as " Clear the Lungs Drink. " Clear comes from the Old French > " cler " which can mean free of encumbrance. With this formula, phlegm is > transformed and cleared out, perhaps a little more aggressively. I can't > comment on the tem " Wen " because I am not familiar with its usage in > Chinese, though I would assume that it's implication is anesthesia. But if > that's the case, that would be very different than sedate. Anesthetize comes > from the Greek anaisthet which means without feeling. > > Let me summarize: 1. It would appear that Classic Chinese medicine was > more concerned with clinical signs rather than subjective symptoms, in > determining the terminological choices. 2. It is very difficult, if not > next to impossible for someone who is not equally fluent in Chinese and > English to clearly develop the mindset of the ancient Chinese physician. It > is difficult enough for the modern Chinese physician/scholar. I would > suggest as an ignorant outsider, that this would be because the > terminology is integrated and so completely different from Western > languages. 3. I would suggest that as Westerners we need to take a two > step process in proximating what Chinese doctors meant in using Medical > terminology: First, Analyze carefully the context of the terms used in their > original text, and second, determine the etymological root of translated > terms. > > Based upon the above three points, I come to a different conclusion then > heretofore: that the origin of the term sedate in English has a very > different connotation than the connotation of the term anesthetize, and > based upon the above discussion and research I find it less objectionable > to use it in the context that I chose, to quiet the liver, which is very > different than calming the liver. > > Thank you for your eminent challenge. Even if we agree to disagree may our > discussions have always have the same collegiality as Bais Hillel and Bais > Shammai: for the sake and pursuit of knowledge and truth. > > Respectfully, > > > Yehuda > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 My dear friend Yehuda, A couple of points here: 1) I was responding to your original example, which was an acupuncture treatment performed in your clinical program. There isn't any way that one can translate xie as 'sedate' in acupuncture. Nearly all modern translators, including those working with Eastland Press, have abandoned sedate as an equivalent for xie. Sedate is wrong etymologically and clinically speaking. It leads to a serious misconception as to how acupuncture and moxabustion work. 2) In herbal medicine, certainly one can describe liver drainage in different ways and use different terms and/or approaches, but again one wouldn't translate xie as sedate or sedation. I don't think you'd find one Chinese dictionary, either medical or general, that would do so. There are terms such as calm or level/ping2 平 , subdue/qian2 潜, or settle or calm/zhen4 镇. 3) Certainly flexibility in translation is important, but there are rules to language and term choice. My only point is that sedate or sedation is never the correct choice for xie, especially in acupuncture, and I will not budge on that, 'dogmatic' as it may be. . . On May 7, 2009, at 8:21 PM, yehuda frischman wrote: > > My dear friend Z'ev, > > In my very humble and insignifcant opinion, I believe that the > approach you are taking is dogmatic. Just because no one of stature > chooses to use the term sedate to describe the phenomenon of calming > an irritable and replete liver, doesn't mean that its use doesn't > have merit. That is specifically why I, as an English speaker, > chose to delve into the etymological root of the word, to understand > as best as possible what the original intent may have been before > modern usage bastardized it. And it seems to be a very appropriate > word to describe a process that we undertake as clinicians. I would > add, though, that I think that the main problem that we have is with > action verbs. It is there that our controversy seems to be playing > out. > Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine Pacific College of Oriental Medicine San Diego, Ca. 92122 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 Obviously this is a debate that will go on forever. To put my two cents in - on the one hand I do agree in instances that are particularly egregious that correct terminology is important - and I do think 'sedation' is one of those instances - because quite simply, no matter how you look at it, I don't see how we can think we sedate anything with acupuncture - we do drain things and get things moving where they are stuck. On the other hand, the dogmatism of the etymological purists can go too far - I just don't see how 'torpid intake' is an improvement over 'lack of appetite' or 'poor appetite' - I never knew the word 'torpid', still don't know it, I can't relate to it, my patients certainly can't relate to it and referring to eating as 'intake' sounds bizarre too. Regards Daniel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 I think you have said a lot of wise useful ways for us practitioners to go on understanding each other, over the next decades. We don't yet need a quorum of terminology. --- On Thu, 5/7/09, wrote: Re: Terminology and Etymology , " TCM " <Chinese Traditional Medicine > Thursday, May 7, 2009, 11:21 PM My dear friend Z'ev, In my very humble and insignifcant opinion, I believe that the approach you are taking is dogmatic. Just because no one of stature chooses to use the term sedate to describe the phenomenon of