Guest guest Posted March 2, 2007 Report Share Posted March 2, 2007 henry: good luck with your studies, and thank you for working on this translation. on wisemanese: when wiseman published his dictionary, there was a lot of controversy about his translations of the chinese terms. the community recognized that having multiple translations of various terms was confusing, and wiseman attempted to solve this prob by publishing his dictionary. the idea was that everyone was to use his language, so we'ld all be on the same page. the problem (as i see it) is that wiseman's language is very cumbersome, as you point out, and he uses words that aren't in the natural reading/speaking vocabulary of the average english speaker, such as your example. so his translations of chinese terms are difficult to understand, such as the example you give. one of my teachers gave a different, simpler translation for the term you describe. its late, and my brain is not recalling it at the moment. when it comes to mind, i will try to remember to email it to you. kath On 2/26/07, henry_buchtel <henry.buchtel wrote: > > Hello all, I am very happy to find such an active (and high quality!) > TCM forum! > > A brief introduction to the group- I am in my first of 4 years at the > Hunan University of TCM, my major is Acupuncture and Tuina. > > Now a question I would appreciate some help with, I am involved with a > book translation (Gynecology/TCM) and want to know if there is an > accepted abbreviation of " Concretions and Conglomerations " > (Zheng1Jia3- ? & #30229; -sorry my computer doesn't seem to have zheng1) > Referring to two different types of lumps in the womb. > > I got Concretions and Conglomerations from Wiseman's dictionary, but > I'm getting tired of writing it... > > Thanks for any help! > > Henry Buchtel > > > -- Kath Bartlett, LAc, MS, BA UCLA Oriental Medicine Experienced, Dedicated, Effective Asheville Center For 70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777 kbartlett www.AcupunctureAsheville.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 2, 2007 Report Share Posted March 2, 2007 Henry Why not use movable and unmovable masses - Chinese Medicine Thursday, March 01, 2007 7:43 PM Wisemanese henry: good luck with your studies, and thank you for working on this translation. on wisemanese: when wiseman published his dictionary, there was a lot of controversy about his translations of the chinese terms. the community recognized that having multiple translations of various terms was confusing, and wiseman attempted to solve this prob by publishing his dictionary. the idea was that everyone was to use his language, so we'ld all be on the same page. the problem (as i see it) is that wiseman's language is very cumbersome, as you point out, and he uses words that aren't in the natural reading/speaking vocabulary of the average english speaker, such as your example. so his translations of chinese terms are difficult to understand, such as the example you give. one of my teachers gave a different, simpler translation for the term you describe. its late, and my brain is not recalling it at the moment. when it comes to mind, i will try to remember to email it to you. kath On 2/26/07, henry_buchtel <henry.buchtel wrote: > > Hello all, I am very happy to find such an active (and high quality!) > TCM forum! > > A brief introduction to the group- I am in my first of 4 years at the > Hunan University of TCM, my major is Acupuncture and Tuina. > > Now a question I would appreciate some help with, I am involved with a > book translation (Gynecology/TCM) and want to know if there is an > accepted abbreviation of " Concretions and Conglomerations " > (Zheng1Jia3- ? & #30229; -sorry my computer doesn't seem to have zheng1) > Referring to two different types of lumps in the womb. > > I got Concretions and Conglomerations from Wiseman's dictionary, but > I'm getting tired of writing it... > > Thanks for any help! > > Henry Buchtel > > > -- Oriental Medicine Experienced, Dedicated, Effective Asheville Center For 70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777 kbartlett www.AcupunctureAsheville.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 2, 2007 Report Share Posted March 2, 2007 Kath, Not all of us find Wiseman's translations to be " cumbersome " . Only a few terms are as difficult to translate as " zheng jia " , concretions and conglomerations. The dictionary was published not to get everyone to use the same English equivalent, but to have access to the thousands of Chinese medical terms that had never been published in dictionaries and/or glossaries up to that point, and to have some accountability and reference for translation work. Until the Wiseman dictionary was published, it was difficult to reference English language CM works back to the original pinyin and Chinese language works. If some of the terms seem cumbersome, just look at other Chinese/ English dictionaries and find term equivalents that are accurate. It just takes some getting used to. I am always surprised when I hear this, as even lay people don't find biomedical terminology (which is far more cumbersome) anything to complain about. Thrombocytopenia, anyone? On Mar 1, 2007, at 7:43 PM, wrote: > henry: > > good luck with your studies, and thank you for working on this > translation. > > on wisemanese: > > when wiseman published his dictionary, there was a lot of > controversy about > his translations of the chinese terms. the community recognized > that having > multiple translations of various terms was confusing, and wiseman > attempted > to solve this prob by publishing his dictionary. the idea was that > everyone > was to use his language, so we'ld all be on the same page. the > problem (as > i see it) is that wiseman's language is very cumbersome, as you > point out, > and he uses words that aren't in the natural reading/speaking > vocabulary of > the average english speaker, such as your example. so his > translations of > chinese terms are difficult to understand, such as the example you > give. one > of my teachers gave a different, simpler translation for the term you > describe. its late, and my brain is not recalling it at the moment. > when > it comes to mind, i will try to remember to email it to you. > > kath > > On 2/26/07, henry_buchtel <henry.buchtel wrote: > > > > Hello all, I am very happy to find such an active (and high > quality!) > > TCM forum! > > > > A brief introduction to the group- I am in my first of 4 years at > the > > Hunan University of TCM, my major is Acupuncture and Tuina. > > > > Now a question I would appreciate