Terminology and Etymology

[Guest guest]

Chinese Medicine , " Daniel Schulman "

<daniel.schulman wrote:

>

> 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.

 

In this instance, Nigel is using a literal translation, and he is deliberately

keeping the term unusual so that it receives further study and investigation,

rather than making it appear to be a concept that is regarded as a native

English idea that has a simple suitable translation. The phrase " na dai, " which

Nigel translates as torpid intake, refers to a breakdown in the stomach's

function of " na, " intake. The meaning goes beyond lack of appetite or poor

appetite, it means lack of appetite PLUS poor digestion.

 

If the meaning was lack of appetite alone, obviously it would be much easier to

simply say lack of appetite, which is also a term that Nigel Wiseman uses in his

work. In this instance, the meaning is more complex than that, and we don't

have one English word that reflects both poor digestion and poor appetite

occurring together. That said, I dislike the phrase torpid intake and it tops

the list of Nigel's terms that I am not a big fan of. But I understand his

reasons, I understand the Chinese concept, I see the academic validity, and I

see the importance of the clinical distinction that he is making with this term.

 

Eric Brand

website: legendaryherbs.com

blog: http://bluepoppy.com/blog/blogs/index.php

[Guest guest]

If when we use the word sedate we mean Xie & #27844; then clearly sedate is not

a good word choice. The issue is with experience. As a practitioner I experience

the draining of the Xie Qi & #37034; & #27683;, the pathogenic Qi, out of the

needle. THis is a subjective experience. I would liken it to sucking out or

dredging or syphoning off. Sometimes it is like opening a hole so that a

pressure or heat can escape, but most often it is a more active pulling of the

pathogenic factor out of the channel by moving the needle so as to accomplish

this. This experience is a kinesthetic and / or imaginal complex. As an

acupuncturist and Qigong practitioner, I have been practicing this tehnique, and

focusing my awareness on it, for 20 years. When I render this experience into

language then clearly the idea 'to sedate' is not as accurate a description of

the experience as the idea 'to drain', which used in modern English implies to

drain something away. It is interesting for me to note that the root conception

of the TCM term Xie & #27844; comes closer to my experience as an acupuncturist

than does the word sedate. It is said to mean to discharge, let out or vent.

I think experience is more important than language. If we get the right

experience then we will know what the ancient masters experienced and therefore

what the classics mean. This experience guides us to transmit this appropriately

into our language, because the universal experience of Qi, and the science and

art of how we work with it, is understandable independently of language.

language points to it, but the reality of what is meant by Xie in any given

classic is best understood from within our own experience base as practitioners.

[Guest guest]

Interesting discussion but kinda hard to follow if the analysis isn't rooted in

the Chinese terminology. Shu, as in to " shu " the liver or wind, according to

Chinese-English Dictionary from the Beijing Foreign Languages Press, is

" dredge " . Wiseman uses the term " coursing. "

 

There's another " shu " character, which is also associated with the liver.

Wiseman translates this as " soothe. " The tendons are keen on receiving this kind

of " shu. "

 

None of this means squat without looking to the characters for meaning. If you

look at the character for shu number 1, there's no mistaking that it bears a

resemblance to the character " liu " as in to flow, but with a much less common

radical that looks something like the foot (zu). Matthews Dictionary indicates

that this is radical #103, which means surprise, surprise... foot or roll of

cloth. In olden days it was pronounced " shu " .

 

I don't want to state the obvious, but for those who don't know, the radicals

often are key to understanding direction, action, or elemental influence of the

character itself. We might think about this in terms of the English, Latin,

Hindi or, my personal favorite, Cuneiform terms we choose to match with the

Chinese. We might innovate some designations which are truer (albeit more

clunky) to the radical influence of special terms like " shu " . For instance,

instead of choosing " course " , " clear " , drain, we could opt for (foot)course,

(water)clear, (water)drain.