calming an irritable and replete liver, doesn't mean that its use doesn't have merit. That is specifically why I, as an English speaker, chose to delve into the etymological root of the word, to understand as best as possible what the original intent may have been before modern usage bastardized it. And it seems to be a very appropriate word to describe a process that we undertake as clinicians. I would add, though, that I think that the main problem that we have is with action verbs. It is there that our controversy seems to be playing out. I admire your attempt to " think " Chinese, but as with Hebrew, which I am fluent in, it is a great leap to go from being able to read and even speak a foreign language, while still thinking in English, to get to the point where one actually thinks in the language. I still think in English, and sometimes make silly mistakes in translating literally, when engaging in Hebrew conversations. When I studied in Israel for two years, and lived in an all Hebrew speaking environment, it took me about 3 months before I actually realized that I was thinking in Hebrew. But that was when I was 22. As we age, we become less resilient and its much harder to get back that thought process now in my late 50s, though I speak to patients and family in Hebrew nearly daily. " Ah but I was so much older than, I'm younger than that now " The point I'm trying to make is that sure it's possible, but I would suggest that it's very, very difficult to get yourself to think in a foreign language, and especially, and especially for a Westerner, if that language is Chinese which is unlike any Western language, even more so than Hebrew. And without thinking in Chinese, I don't believe that it's possible to develop a Chinese mindset. That being said, I am not suggesting that it is appropriate to create a new Bio-medically savvy, interpretive Western Chinese medicine. If that evolves in the next 100 years, it may not be a bad thing, necessarily. But as our sages say, " Who is the wise person, the one who learns from all people. " We live in a world of tremendous opportunities to acquire information. There is tremendous connectivity and many are attempting all kinds of eclectic blendings of old and new. I feel that if we patiently are able to develop viable theory behind successful clinical practice than we can grow a wonderful branch onto the beautiful Chinese medical tree. But it has to be connected to the trunk, and it has to be connected to the roots. Otherwise it won't have the integrity or viability to survive. This is the foolishness of the New Age movement, in my opinion. Either it is rootless, or its roots come from paganism. I don't think it will last any longer than its flim flam salesmen who hawk their wares at health consciousness conventions, are around. There is much wisdom in the West as well as the East. Let us use the method that we have acquired wisdom, to continue to due so, but without the arrogance of claiming soemthing which we adapt is our birthright. Having said that, there is a lot in Chinese medicine that is universally understandable by both layperson and practitioner, i.e. hot, cold, supplement, drain, seasons, phases, etc. We just need to understand it in the original context before adapting it to conditions here in the West. As I said to RoseAnne, I am very concerned with the laxity in which terms are interchanged in English without precision. This is why I feel that understanding etymology is essential in this adaptation process. Unfortunately, we don't agree, otherwise, I don't think that you would have a problem with my usage of sedation as a term which implies calming, and different from anesthetizing. The difficulty arises because of poor translation efforts at the beginning of the transmission of Chinese medicine to the West. It shows how easily poor translation can lead to long-term misunderstandings of root principles in our medicine. We are still using some of these terms and concepts today! This difficulty remains with many mainland Chinese translators, who do not adequately understand the target language and culture (English or other Western languages), and non-professional Western translators. Ideal is a team of native Chinese speakers who practice Chinese medicine who know English well with native English-speakers who know medical Chinese well. Lately, many texts have used this team approach to translation. I agree with you, but being able to speak and think in English is not enough. Language needs to be studied with precision, and, as I said earlier, when terms connoting actions, meaning verbs are considered, it is essential the the source of the verb be considered in order to be viable. I would suggest that the same process needs to take place in Chinese--that the Radicals need to be considered when understanding the characters. Nigel Wiseman is a professional linguist, fluent in several languages. While other term choices may be valid for technical Chinese terms, I trust his judgment when it comes to English term choices. He has done the hard work and research, and if one is going to challenge his term choices, they need to have the chops to do so. . I am not in any way questioning the wisdom of the choices that an eminent scholar such as he may have chosen. But I am not interested in translating terms. I am interesting in understanding what idea is being conveyed, and what the terms mean. Looking in a dictionary to figure out arcane or scholarly English terminology does not explain to me what a given action is meant necessarily. That is why etymology is so