some help with, I am involved > with a > > book translation (Gynecology/TCM) and want to know if there is an > > accepted abbreviation of " Concretions and Conglomerations " > > (Zheng1Jia3- ? & #30229; -sorry my computer doesn't seem to have > zheng1) > > Referring to two different types of lumps in the womb. > > > > I got Concretions and Conglomerations from Wiseman's dictionary, but > > I'm getting tired of writing it... > > > > Thanks for any help! > > > > Henry Buchtel > > > > > > > > -- > > Oriental Medicine > Experienced, Dedicated, Effective > > Asheville Center For > 70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two > Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777 > kbartlett > www.AcupunctureAsheville.com > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 2, 2007 Report Share Posted March 2, 2007 Kath, and Henry, As someone who grew up in Chinese language and cultural environment, and went to what's considered the best high school and most competitive department of the best university in Taiwan, I can tell you that Zheng Jia were not the terms I found easy to understand and remember before learning CM myself. In fact, I would venture to guess if we were to sample 100 native speakers off the street in Taipei or Beijing, more than 95% of them won't be able to tell what Zheng and Jia mean. (Almost all of them will be able to tell it's some sort of the disease because of the root part of these words.) I applaud Wiseman and Feng for their deliberate effort in making sure the meaning is preserved and making it possible to reverse translate. Come on, do you really expect learning CM in English for native English speakers to be easier than doing it in Chinese for native Chinese speakers? :-) Mike L. <zrosenbe wrote: Kath, Not all of us find Wiseman's translations to be " cumbersome " . Only a few terms are as difficult to translate as " zheng jia " , concretions and conglomerations. The dictionary was published not to get everyone to use the same English equivalent, but to have access to the thousands of Chinese medical terms that had never been published in dictionaries and/or glossaries up to that point, and to have some accountability and reference for translation work. Until the Wiseman dictionary was published, it was difficult to reference English language CM works back to the original pinyin and Chinese language works. If some of the terms seem cumbersome, just look at other Chinese/ English dictionaries and find term equivalents that are accurate. It just takes some getting used to. I am always surprised when I hear this, as even lay people don't find biomedical terminology (which is far more cumbersome) anything to complain about. Thrombocytopenia, anyone? On Mar 1, 2007, at 7:43 PM, wrote: > henry: > > good luck with your studies, and thank you for working on this > translation. > > on wisemanese: > > when wiseman published his dictionary, there was a lot of > controversy about > his translations of the chinese terms. the community recognized > that having > multiple translations of various terms was confusing, and wiseman > attempted > to solve this prob by publishing his dictionary. the idea was that > everyone > was to use his language, so we'ld all be on the same page. the > problem (as > i see it) is that wiseman's language is very cumbersome, as you > point out, > and he uses words that aren't in the natural reading/speaking > vocabulary of > the average english speaker, such as your example. so his > translations of > chinese terms are difficult to understand, such as the example you > give. one > of my teachers gave a different, simpler translation for the term you > describe. its late, and my brain is not recalling it at the moment. > when > it comes to mind, i will try to remember to email it to you. > > kath > > On 2/26/07, henry_buchtel <henry.buchtel wrote: > > > > Hello all, I am very happy to find such an active (and high > quality!) > > TCM forum! > > > > A brief introduction to the group- I am in my first of 4 years at > the > > Hunan University of TCM, my major is Acupuncture and Tuina. > > > > Now a question I would appreciate some help with, I am involved > with a > > book translation (Gynecology/TCM) and want to know if there is an > > accepted abbreviation of " Concretions and Conglomerations " > > (Zheng1Jia3- ? & #30229; -sorry my computer doesn't seem to have > zheng1) > > Referring to two different types of lumps in the womb. > > > > I got Concretions and Conglomerations from Wiseman's dictionary, but > > I'm getting tired of writing it... > > > > Thanks for any help! > > > > Henry Buchtel > > > > > > > > -- > > Oriental Medicine > Experienced, Dedicated, Effective > > Asheville Center For > 70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two > Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777 > kbartlett > www.AcupunctureAsheville.com > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 2, 2007 Report Share Posted March 2, 2007 I very much agree! Wiseman is a starting point - but you have to immerse yourself in the field and culture to really understand it. Since we are all Yi Xue jia in Yi Lin, we have to do our best to really understand our ancestors. Robert Chu, L.Ac., QME, PhD chusauli www.chusaulei.com >Mike Liaw <mikeliaw >Chinese Medicine >Chinese Medicine >Re: Wisemanese >Thu, 1 Mar 2007 22:04:03 -0800 (PST) > >Kath, and Henry, > > As someone who grew up in Chinese language and cultural environment, and >went to what's considered the best high school and most competitive >department of the best university in Taiwan, I can tell you that Zheng Jia >were not the terms I found easy to understand and remember before learning >CM myself. In fact, I would venture to guess if we were to sample 100 >native speakers off the street in Taipei or Beijing, more than 95% of them >won't be able to tell what Zheng and Jia mean. (Almost all of them will be >able to tell it's some sort of the disease because of the root part of >these words.) I applaud Wiseman and Feng for their deliberate effort in >making sure the meaning is preserved and making it possible to reverse >translate. > Come on, do you really expect learning CM in English for native English >speakers to be easier than doing it in Chinese for native Chinese >speakers? :-) > > Mike L. > > <zrosenbe wrote: > Kath, >Not all of us find Wiseman's translations to be " cumbersome " . >Only a few terms are as difficult to translate as " zheng jia " , >concretions and conglomerations. The dictionary was published not to >get everyone to use the same English equivalent, but to have access >to the