 

Hey! I said it was clunky, but it's much more helpful--I think-- than dickering

over tit or tat, when I suppose what we're really trying to reach is a deeper

understanding. Some might argue that this solution would compel them to learn

Chinese, which is time-consuming and altogether inconvenient, but since the

issue seems to center around truer understanding of critical terminology, this

seems to be the direction that the overall discussion is headed.

 

y.c.

[Guest guest]

Yangchu,

 

Can you say a little more about what the " foot " radical implies? I

don't think I'm understanding this one.

 

thanks,

RoseAnne

 

 

On May 9, 2009, at 12:47 PM, Yangchu Higgins wrote:

 

>

> Interesting discussion but kinda hard to follow if the analysis

> isn't rooted in the Chinese terminology. Shu, as in to " shu " the

> liver or wind, according to Chinese-English Dictionary from the

> Beijing Foreign Languages Press, is " dredge " . Wiseman uses the term

> " coursing. "

>

> There's another " shu " character, which is also associated with the

> liver. Wiseman translates this as " soothe. " The tendons are keen

> on receiving this kind of " shu. "

>

> None of this means squat without looking to the characters for

> meaning. If you look at the character for shu number 1, there's no

> mistaking that it bears a resemblance to the character " liu " as in

> to flow, but with a much less common radical that looks something

> like the foot (zu). Matthews Dictionary indicates that this is

> radical #103, which means surprise, surprise... foot or roll of

> cloth. In olden days it was pronounced " shu " .

>

> I don't want to state the obvious, but for those who don't know,

> the radicals often are key to understanding direction, action, or

> elemental influence of the character itself. We might think about

> this in terms of the English, Latin, Hindi or, my personal

> favorite, Cuneiform terms we choose to match with the Chinese. We

> might innovate some designations which are truer (albeit more

> clunky) to the radical influence of special terms like " shu " . For

> instance, instead of choosing " course " , " clear " , drain, we could

> opt for (foot)course, (water)clear, (water)drain.

>

> Hey! I said it was clunky, but it's much more helpful--I think--

> than dickering over tit or tat, when I suppose what we're really

> trying to reach is a deeper understanding. Some might argue that

> this solution would compel them to learn Chinese, which is time-

> consuming and altogether inconvenient, but since the issue seems to

> center around truer understanding of critical terminology, this

> seems to be the direction that the overall discussion is headed.

>

> y.c.

>

>

>

>

>

> ---

>

> Subscribe to the free online journal for TCM at

> Times http://www.chinesemedicinetimes.com

>

> Help build the world's largest online encyclopedia for Chinese

> medicine and acupuncture, click, http://

> www.chinesemedicinetimes.com/wiki/CMTpedia

>

> http://

> and adjust

> accordingly.

>

> Messages are the property of the author. Any duplication outside

> the group requires prior permission from the author.

>

> Please consider the environment and only print this message if

> absolutely necessary.

[Guest guest]

What's interesting to note about this particular " foot " radical is that it's not

the normal foot radical (my capabilities do not permit use of Chinese).

However, as with all Chinese medicine understanding stuff has to occur in

context. In other words, we need to ask, in what context can we place " foot " ?

The most obvious answer within the yin-yang dynamic of complementary opposites

is " hand " , but we may also think about foot in terms of functionality. Think of

the creative yin-yang reasoning offered by the Vietnamese practitioner who

regularly contributes on this site. We may further the understanding of the

radical in terms of its contextual relationship to pair; the component that is

most often paired with the water radical to denote flow, " liu " in Mandarin. It

seems most of our understanding has to be taken to the basics: up-down,

left-right, in-out, the like. Therefore, we want to root the our understanding

of the radicals and treatment

principles similarly. Getting too sexy with all the Latin and, my personal

fav, Cuneiform is likely to lead us too far afield from the natural actions that

these terms seek to replicate.

 

I'd certainly be interested in what you think the contextual applicability of

the foot radical would be in the context of " shu gan " , even more how you

perceive such " intentional awareness " , which I do not altogether buy but don't

sell either, is impacted.

 

cheers,

y.c. LA.C., EFT-Adv

Los Angeles