important, and like I said, both ways, and if a term cannot be translated appropriately in one word, then it should be left with a description rather than a lame one word proximation which helps neither scholar nor clinician. Respectfully, www.traditionaljewi shmedicine. net www.traditionaljewi shmedicine. blogspot. com --- On Thu, 5/7/09, <zrosenbe (AT) san (DOT) rr.com> wrote: <zrosenbe (AT) san (DOT) rr.com> Re: Terminology and Etymology Thursday, May 7, 2009, 12:30 PM Yehuda, Not much time right now, but I must disagree with you. If we are resigned to a 'Western mindset', we will never understand Chinese medicine properly, but will simply end up making Chinese medicine " in our own image " . And don't we have enough biomedicine already without turning tranditional medicines into another form of the same? I believe we need to create a 'virtual Chinese medicine mindset' by studying the classical medical texts and theory, and then translate that out clinically. There are accurate translations of terms and functions, and I don't know one reputable source left that still uses 'sedate' for the acupuncture treatment method of xie/drainage. With sedation there is no movement or circulation, and acupuncture/ moxa always circulates the qi. Having said that, there is a lot in Chinese medicine that is universally understandable by both layperson and practitioner, i.e. hot, cold, supplement, drain, seasons, phases, etc. We just need to understand it in the original context before adapting it to conditions here in the West. The difficulty arises because of poor translation efforts at the beginning of the transmission of Chinese medicine to the West. It shows how easily poor translation can lead to long-term misunderstandings of root principles in our medicine. We are still using some of these terms and concepts today! This difficulty remains with many mainland Chinese translators, who do not adequately understand the target language and culture (English or other Western languages), and non-professional Western translators. Ideal is a team of native Chinese speakers who practice Chinese medicine who know English well with native English-speakers who know medical Chinese well. Lately, many texts have used this team approach to translation. Nigel Wiseman is a professional linguist, fluent in several languages. While other term choices may be valid for technical Chinese terms, I trust his judgment when it comes to English term choices. He has done the hard work and research, and if one is going to challenge his term choices, they need to have the chops to do so. . On May 7, 2009, at 11:38 AM, yehuda frischman wrote: > But returning to our original topic, let me posit another idea: > The medicine we practice in the English speaking Western world is > not the same as is practiced in the East, for the same reason: The > mindset that we bring to our practices is one that was formed by our > upbringing, education and environment. We think like Westerners, > whether we like it or not. Therefore, I would contend, that unless > we speak and think in Chinese when we see patients, we are fitting a > round peg into a square hole, by attempting to translate terms > literally, without considering the etymology of the English. Look > at Xie, Qing and Wen for example: When we look at the formula " Xie > Bai San, " it is translated as " Drain the White Powder. " Let's look > for a minute at the etymology of drain. Drain comes from the Middle > English term, " dreinen " which means to filter as in the quote by Sir > Francis Bacon, " Salt water, drained through twenty vessels of earth, > hath > become fresh. " This seems to fit nicely with the idea of gently > filtering the heat from the lungs which makes this formula so > effective for small children as opposed to " Qing " as in the formula > " Qing Fei Yin " which is translated as " Clear the Lungs Drink. " > Clear comes from the Old French " cler " which can mean free of > encumbrance. With this formula, phlegm is transformed and cleared > out, perhaps a little more aggressively. I can't comment on the tem > " Wen " because I am not familiar with its usage in Chinese, though I > would assume that it's implication is anesthesia. But if that's the > case, that would be very different than sedate. Anesthetize comes > from the Greek anaisthet which means without feeling. > > Let me summarize: 1. It would appear that Classic Chinese medicine > was more concerned with clinical signs rather than subjective > symptoms, in determining the terminological choices. 2. It is very > difficult, if not next to impossible for someone who is not equally > fluent in Chinese and English to clearly develop the mindset of the > ancient Chinese physician. It is difficult enough for the modern > Chinese physician/scholar. I would suggest as an ignorant outsider, > that this would be because the terminology is integrated and so > completely different from Western languages. 