thousands of Chinese medical terms that had never been >published in dictionaries and/or glossaries up to that point, and to >have some accountability and reference for translation work. Until >the Wiseman dictionary was published, it was difficult to reference >English language CM works back to the original pinyin and Chinese >language works. >If some of the terms seem cumbersome, just look at other Chinese/ >English dictionaries and find term equivalents that are accurate. It >just takes some getting used to. I am always surprised when I hear >this, as even lay people don't find biomedical terminology (which is >far more cumbersome) anything to complain about. Thrombocytopenia, >anyone? > > >On Mar 1, 2007, at 7:43 PM, wrote: > > > henry: > > > > good luck with your studies, and thank you for working on this > > translation. > > > > on wisemanese: > > > > when wiseman published his dictionary, there was a lot of > > controversy about > > his translations of the chinese terms. the community recognized > > that having > > multiple translations of various terms was confusing, and wiseman > > attempted > > to solve this prob by publishing his dictionary. the idea was that > > everyone > > was to use his language, so we'ld all be on the same page. the > > problem (as > > i see it) is that wiseman's language is very cumbersome, as you > > point out, > > and he uses words that aren't in the natural reading/speaking > > vocabulary of > > the average english speaker, such as your example. so his > > translations of > > chinese terms are difficult to understand, such as the example you > > give. one > > of my teachers gave a different, simpler translation for the term you > > describe. its late, and my brain is not recalling it at the moment. > > when > > it comes to mind, i will try to remember to email it to you. > > > > kath > > > > On 2/26/07, henry_buchtel <henry.buchtel wrote: > > > > > > Hello all, I am very happy to find such an active (and high > > quality!) > > > TCM forum! > > > > > > A brief introduction to the group- I am in my first of 4 years at > > the > > > Hunan University of TCM, my major is Acupuncture and Tuina. > > > > > > Now a question I would appreciate some help with, I am involved > > with a > > > book translation (Gynecology/TCM) and want to know if there is an > > > accepted abbreviation of " Concretions and Conglomerations " > > > (Zheng1Jia3- ?ðý -sorry my computer doesn't seem to have > > zheng1) > > > Referring to two different types of lumps in the womb. > > > > > > I got Concretions and Conglomerations from Wiseman's dictionary, but > > > I'm getting tired of writing it... > > > > > > Thanks for any help! > > > > > > Henry Buchtel > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > Oriental Medicine > > Experienced, Dedicated, Effective > > > > Asheville Center For > > 70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two > > Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777 > > kbartlett > > www.AcupunctureAsheville.com > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 2, 2007 Report Share Posted March 2, 2007 A very good point, Mike. On Mar 1, 2007, at 10:04 PM, Mike Liaw wrote: > I applaud Wiseman and Feng for their deliberate effort in making > sure the meaning is preserved and making it possible to reverse > translate. > Come on, do you really expect learning CM in English for native > English speakers to be easier than doing it in Chinese for native > Chinese speakers? :-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 2, 2007 Report Share Posted March 2, 2007 Hi Henry! If you're getting tired of typing " Concretions and Conglomerations " , use cut and paste! It would be my opinion that you have few choices when doing translations, and Wiseman is one of the best choices. My teacher will sometimes make a point of making a point about accuracy in translation - it is very easy to corrupt or pollute our medical system because it _is_ so supple and fluid. I find Wiseman to be accurate and fair, and as far as his terms being unwieldy ... it seems to me that if a term is specialised (as zheng jia is), then it makes no sense to " translate " it into " simple, common-use language " . Catch my meaning? Looking forward to your translation! Hugo On 2/26/07, henry_buchtel <henry.buchtel wrote: > I got Concretions and Conglomerations from Wiseman's dictionary, but > I'm getting tired of writing it... > > Thanks for any help! > > Henry Buchtel > > > -- Kath Bartlett, LAc, MS, BA UCLA Oriental Medicine Experienced, Dedicated, Effective Asheville Center For 70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777 kbartlett www.AcupunctureAsheville.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 3, 2007 Report Share Posted March 3, 2007 Just to clear up a possible misunderstanding- I am all in favor of a standard English non-colloquial term for translating Chinese terms, but in this case " Concretions and Conglomerations " really is cumbersome! I was hoping for something like " C & C " or " Concre/Conglo " ... Much easier to use would be Alon's suggestion of " Moveable and Unmovable Masses " which could easily be shortened to " Masses " (when in context) to make a passage more readable. About non-colloquial terms, while I agree that many commonly used TCM terms in Chinese are not familiar to the layperson, I do not feel *this alone* is a very good argument for making the English terms specialized. One good argument, however, is that many of the readers of English TCM texts will *not* be American (or Canadian, or British) so translations should use " International English " rather then terms or phrases which would feel more natural to us. Thank you all for your comments, I am still catching up with them! Henry (I am new to the online TCM community, if what I said above has already been repeated many times please accept my apology! ) Chinese Medicine , Hugo Ramiro <subincor wrote: > > > > > > Hi Henry! If you're getting tired of typing " Concretions and Conglomerations " , use cut and paste! It would be my opinion that you have few choices when doing translations, and Wiseman is one of the best choices. My teacher will sometimes make a point of making a point about accuracy in translation - it is very easy to corrupt or pollute our medical system because it _is_ so supple and fluid. I find Wiseman to be accurate and fair, and as far as his terms being unwieldy ... it seems to me that if a term is specialised (as zheng jia is), then it makes no sense to " translate " it into " simple, common-use language " . Catch my meaning? Looking forward to your translation! > Hugo > > On 2/26/07, henry_buchtel <henry.buchtel wrote: > > > I got Concretions and Conglomerations from Wiseman's dictionary, but > > I'm getting tired of writing it... > > > > Thanks for any help! > > > > Henry Buchtel > > > > > > > > -- > Kath Bartlett, LAc, MS, BA UCLA > Oriental Medicine > Experienced, Dedicated, Effective > > Asheville Center For > 70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two > Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777 > kbartlett > www.AcupunctureAsheville.com > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 3, 2007 Report Share Posted March 3, 2007 Hi Henry. Maccioca even suggests shortening it all down to " abdominal masses " . He has a fairly fierce rebuttal to a lot of Wiseman's linguistic behaviours floating around on the internet. What it really comes down to is a choice made on the part of the author / translator as to the tone of the text, and as has been repeated by many people, if there is at the minimum a glossary with the original chinese terms, this can keep the " problems " to a minimum. That last comment is meant more generally, not so much directed at you, Henry. Hugo henry_buchtel <henry.buchtel Chinese Medicine Friday, 2 March, 2007 9:58:27 PM Re: Wisemanese Much easier to use would be Alon's suggestion of " Moveable and Unmovable Masses " which could easily be shortened to " Masses " (when in context) to make a passage more readable. About non-colloquial terms, while I agree that many commonly used TCM terms in Chinese are not familiar to the layperson, I do not feel *this alone* is a very good argument for making the English terms specialized. One good argument, however, is that many of the readers of English TCM texts will *not* be American (or Canadian, or British) so translations should use " International English " rather then terms or phrases which would feel more natural to us. > <!-- #ygrp-mlmsg {font-size:13px;font-family:arial,helvetica,clean,sans-serif;} #ygrp-mlmsg table {font-size:inherit;font:100%;} #ygrp-mlmsg select, input, textarea {font:99% arial,helvetica,clean,sans-serif;} #ygrp-mlmsg pre, code {font:115% monospace;} #ygrp-mlmsg * {line-height:1.22em;} #ygrp-text{ font-family:Georgia; } #ygrp-text p{ margin:0 0 1em 0; } #ygrp-tpmsgs{ font-family:Arial; clear:both; } #ygrp-vitnav{ padding-top:10px; font-family:Verdana; font-size:77%; margin:0; } #ygrp-vitnav a{ padding:0 1px; } #ygrp-actbar{ clear:both; margin:25px 0; white-space:nowrap; color:#666; text-align:right; } #ygrp-actbar .left{ float:left; white-space:nowrap; } ..bld{font-weight:bold;} #ygrp-grft{ font-family:Verdana; font-size:77%; padding:15px 0; } #ygrp-ft{ font-family:verdana; font-size:77%; border-top:1px solid #666; padding:5px 0; } #ygrp-mlmsg #logo{ padding-bottom:10px; } #ygrp-vital{ background-color:#e0ecee; margin-bottom:20px; padding:2px 0 8px 8px; } #ygrp-vital #vithd{ font-size:77%; font-family:Verdana; font-weight:bold; color:#333; text-transform:uppercase; } #ygrp-vital ul{ padding:0; margin:2px 0; } #ygrp-vital ul li{ list-style-type:none; clear:both; border:1px solid #e0ecee; } #ygrp-vital ul li .ct{ font-weight:bold; color:#ff7900; float:right; width:2em; text-align:right; padding-right:.5em; } #ygrp-vital ul li .cat{ font-weight:bold; } #ygrp-vital a { text-decoration:none; } #ygrp-vital a:hover{ text-decoration:underline; } #ygrp-sponsor #hd{ color:#999; font-size:77%; } #ygrp-sponsor #ov{ padding:6px 13px; background-color:#e0ecee; margin-bottom:20px; } #ygrp-sponsor #ov ul{ padding:0 0 0 8px; margin:0; } #ygrp-sponsor #ov li{ list-style-type:square; padding:6px 0; font-size:77%; } #ygrp-sponsor #ov li a{ text-decoration:none; font-size:130%; } #ygrp-sponsor #nc { background-color:#eee; margin-bottom:20px; padding:0 8px; } #ygrp-sponsor .ad{ padding:8px 0; } #ygrp-sponsor .ad #hd1{ font-family:Arial; font-weight:bold; color:#628c2a; font-size:100%; line-height:122%; } #ygrp-sponsor .ad a{ text-decoration:none; } #ygrp-sponsor .ad a:hover{ text-decoration:underline; } #ygrp-sponsor .ad p{ margin:0; } o {font-size:0;} ..MsoNormal { margin:0 0 0 0; } #ygrp-text tt{ font-size:120%; } blockquote{margin:0 0 0 4px;} ..replbq {margin:4;} --> _________ The all-new Mail goes wherever you go - free your email address from your Internet provider. http://uk.docs./nowyoucan.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 3, 2007 Report Share Posted March 3, 2007 Henry, Good luck with your studies. Perhaps it would be useful for you to consider the derivation of the terms you are considering. They are derived from a clinical encounter with a patient. They are descriptions of a feeling of masses either reported by the patient to the practitioner or directly palpated by that practitioner. If you think of them in that way they become very specific and descriptive. Imagine yourself palpating an abdomen and feeling a Concretion, hard, unyielding, movable or not. Do the same for Conglomeration, having some of the same characteristics as the aforementioned along with having a touch sensation of masses drawn together (think tightly bound bag of marbles). When I consider the translation in this way it becomes very enlightening as to the type of mass described. I agree that the terms are awkwardly long but the task you have taken on is not an easy one and in this case it may be the best term. I will leave that argument to the language experts in the group. For me as a " hands on practitioner " the description is very useful. Regards, Michael Chinese Medicine , " henry_buchtel " <henry.buchtel wrote: > > Just to clear up a possible misunderstanding- I am all in favor of a > standard English non-colloquial term for translating Chinese terms, > but in this case " Concretions and Conglomerations " really is > cumbersome! I was hoping for something like " C & C " or " Concre/Conglo " ... > > Much easier to use would be Alon's suggestion of " Moveable and > Unmovable Masses " which could easily be shortened to " Masses " (when in > context) to make a passage more readable. > > About non-colloquial terms, while I agree that many commonly used TCM > terms in Chinese are not familiar to the layperson, I do not feel > *this alone* is a very good argument for making the English terms > specialized. One good argument, however, is that many of the readers > of English TCM texts will *not* be American (or Canadian, or British) > so translations should use " International English " rather then terms > or phrases which would feel more natural to us. > > Thank you all for your comments, I am still catching up with them! > > Henry > > (I am new to the online TCM community, if what