3. I would suggest > that as Westerners we need to take a two step process in proximating > what Chinese doctors meant in using Medical terminology: First, > Analyze carefully the context of the terms used in their original > text, and second, determine the etymological root of translated terms. > > Based upon the above three points, I come to a different conclusion > then heretofore: that the origin of the term sedate in English has > a very different connotation than the connotation of the term > anesthetize, and based upon the above discussion and research I > find it less objectionable to use it in the context that I chose, to > quiet the liver, which is very different than calming the liver. > > Thank you for your eminent challenge. Even if we agree to disagree > may our discussions have always have the same collegiality as Bais > Hillel and Bais Shammai: for the sake and pursuit of knowledge and > truth. > > Respectfully, > > > Yehuda Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine Pacific College of Oriental Medicine San Diego, Ca. 92122 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 Yes... my American teachers used the Chinese terms more than the Chinese teachers did. For instance, Robert Johns would say " Bu, Xie or Ping " for Supplementation, Draining or Even acu-techniques. I learned " Tonify " and " Sedate " from the Chinese teachers speaking in translation. It would have been much better if we were taught the Pinyin for all of the terms to begin with and that's all we used in school, classroom, clinic and conversations. Along with the character study and constant practice, there would be no room for poor translations. But, it's difficult because the books on the CA state board and NCCAOM recommended list all have different terminologies. We can thank Maciocia and the rest of the authors for the diverse terms that we use in our professional vocabulary. I don't see Maciocia's texts going off of the shelves any time soon. Those who studied TCM from those texts are teaching others with the same terminology. For every Wiseman-head out there, there are five Maciocia-heads. So, we may have to put our foot down and do something in order to have consistency. Maybe the best way is just to use the Chinese in the first place and not to veer from that. I mean, who do we need to translate for? Our patients? Of course, I need to learn Chinese first and this conversation is inspiring me to put the time in to do just that. This harkens back to our conversation about Korean medicine and the need for bilingual teachers. As Mark Twain said, " East is East and West is West and never the twain shall meet. " Oops.. that was Kipling. Sorry for my poor translation. K K On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 8:27 PM, wrote: > > > I agree, and I think that that is part of the problem--a distinction is not > made in terms of actions relative to the two very different therapies. And > it goes without saying, that this fallacy of herbal actions being identical > with acupuncture actions is being perpetuated in every school of Chinese > medicine that I know of, whether in the US, anywhere else in the Western > world, and, of course, in China as well. We all have had professors from > China who equate the two. And it's a terrible mistake, and another example > of the complacent vagueness of our medicine, in my opinion. > > > > > > > > > --- On Thu, 5/7/09, <johnkokko<johnkokko%40gmail.com>> > wrote: > > <johnkokko <johnkokko%40gmail.com>> > Re: Terminology and Etymology > To: Chinese Medicine <Chinese Medicine%40yaho\ ogroups.com> > Thursday, May 7, 2009, 12:36 PM > > Yehuda, > Based on what your wrote, > > it seems " sedation " could fit with herbalism/formulais m as there are some > > herbs that do have sedative effects, > however, " clearing " and " draining " can fit for certain categories as well. > > " Draining " and " unobstructing " does make a lot more sense for acupuncture > channels/ points, > while " sedating " is certainly an inaccurate term for opening / clearing the > channels through acupuncture. > > Does Nigel Wiseman / Bensky / Unschuld / Scheid make that distinction. .. > between acupuncture terminology and herbal terminology? > > K > > On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 11:38 AM, wrote: > > > > > > > Dear friends and colleagues, > > > > I want to let you in on an interesting conversation that I have begun > with > > my esteemed friend from the south (relatively speaking, at least), Z'ev > > Rosenberg. Z'ev noted that I had used to term sedate in an inappropriate > > context, and so here is our conversation, thus far. I post this with the > > caveat that I would appreciate it if those of you who object to Nigel > > Wiseman's terminology, not bring up again this old cantankorous subject, > as > > it has been addressed to death, and is not what we are discussing here, > > anyway. Rather, the issue is what is our goal in translating- -to convey > a > > translation from Chinese which is as exact as possible, or to select a > term > > in English whose etymology most closely represents what the Chinese term > > is conveying. Here goes: > > > > Here was the comment that I originally made: > > > > " When we address a given imbalance, I think that the most important thing > > we need to do is look at the channels most affected, and most affecting, > > sedate one and tonify the other. Also to palpate, look and feel for > > tenderness, spasm, skin crease, lack of symmetry and weakness. In my > > patients case, I sedated liver and tonified spleen and Dai, among other > > things. " > > > > and here was Z'ev's concern: > > > > " Just wanted to point out privately that there is no such thing as > > 'sedation' in Chinese acupuncture. The terms are bu/supplement, and > > xie/drain. Sedation means to numb, to put to sleep. That is not what > > acupuncture does (unless you inject the point with lidocaine). I know > half > > the profession still uses these terms, but they are simply wrong. " > > > > Yehuda: > > > > " Thank you for the reminder. Unfortunately, because there is not > > standardized terminology, and in both lectures, articles and books bu and > > xie are translated as tonify and sedate, one tends to become a creature > of > > habit. > > > > That being said, consider if you would, that the etymological source > > of " sedate " is the Latin: sedatus which means to compose, moderate, > > or quiet, which is pretty accurate as to what we are trying to do with an > > overactive liver, no? Maybe the exact translation of the term xie is > drain, > > but are we attempting to lessen the volume of a replete liver, in terms > of > > its content (as in draining a sink) or are we attempting to calm a > > hyperactive child, as it were? It seems to me that the action would be > > more similar to the latter. The source of tonify on the other hand, > > is the Greek, Tonus, which means to stretch, as in a rope. Bu doesn't > seem > > to convey that meaning, and in that case I would agree, that the action > > could more accurately be called supplementing. > > > > I think that more important than exactly translating the terminology, > > sometimes it is important to choose a more interpretive translation when > > trying to convey a certain concept in a different language. I find that > > frequently in Hebrew, too, that when I translate exactly, the gist of the > > meaning is lost. > > > > This is an interesting idea to exchange. I wouldn't mind posting it on > CHA > > and TCM if you aren't opposed to it. " > > > > Z'ev: > > > > " Not opposed at all. . . > > > > One clarification that may be helpful is that with acupuncture/ moxa we > are > > dealing with channels primarily, and literally moving qi in specific > ways, > > to and from channels and points. The direct visceral relationships are > not > > the same as with herbal medicine, i.e. shu gan, or calm the liver, which > is > > different entirely. Patients may feel more calm or relaxed during and > after > > acupuncture, but this is a result of balancing the channels, not of a > > physiological 'sedation'. > > > > The term for sedate or sedation in chinese is wen3 ÎÈ . . .. > > > > Now to continue our discussion: > > > > This brings up another interesting idea to consider: do the terms that we > > use to describe therapeutic actions reflect the objective physiological > > change in the patient or their subjective sensation. It would seem to me > > that the Chinese are more concerned with the former, as reflected in > changes > > in the pulse. > > > > But returning to our original topic, let me posit another idea: The > > medicine we practice in the English speaking Western world is not the > same > > as is practiced in the East, for the same reason: The mindset that we > bring > > to our practices is one that was formed by our upbringing, education and > > environment. We think like Westerners, whether we like it or not. > > Therefore, I would contend, that unless we speak and think in Chinese > when > > we see patients, we are fitting a round peg into a square hole, by > > attempting to translate terms literally, without considering the > etymology > > of the English. Look at Xie, Qing and Wen for example: When we look at > the > > formula " Xie Bai San, " it is translated as " Drain the White Powder. " > Let's > > look for a minute at the etymology of drain. Drain comes from the Middle > > English term, " dreinen " which means to filter as in the quote by Sir > Francis > > Bacon, " Salt water, drained through twenty vessels of earth, hath > > become fresh. " This seems to fit nicely with the idea of gently filtering > > the heat from the lungs which makes this formula so effective for small > > children as opposed to " Qing " as in the formula " Qing Fei Yin " which is > > translated as " Clear the Lungs Drink. " Clear comes from the Old French > > " cler " which can mean free of encumbrance. With this formula, phlegm is > > transformed and cleared out, perhaps a little more aggressively. I can't > > comment on the tem " Wen " because I am not familiar with its usage in > > Chinese, though I would assume that it's implication is anesthesia. But > if > > that's the case, that would be very different than sedate. Anesthetize > comes > > from the Greek anaisthet which means without feeling. > > > > Let me summarize: 1. It would appear that Classic Chinese medicine was > > more concerned with clinical signs rather than subjective symptoms, in > > determining the terminological choices. 2. It is very difficult, if not > > next to impossible for someone who is not equally fluent in Chinese and > > English to clearly develop the mindset of the ancient Chinese physician. > It > > is difficult enough for the modern Chinese physician/scholar. I would > > suggest as an ignorant outsider, that this would be because the > > terminology is integrated and so completely different from Western > > languages. 3. I would suggest that as Westerners we need to take a two > > step process in proximating what Chinese doctors meant in using Medical > > terminology: First, Analyze carefully the context of the terms used in > their > > original text, and second, determine the etymological root of translated > > terms. > > > > Based upon the above three points, I come to a different conclusion then > > heretofore: that the origin of the term sedate in English has a very > > different connotation than the connotation of the term anesthetize, and > > based upon the above discussion and research I find it less objectionable > > to use it in the context that I chose, to quiet the liver, which is very > > different than calming the liver. > > > > Thank you for your eminent challenge. Even if we agree to disagree may > our > > discussions have always have the same collegiality as Bais Hillel