I said above has > already been repeated many times please accept my apology! ) > > > > Chinese Medicine , Hugo Ramiro > <subincor@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Hi Henry! If you're getting tired of typing " Concretions and > Conglomerations " , use cut and paste! It would be my opinion that > you have few choices when doing translations, and Wiseman is one of > the best choices. My teacher will sometimes make a point of making a > point about accuracy in translation - it is very easy to corrupt or > pollute our medical system because it _is_ so supple and fluid. I find > Wiseman to be accurate and fair, and as far as his terms being > unwieldy ... it seems to me that if a term is specialised (as zheng > jia is), then it makes no sense to " translate " it into " simple, > common-use language " . Catch my meaning? Looking forward to your > translation! > > Hugo > > > > On 2/26/07, henry_buchtel <henry.buchtel@> wrote: > > > > > I got Concretions and Conglomerations from Wiseman's dictionary, but > > > I'm getting tired of writing it... > > > > > > Thanks for any help! > > > > > > Henry Buchtel > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Kath Bartlett, LAc, MS, BA UCLA > > Oriental Medicine > > Experienced, Dedicated, Effective > > > > Asheville Center For > > 70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two > > Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777 > > kbartlett@ > > www.AcupunctureAsheville.com > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 3, 2007 Report Share Posted March 3, 2007 Hello all, How about " fixed papable mass about the size of a.. " for concretions, and " movable mass about the size of a... " for conglomerations. A movable mass would also indicate that it is encapsulated. Usually easier to treat surgically. Hope that helps. Take care. amy <BR><BR><BR>**************************************<BR> AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at http://www.aol.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 4, 2007 Report Share Posted March 4, 2007 Hugo, A majority of the glossaries in English language texts other than those using Wiseman terminology are woefully inadequate. It is only common sense to realize that a great amount of detail is lost by reducing zheng jia ji ju/concretions, conglomerations accumulations and gatherings to " abdominal masses " . Each of these is a technical term that aids in a specfic diagnosis, and to lose that detail obscures the ability to diagnose and treat specific conditions and patterns. On Mar 3, 2007, at 8:29 AM, Hugo Ramiro wrote: > Hi Henry. Maccioca even suggests shortening it all down to > " abdominal masses " . He has a fairly fierce rebuttal to a lot of > Wiseman's linguistic behaviours floating around on the internet. > What it really comes down to is a choice made on the part of the > author / translator as to the tone of the text, and as has been > repeated by many people, if there is at the minimum a glossary with > the original chinese terms, this can keep the " problems " to a > minimum. That last comment is meant more generally, not so much > directed at you, Henry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 4, 2007 Report Share Posted March 4, 2007 Just to clear up a possible misunderstanding- I am all in favor of a standard English non-colloquial term for translating Chinese terms, but in this case " Concretions and Conglomerations " really is cumbersome! I was hoping for something like " C & C " or " Concre/Conglo " ... Much easier to use would be Alon's suggestion of " Moveable and Unmovable Masses " which could easily be shortened to " Masses " (when in context) to make a passage more readable. About non-colloquial terms, while I agree that many commonly used TCM terms in Chinese are not familiar to the layperson, I do not feel *this alone* is a very good argument for making the English terms specialized. One good argument, however, is that many of the readers of English TCM texts will *not* be American (or Canadian, or British) so translations should use " International English " rather then terms or phrases which would feel more natural to us. Thank you all for your comments, I am still catching up with them! Henry Hi Henry. Maccioca even suggests shortening it all down to " abdominal masses " . He has a fairly fierce rebuttal to a lot of Wiseman's linguistic behaviours floating around on the internet. What it really comes down to is a choice made on the part of the author / translator as to the tone of the text, and as has been repeated by many people, if there is at the minimum a glossary with the original chinese terms, this can keep the " problems " to a minimum. Hugo I'm getting used to Wisemanspeak, but i do find it is often cumbersome, as this example so clearly demonstrates. as a non-scholar type practitioner, practically/clinically oriented, i'm like to be able to read things quickly and easily to get concepts i can use for tx patients in clinic. for this reason, i appreciate authors like giovanni and jane lyttleton who explain TCM using lite and breezy language. so for myself, i would prefer terms that i don't have to look up in wiseman to understand, such as alon's suggestion of movable and unmovable masses. a footnote could be added referencing wiseman's terminology for those seeking a deeper understanding of the term. i appreciate what wiseman accomplished in putting the dictionary together, it was quite an undertaking and a boon to the English speaking profession. kath -- Kath Bartlett, LAc, MS, BA UCLA Oriental Medicine Experienced, Dedicated, Effective Asheville Center For 70 Woodfin Place, Suite West Wing Two Asheville, NC 28801 828.258.2777 kbartlett www.AcupunctureAsheville.com Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 4, 2007 Report Share Posted March 4, 2007 He has a fairly fierce rebuttal to a lot of > Wiseman's linguistic behaviours floating around on the internet. >>>>>>>>> Hugo were can you find these - Chinese Medicine Saturday, March 03, 2007 6:50 PM Re: Wisemanese Hugo, A majority of the glossaries in English language texts other than those using Wiseman terminology are woefully inadequate. It is only common sense to realize that a great amount of detail is lost by reducing zheng jia ji ju/concretions, conglomerations accumulations and gatherings to " abdominal masses " . Each of these is a technical term that aids in a specfic diagnosis, and to lose that detail obscures the ability to diagnose and treat specific conditions and patterns. On Mar 3, 2007, at 8:29 AM, Hugo Ramiro wrote: > Hi Henry. Maccioca even suggests