and > Bais > > Shammai: for the sake and pursuit of knowledge and truth. > > > > Respectfully, > > > > > > Yehuda > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 I see a couple of interesting points here: I completely agree with Doug's idea below, it many times is more about the concept than the " word. " For example, there are two reasons why I enjoy reading in Chinese 1) because of the very logical structure, but more importantly to this conversation is 2) many of the words that we pin down in English I see as more concepts in Chinese. Within a single 'concept' or even four character phrase, there is a whole spectrum of meanings, and nuances that can become easily lost when one pin that down to a word in English. To elaborate, many times the Chinese is more precise because it is not precise. Many Chinese phrases are meant to be kind of vague or encompass more than one might think at first reading. Part of understanding it is contemplation in a larger scale. I find that when I read such a Chinese phrase 'I get it.' because I don't. For example, when I try to translate it, it becomes a monstrous task, because as soon as I assign a word, then this word becomes a substitution for sometimes a whole host of nuanced meanings. To contemplate things, this word might be dependent of the context of the passage or even the Authors nuanced usage. This can be the key to getting many Chinese words and phrases, and even a English speaker overtime can start to get this point. Therefore, Yehuda is somewhat correct if you are not thinking in Chinese you will miss the boat. If you are just reading and substituting 1 English word for 1 Chinese character when you read (which I used to do) you have a good chance of missing something. (This is not to say we should not still strive for the best translation possible, but sometimes this may be a string of words, a single word, or a long footnote, or a fuzzy idea based on the passage). It is really case by case dependent. In the West, I think Doug also mentioned this, our minds want the exact meaning, we want precision. If one cannot access Chinese, this makes sense, we want the best possible translation as possible, who can argue with that! Before some takes my commentary as some black and white statement, let me be clear. I am not saying that Chinese is not precise. There are plenty of situations (probably the majority) that require a very precise single word translation. I am not suggesting one system or way of translating is better than any other. I am not suggesting one must be fluent in Chinese to be a great practitioner. There are people that are fluent, teach, and can translate and have little clinical experience. There are those that don't know a lick of Chinese that I would trust with my life. Hope that helps, - On Behalf Of I am no way saying in my provocative comments that English could or should ever be the " lingua franca " of only that learning the authentic " word " is not the culprit. It is in the concept and that is not totally dependent on any one language or language skill set. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 Again, Daniel, I refer back to the etymological root of sedate, the Latin term: sedatus which means to compose, moderate, or quiet. If before I needle there is intercostal tenderness, burping and irritability, and after I needle the patient is happy and calm, can I not say that they are sedate (using the noun form)? Remember, as I mentioned earlier in this discussion, sedation does not mean numbing. That is anesthesia. --- On Thu, 5/7/09, Daniel Schulman <daniel.schulman wrote: Daniel Schulman <daniel.schulman Re: Terminology and Etymology Chinese Medicine Thursday, May 7, 2009, 9:23 PM Obviously this is a debate that will go on forever. To put my two cents in - on the one hand I do agree in instances that are particularly egregious that correct terminology is important - and I do think 'sedation' is one of those instances - because quite simply, no matter how you look at it, I don't see how we can think we sedate anything with acupuncture - we do drain things and get things moving where they are stuck. On the other hand, the dogmatism of the etymological purists can go too far - I just don't see how 'torpid intake' is an improvement over 'lack of appetite' or 'poor appetite' - I never knew the word 'torpid', still don't know it, I can't relate to it, my patients certainly can't relate to it and referring to eating as 'intake' sounds bizarre too. Regards Daniel Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 8, 2009 Report Share Posted May 8, 2009 Kokko,  I used to think that way as well. And I think that it is important to understand as well as possible the gist of what the chinese medical action verbs mean. But I have come to realize that I will never really understand what the implication is that is being expressed in Chinese, and for 2 reasons: 1. because every language is unique and can't be converted exactly to another language. and 2. because in Chinese, every picture tells a story (don't it!), and to understand the character, and the action, I would really need to understand the inuendos behind the story of the characters, which I would suspect would be hard for an American who has lived most of his life in Los Angeles. Again, just ask any Chinese medical scholar who is Chinese if these two points are valid. They may hem and haw and not want you to feel bad, but when it comes down to it and push comes to shove, I'll bet you that they believe there is no way to convey the meaning accurately to someone who isn't living the language.  Tomorrow is Samra, so I have to prepare.  'night   --- On Thu, 5/7/09, <johnkokko wrote: <johnkokko Re: Terminology and Etymology Chinese Medicine Thursday, May 7, 2009, 10:32 PM Yes... my American teachers used the Chinese terms more than the Chinese teachers did. For instance, Robert Johns would say " Bu, Xie or Ping " for Supplementation, Draining or Even acu-techniques. I learned " Tonify " and " Sedate " from the Chinese teachers speaking in translation. It would have been much better if we were taught the Pinyin for all of the terms to begin with and that's all we used in school, classroom, clinic and conversations. Along with the character study and constant practice, there would be no room for poor translations. But, it's difficult because the books on the CA state board and NCCAOM recommended list all have different terminologies. We can thank Maciocia and the rest of the authors for the diverse terms that we use in our professional vocabulary. I don't see Maciocia's texts going off of the shelves any time soon. Those who studied TCM from those texts are teaching others with the same terminology. For every Wiseman-head out there, there are five Maciocia-heads. So, we may have to put our foot down and do something in order to have consistency. Maybe the best way is just to use the Chinese in the first place and not to veer from that. I mean, who do we need to translate for? Our patients? Of course, I need to learn Chinese first and this conversation is inspiring me to put the time in to do just that. This harkens back to our conversation about Korean medicine and the need for bilingual teachers. As Mark Twain said, " East is East and West is West and never the twain shall meet. " Oops.. that was Kipling. Sorry for my poor translation. K K On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 8:27 PM, > wrote: > > > I agree, and I think that that is part of the problem--a distinction is not > made in terms of actions relative to the two very different therapies. And > it goes without saying, that this fallacy of herbal actions being identical > with acupuncture actions is being perpetuated in every school of Chinese > medicine that I know of, whether in the US, anywhere else in the Western > world, and, of course, in China as well. We all have had professors from > China who equate the two. And it's a terrible mistake, and another example > of the complacent vagueness of our medicine, in my opinion. > > > > www.traditionaljewi shmedicine. net > www.traditionaljewi shmedicine. blogspot. com > > > > --- On Thu, 5/7/09, <johnkokko (AT) gmail (DOT) com<johnkokko%40gmail. com>> > wrote: > > <johnkokko (AT) gmail (DOT) com <johnkokko%40gmail. com>> > Re: Terminology and Etymology > <Traditional_ Chinese_Medicine %40. com> > Thursday, May 7, 2009, 12:36 PM > > Yehuda, > Based on what your wrote, > > it seems " sedation " could fit with herbalism/formulais m as there are some > > herbs that do have sedative effects, > however, " clearing " and " draining " can fit for certain categories as well. > > " Draining " and " unobstructing " does make a lot more sense for acupuncture > channels/ points, > while " sedating " is certainly an inaccurate term for opening / clearing the > channels through acupuncture. > > Does Nigel Wiseman / Bensky / Unschuld / Scheid make that distinction. .. > between acupuncture terminology and herbal terminology? > > K > > On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 11:38 AM, >wrote: > > > > > > > Dear friends and colleagues, > > > > I want to let you in on an interesting conversation that I have begun > with > > my esteemed friend from the south (relatively speaking, at least), Z'ev > > Rosenberg. Z'ev noted that I had used to term sedate in an inappropriate > > context, and so here is our conversation, thus far. I post this with the > > caveat that I would appreciate it if those of you who object to Nigel > > Wiseman's terminology, not bring up again this old cantankorous subject, > as > > it has been addressed to death, and is not what we are discussing here, > > anyway. Rather, the issue is what is our goal in translating- -to convey > a > > translation from Chinese which is as exact as possible, or to select a > term > > in English whose etymology most closely represents what the Chinese term > > is conveying. Here goes: > > > > Here was the comment that I originally made: > > > > " When we address a given imbalance, I think that the most important thing > > we need to do is look at the channels most affected, and most affecting, > > sedate one and tonify the other. Also to palpate, look and feel for > > tenderness, spasm, skin crease, lack of symmetry and weakness. In my > > patients case, I sedated liver and tonified spleen and Dai, among other > > things. " > > > > and here was Z'ev's concern: > > > > " Just wanted to point out privately that there is no such thing as > > 'sedation' in Chinese acupuncture. The terms are bu/supplement, and > > xie/drain. Sedation means to numb, to put to sleep. That is not what > > acupuncture does (unless you inject the point with lidocaine). I know > half > > the profession still uses these terms, but they are simply wrong. " > > > > Yehuda: > > > > " Thank you for the reminder. Unfortunately, because there is not > > standardized terminology, and in both lectures, articles and books bu and > > xie are translated as tonify and sedate, one tends to become a creature > of > > habit. > > > > That being said, consider if you would, that the etymological source > > of " sedate " is the Latin: sedatus which means