shortening it all down to > " abdominal masses " . He has a fairly fierce rebuttal to a lot of > Wiseman's linguistic behaviours floating around on the internet. > What it really comes down to is a choice made on the part of the > author / translator as to the tone of the text, and as has been > repeated by many people, if there is at the minimum a glossary with > the original chinese terms, this can keep the " problems " to a > minimum. That last comment is meant more generally, not so much > directed at you, Henry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 4, 2007 Report Share Posted March 4, 2007 You can find it on his website. It is several years old, and has already had several rebuttals from Wiseman and others. On Mar 4, 2007, at 8:40 AM, Alon Marcus wrote: > He has a fairly fierce rebuttal to a lot of > > Wiseman's linguistic behaviours floating around on the internet. > >>>>>>>>> > Hugo > were can you find these > > > > > > > > > - > > Chinese Medicine > Saturday, March 03, 2007 6:50 PM > Re: Wisemanese > > Hugo, > A majority of the glossaries in English language texts other > than those using Wiseman terminology are woefully inadequate. It is > only common sense to realize that a great amount of detail is lost by > reducing zheng jia ji ju/concretions, conglomerations accumulations > and gatherings to " abdominal masses " . Each of these is a technical > term that aids in a specfic diagnosis, and to lose that detail > obscures the ability to diagnose and treat specific conditions and > patterns. > > > On Mar 3, 2007, at 8:29 AM, Hugo Ramiro wrote: > > > Hi Henry. Maccioca even suggests shortening it all down to > > " abdominal masses " . He has a fairly fierce rebuttal to a lot of > > Wiseman's linguistic behaviours floating around on the internet. > > What it really comes down to is a choice made on the part of the > > author / translator as to the tone of the text, and as has been > > repeated by many people, if there is at the minimum a glossary with > > the original chinese terms, this can keep the " problems " to a > > minimum. That last comment is meant more generally, not so much > > directed at you, Henry. > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 4, 2007 Report Share Posted March 4, 2007 Henry, An argument for 'specialized' terms: While not incorrect, 'moveable and unmovable masses " is insufficient as a definition for " zheng jia " . First of all, the complete technical term is " zheng jia ji ju " /concretions, conglomerations, accumulations and gatherings. The abdominal masses are not classified just by being movable or fixed. They are also defined by: 1) form (concretions and accumulations have definite shape, conglomerations and gatherings have indefinite shape) 2) location (accumulations and gatherings are located in the middle burner, concretions and conglomerations in the lower burner) 3) source (concretions and accumulations are associated with the zang/ viscera and blood aspect, conglomerations and gatherings are associated with the fu/bowels and qi aspect). I think it would be difficult for a clinician to make an argument for less detailed information about the body that so clearly serves to make a more clarified diagnosis and treatment plan. On Mar 2, 2007, at 6:58 PM, henry_buchtel wrote: > Much easier to use would be Alon's suggestion of " Moveable and > Unmovable Masses " which could easily be shortened to " Masses " (when in > context) to make a passage more readable. > > About non-colloquial terms, while I agree that many commonly used TCM > terms in Chinese are not familiar to the layperson, I do not feel > *this alone* is a very good argument for making the English terms > specialized. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 5, 2007 Report Share Posted March 5, 2007 Zev One can also add qualifications to the descriptions. If these are to reflect a real palpable entity then one can describe the actual location, shape etc. That would be much more useful than concretions, accumulations etc. If we are for more detail than the traditional terms are not as specific as one would like to see. If we talk about translations than of course you need to really know what the author meant. Not quite as easy as it sounds. - Chinese Medicine Sunday, March 04, 2007 12:37 PM Re: Wisemanese Henry, An argument for 'specialized' terms: While not incorrect, 'moveable and unmovable masses " is insufficient as a definition for " zheng jia " . First of all, the complete technical term is " zheng jia ji ju " /concretions, conglomerations, accumulations and gatherings. The abdominal masses are not classified just by being movable or fixed. They are also defined by: 1) form (concretions and accumulations have definite shape, conglomerations and gatherings have indefinite shape) 2) location (accumulations and gatherings are located in the middle burner, concretions and conglomerations in the lower burner) 3) source (concretions and accumulations are associated with the zang/ viscera and blood aspect, conglomerations and gatherings are associated with the fu/bowels and qi aspect). I think it would be difficult for a clinician to make an argument for less detailed information about the body that so clearly serves to make a more clarified diagnosis and treatment plan. On Mar 2, 2007, at 6:58 PM, henry_buchtel wrote: > Much easier to use would be Alon's suggestion of " Moveable and > Unmovable Masses " which could easily be shortened to " Masses " (when in > context) to make a passage more readable. > > About non-colloquial terms, while I agree that many commonly used TCM > terms in Chinese are not familiar to the layperson, I do not feel > *this alone* is a very good argument for making the English terms > specialized. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 5, 2007 Report Share Posted March 5, 2007 Alon, The idea is to be able to access the original conception, not necessarily add one's own. What Chinese medicine is looking for is a seamless diagnosis and treatment strategy, and for that the language has to be consistent, and not added on to. It sounds like what you are talking about is using the abdominal palpation techniques and descriptions from biomedicine. While this is fine, the original terms and definitions allow one to proceed from what one observes to a description of viscera-bowel, qi, blood, fluid or channel/network vessel patterns that have led to the particular zheng jia ji ju. On Mar 4, 2007, at 8:11 PM, Alon Marcus wrote: > Zev > One can also add qualifications to the descriptions. If these are > to reflect a real palpable entity then one can describe the actual > location, shape etc. That would be much more useful than > concretions, accumulations etc. If we are for more detail than the > traditional terms are not as specific as one would like to see. If > we talk about translations than of course you need to really know > what the author meant. Not quite as easy as it sounds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 5, 2007 Report Share Posted March 5, 2007 Zev I agree as long as we really know what the original term means in a particular book we translate. I agree with you that we should not simplify concepts but i also think we should make them as accessible as possible. - Chinese Medicine Sunday, March 04, 2007 8:25 PM Re: Wisemanese Alon, The idea is to be able to access the original conception, not necessarily add one's own. What Chinese medicine is looking for is a seamless diagnosis and treatment strategy, and for that the language has to be consistent, and not added on to. It sounds like what you are talking about is using the abdominal palpation techniques and descriptions from biomedicine. While this is fine, the original terms and definitions allow one to proceed from what one observes to a description of viscera-bowel, qi, blood, fluid or channel/network vessel patterns that have led to the particular zheng jia ji ju. On Mar 4, 2007, at 8:11 PM, Alon Marcus wrote: > Zev > One can also add qualifications to the descriptions. If these are > to reflect a real palpable entity then one can describe the actual > location, shape etc. That would be much more useful than > concretions, accumulations etc. If we are for more detail than the > traditional terms are not as specific as one would like to see. If > we talk about translations than of course you need to really know > what the author meant. Not quite as easy as it sounds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 5, 2007 Report Share Posted March 5, 2007 Hi Z'ev. Although I do find sense and reason in Maccioca's (for example) opinions, I am firmly on the side of accurate translation, even to the point of apparent silliness (foxy mounting pattern). For me, it is the distasteful or weird terms that can indicate to us how differently CM views the world, and therefore can tell us if we are really " getting " or not. Speaking three languages and continuing my work on Chinese, I am familiar with how easily the essence of a word, poem or idea is lost in translation. I do feel, however, that we need to be more inclusive, and at the same time aware of where our personal niche (pronounced NEESH everyone) is. We all have a different role to play. " Linguists " must do their job in maintaining a direct link to our root texts, " Clinicians " must constantly provide a link to clinical realities in the present. With mutual respect, we will further without corrupting it. As a final note, I am a firm believer of converting to (but not being assimilated by) the Chinese Culture if you really want a bite of the Chinese Medical pie. Familiarity with the source of , its people, is essential. Hugo <zrosenbe Hugo, A majority of the glossaries in English language texts other than those using Wiseman terminology are woefully inadequate. It is only common sense to realize that a great amount of detail is lost by reducing zheng jia ji ju/concretions, conglomerations accumulations and gatherings to " abdominal masses " . Each of these is a technical term that aids in a specfic diagnosis, and to lose that detail obscures the ability to diagnose and treat specific conditions and patterns. On Mar 3, 2007, at 8:29 AM, Hugo Ramiro wrote: > Hi Henry. Maccioca even suggests shortening it all down to > " abdominal masses " . He has a fairly fierce rebuttal to a lot of > Wiseman's linguistic behaviours floating around on the internet. > What it really comes down to is a choice made on the part of the > author / translator as to the tone of the text, and as has been > repeated by many people, if there is at the minimum a glossary with > the original chinese terms, this can keep the " problems " to a > minimum. That last comment is meant more generally, not so much > directed at you, Henry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 6, 2007 Report Share Posted March 6, 2007 Chinese Medicine , " mpplac " <inquiry wrote: > > Henry, > Good luck with your studies. Perhaps it would be useful for you to > consider the derivation of the terms you are considering. They are > derived from a clinical encounter with a patient. They are > descriptions of a feeling of masses either reported by the patient to > the practitioner or directly palpated by that practitioner. If you > think of them in that way they become very specific and descriptive. > Imagine yourself palpating an abdomen and feeling a Concretion, hard, > unyielding, movable or not. Do the same for Conglomeration, having > some of the same characteristics as the aforementioned along with > having a touch sensation of masses drawn together (think tightly bound > bag of marbles). Thanks Michael, that is very helpful! After reading your description I have more of a 'feel' for the words Concretion.. concrete.. Conglomeration...glom together, conglomerate... Henry Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 6, 2007 Report Share Posted March 6, 2007 Hello Z'ev, I realized I left out an important word in my post that you quoted below, it should have been " About non-colloquial terms, while I agree that many commonly used TCM terms in Chinese are not familiar to the CHINESE layperson, I do not feel *this alone* is a very good argument for making the English terms specialized. " Does this change your understanding of my comment much? I don't disagree with you that when translating it is important not to lose meaning or detail. Are you saying that a term like " movable mass " is too specific? That it might prevent readers from giving the term a more complete definition? The term " conglomeration " certainly is not very specific, it just gives a general impression of things coming together. It might be easier to conglomerate all the different characteristics (form, location, source) together onto an unfamiliar word like this then it would be with a familiar one like " movable. " In any case, it is the meaning that we associate with a term rather then the term itself that is most important. If everybody knows what is meant by " movable mass " then that is just fine. Henry Chinese Medicine , " " <zrosenbe wrote: > > Henry, > An argument for 'specialized' terms: > > While not incorrect, 'moveable and unmovable masses " is insufficient > as a definition for " zheng