to compose, moderate, > > or quiet, which is pretty accurate as to what we are trying to do with an > > overactive liver, no? Maybe the exact translation of the term xie is > drain, > > but are we attempting to lessen the volume of a replete liver, in terms > of > > its content (as in draining a sink) or are we attempting to calm a > > hyperactive child, as it were? It seems to me that the action would be > > more similar to the latter. The source of tonify on the other hand, > > is the Greek, Tonus, which means to stretch, as in a rope. Bu doesn't > seem > > to convey that meaning, and in that case I would agree, that the action > > could more accurately be called supplementing. > > > > I think that more important than exactly translating the terminology, > > sometimes it is important to choose a more interpretive translation when > > trying to convey a certain concept in a different language. I find that > > frequently in Hebrew, too, that when I translate exactly, the gist of the > > meaning is lost. > > > > This is an interesting idea to exchange. I wouldn't mind posting it on > CHA > > and TCM if you aren't opposed to it. " > > > > Z'ev: > > > > " Not opposed at all. . . > > > > One clarification that may be helpful is that with acupuncture/ moxa we > are > > dealing with channels primarily, and literally moving qi in specific > ways, > > to and from channels and points. The direct visceral relationships are > not > > the same as with herbal medicine, i.e. shu gan, or calm the liver, which > is > > different entirely. Patients may feel more calm or relaxed during and > after > > acupuncture, but this is a result of balancing the channels, not of a > > physiological 'sedation'. > > > > The term for sedate or sedation in chinese is wen3 稳 . . .. > > > > Now to continue our discussion: > > > > This brings up another interesting idea to consider: do the terms that we > > use to describe therapeutic actions reflect the objective physiological > > change in the patient or their subjective sensation. It would seem to me > > that the Chinese are more concerned with the former, as reflected in > changes > > in the pulse. > > > > But returning to our original topic, let me posit another idea: The > > medicine we practice in the English speaking Western world is not the > same > > as is practiced in the East, for the same reason: The mindset that we > bring > > to our practices is one that was formed by our upbringing, education and > > environment. We think like Westerners, whether we like it or not. > > Therefore, I would contend, that unless we speak and think in Chinese > when > > we see patients, we are fitting a round peg into a square hole, by > > attempting to translate terms literally, without considering the > etymology > > of the English. Look at Xie, Qing and Wen for example: When we look at > the > > formula " Xie Bai San, " it is translated as " Drain the White Powder. " > Let's > > look for a minute at the etymology of drain. Drain comes from the Middle > > English term, " dreinen " which means to filter as in the quote by Sir > Francis > > Bacon, " Salt water, drained through twenty vessels of earth, hath > > become fresh. " This seems to fit nicely with the idea of gently filtering > > the heat from the lungs which makes this formula so effective for small > > children as opposed to " Qing " as in the formula " Qing Fei Yin " which is > > translated as " Clear the Lungs Drink. " Clear comes from the Old French > > " cler " which can mean free of encumbrance. With this formula, phlegm is > > transformed and cleared out, perhaps a little more aggressively. I can't > > comment on the tem " Wen " because I am not familiar with its usage in > > Chinese, though I would assume that it's implication is anesthesia. But > if > > that's the case, that would be very different than sedate. Anesthetize > comes > > from the Greek anaisthet which means without feeling. > > > > Let me summarize: 1. It would appear that Classic Chinese medicine was > > more concerned with clinical signs rather than subjective symptoms, in > > determining the terminological choices. 2. It is very difficult, if not > > next to impossible for someone who is not equally fluent in Chinese and > > English to clearly develop the mindset of the ancient Chinese physician. > It > > is difficult enough for the modern Chinese physician/scholar. I would > > suggest as an ignorant outsider, that this would be because the > > terminology is integrated and so completely different from Western > > languages. 3. I would suggest that as Westerners we need to take a two > > step process in proximating what Chinese doctors meant in using Medical > > terminology: First, Analyze carefully the context of the terms used in > their > > original text, and second, determine the etymological root of translated > > terms. > > > > Based upon the above three points, I come to a different conclusion then > > heretofore: that the origin of the term sedate in English has a very > > different connotation than the connotation of the term anesthetize, and > > based upon the above discussion and research I find it less objectionable > > to use it in the context that I chose, to quiet the liver, which is very > > different than calming the liver. > > > > Thank you for your eminent challenge. Even if we agree to disagree may > our > > discussions have always have the same collegiality as Bais Hillel and > Bais > > Shammai: for the sake and pursuit of knowledge and truth. > > > > Respectfully, > > > > > > Yehuda > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.