jia " . First of all, the complete > technical term is " zheng jia ji ju " /concretions, conglomerations, > accumulations and gatherings. The abdominal masses are not > classified just by being movable or fixed. They are also defined by: > > 1) form (concretions and accumulations have definite shape, > conglomerations and gatherings have indefinite shape) > 2) location (accumulations and gatherings are located in the middle > burner, concretions and conglomerations in the lower burner) > 3) source (concretions and accumulations are associated with the zang/ > viscera and blood aspect, conglomerations and gatherings are > associated with the fu/bowels and qi aspect). > > I think it would be difficult for a clinician to make an argument for > less detailed information about the body that so clearly serves to > make a more clarified diagnosis and treatment plan. > > > On Mar 2, 2007, at 6:58 PM, henry_buchtel wrote: > > > Much easier to use would be Alon's suggestion of " Moveable and > > Unmovable Masses " which could easily be shortened to " Masses " (when in > > context) to make a passage more readable. > > > > About non-colloquial terms, while I agree that many commonly used TCM > > terms in Chinese are not familiar to the layperson, I do not feel > > *this alone* is a very good argument for making the English terms > > specialized. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 7, 2007 Report Share Posted March 7, 2007 Henry, I forwarded your question to Nigel Wiseman, as I felt he would be more qualified than I to answer this question. Here is his reply: " In PD, it says under " concretions, conglomerations, accumulations, and gatherings " that that conglomerations (and gatherings) are " masses of indefinite form, which gather and dissipate at irregular intervals, and wh are attended by pain of unfixed location. " Movable " reflects only one aspect of the definition. 瘕 come and go; they are not hard; the are associated with pain of unfixed location. If we searched around for more definitions, we would probably find one that says that the pain is not as intense as that associated with concretions. If you say " movable mass, " you are putting into the user's mind that this is the defining quality. I think it is only one of several defining qualities. Saying " movable mass " is like describing qi stagnation pain as " pain of unfixed location " and ignoring the other qualities it is associated with. The pain is not just of unfixed location, it is also less intense, and comes and goes. " Movable mass " is plain English, but plain English does not help if it does not match the concept. " Conglomeration " suggests soemthing loosely coherent, by contrast with concretion, which suggests something much more solid. It is slightly vague, so you have to read the definition. This is as it is in Chinese. On Mar 6, 2007, at 2:45 AM, henry_buchtel wrote: > Are you saying that a term like " movable mass " is too specific? That > it might prevent readers from giving the term a more complete > definition? The term " conglomeration " certainly is not very specific, > it just gives a general impression of things coming together. It might > be easier to conglomerate all the different characteristics (form, > location, source) together onto an unfamiliar word like this then it > would be with a familiar one like " movable. " > > In any case, it is the meaning that we associate with a term rather > then the term itself that is most important. If everybody knows what > is meant by " movable mass " then that is just fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 7, 2007 Report Share Posted March 7, 2007 Makes sense, thanks for asking! It seems he did choose these terms primarily for their tactile connotations but without being too specific. Henry <zrosenbe wrote: > > Henry, > I forwarded your question to Nigel Wiseman, as I felt he would be > more qualified than I to answer this question. Here is his reply: > > " In PD, it says under " concretions, conglomerations, accumulations, > and gatherings " that > that conglomerations (and gatherings) are " masses of indefinite form, > which gather and dissipate at irregular intervals, and wh are > attended by pain of unfixed location. > > " Movable " reflects only one aspect of the definition. 瘕 come and > go; they are not hard; the are associated with pain of unfixed > location. If we searched around for more definitions, we would > probably find one that says that the pain is not as intense as that > associated with concretions. > > If you say " movable mass, " you are putting into the user's mind that > this is the defining quality. I think it is only one of several > defining qualities. Saying " movable mass " is like describing qi > stagnation pain as " pain of unfixed location " and ignoring the other > qualities it is associated with. The pain is not just of unfixed > location, it is also less intense, and comes and goes. " Movable > mass " is plain English, but plain English does not help if it does > not match the concept. > > " Conglomeration " suggests soemthing loosely coherent, by contrast > with concretion, which suggests something much more solid. It is > slightly vague, so you have to read the definition. This is as it is > in Chinese. > > > > On Mar 6, 2007, at 2:45 AM, henry_buchtel wrote: > > > Are you saying that a term like " movable mass " is too specific? That > > it might prevent readers from giving the term a more complete > > definition? The term " conglomeration " certainly is not very specific, > > it just gives a general impression of things coming together. It might > > be easier to conglomerate all the different characteristics (form, > > location, source) together onto an unfamiliar word like this then it > > would be with a familiar one like " movable. " > > > > In any case, it is the meaning that we associate with a term rather > > then the term itself that is most important. If everybody knows what > > is meant by " movable mass " then that is just fine. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 7, 2007 Report Share Posted March 7, 2007 Hi Z'ev & All, Wellin says: ji1 amass; store up; accumulate; indigestion ji1 ju4 v. gather, build up, accumulate; accumulation jia3 lump in abdomen ju4 gather, get together; assemble; zheng1 disease zheng1 jia3 <Ch. med.> concretion zheng1 jia3 ji1 ju4 <Ch. med.> lump in the abdomen causing distension and pain It would be great if Nigel and his publishers would work with Wenlin to incorporate all his terms into the Wenlin dictionary. Best regards, 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.