Digest Number 125

[Guest guest]

> I wrote this article in 1993.If that can help you..

> I 'd love to hear your feedback on it.

>

> Philippe Riviere

 

I agree with you and with Z'ev. This was a great article. Back in 1991

when I was at ACTCM I was involved in a translation project there and what

you said in the article is exactly what I said to my teacher then: In order

to do an adequate translation of a Chinese medicine text into English, one

must know well Chinese language, the English language, Chinese culture and

history and Western culture and history. It is well-known that poetry is

nearly impossible to translate, as is philosophy. Language has two aspects,

the denotative and the connotative. The denotative is easy to translate,

but poetry and philosophy rely heavily on the connotative aspect of

language, and this is very difficult to translate since the associations

that one makes in one language are usually not shared with those of the

other language, because of different cultural and historical contexts.

Chinese medical texts are similar to poetry and philosophy in this sense,

especially the older texts. Chinese medicine has its roots in Daoism, the

entire Chinese cultural civilization has strong roots in the Yi Jing. In

order to understand the metaphors being used by ancient medical authors, it

is necessary to adequately comprehend the Yi Jing (and not merely as a

fortune-telling device) as well as Daoism. The more ancient medical writers

were not only doctors but also scholars. In fact many of them were

primarily scholars. Sometimes when they wrote they would quote the classics

of Chinese civilization. These quotations would be immediately recognized

as such by fellow scholar-doctors who were also well-versed in the classics;

and the context would be immediately understandable to them. But without

this cultural background we are often at best lost when we encounter some of

their statements and at worst we misunderstand and apply our own connotative

understanding which comes out of our own historical context. This is why

commentary is so necessary, commentary by someone familiar with the four

things I cited above. In addition, it is quite obvious that the classical

authors often used word associations based upon puns. When one reads a

translation without any knowledge of the original Chinese text one has no

chance to even consider this word play. An example would be the name of

Large Intestine 4, which is He Gu, which can mean, " union valley " but can

also mean " grain gathering " and then as a pun it is called " Hu Kou " which

means the " Tiger's Mouth, " all of these names bring up associations related

to the functioning of the point. But if one merely reads in English, " grain

gathering, " " union valley " and " tiger's mouth " one has no concept of why all

three names are given to this point let alone why the point is given this

name. Two good books that I have found which deal with the difficulties of

understanding ancient thought and culture include:

 

Avatara: The Humanization of Philosophy Through the Bhagavad Gita by Antonio

T. de Nicolas; 1976 Nicolas Hays Ltd. ISBN 0-89254-001-X

 

Quotation from the book jacket:

 

" Professor de Nicolas presents the reader with actualized possibilities of

knowing other cultures as they knew themselves. In his work, philosophy

becomes an ongoing synthesis of knowledge and sensation. This new

translation of The Bhagavad Gita with its easy and beautiful reading, is a

major philosophical attempt to read a most important text of a culture in

its own context. "

 

Hamlet's Mill: An Essay Investigating the Origins of Human Knowledge and Its

Transmission Through Myth by Giorgio de Santillana and Hertha von Dechend;

1977 David R. Godine, Publisher, Inc. ISBN 0-87923--215-3

 

Quotation from the book jacket:

" Ever since the Greeks coined the language we commonly use for scientific

description, mythology and science have developed separately. But what came

before the Greeks? What if we could prove that all myths have one common

origin in a celestial cosmology? What if the gods, the places they lived,

and what they did are but ciphers for celestial activity, a language for the

perpetuation of complex astronomical data? "

 

Modern science has attempted to rid itself of as much connotative language

as possible and to describe things as denotatively as possible in an effort

to present knowledge unambiguously and which can be understood in all

cultures at all times. I think that this attempt is somewhat of a failure.

Perhaps in 2000 years our modern scientific texts will appear as baffling to

people as 2000 year-old texts appear to us now. And perhaps 2000 years ago

the authors were also writing in a way that they thought would be

universally understood, not realizing the full extent of the significance of

the shifting sands of language and culture.

 

I am glad that we have reached the point in learning Chinese medicine that

we are recognizing our inadequacies here.

 

Later,

Jonathan Daniel, DC, LAc.

[Guest guest]

Jonathan hit it on the head. He and I are both students of the Jewish

mystical literature, and without a continual lineage to pass on the

teaching, teachers to explain it, commentaries to elucidate it, and a

working knowledge of Hebrew, the knowledge cannot be explained adequately.

Modern interpretations of Kabbalistic teaching often end up being just

that, unable to go farther than the person interpreting it. A similar

situation with the Chinese medical literature. . ..we need the tradition,

commentaries, teachers and language, adequately translated. The

macrobiotic movement floundered, because, having separated itself from

historical oriental medical literature and traditions, it could only base

itself on the modern teachers, and not go any further. With Chinese

medicine, we have to be sure to pass on the importance of proper knowledge

of Chinese medical terminology, so that we are not overly dependant on a

teacher's personal interpretations. This is a slow process, and will take

much time. Sometimes, wisdom is knowing what you don't know.

 

 

>>

>> Philippe Riviere

>

>I agree with you and with Z'ev. This was a great article. Back in 1991

>when I was at ACTCM I was involved in a translation project there and what

>you said in the article is exactly what I said to my teacher then: In order

>to do an adequate translation of a Chinese medicine text into English, one

>must know well Chinese language, the English language, Chinese culture and

>history and Western culture and history. It is well-known that poetry is

>nearly impossible to translate, as is philosophy. Language has two aspects,

>the denotative and the connotative. The denotative is easy to translate,

>but poetry and philosophy rely heavily on the connotative aspect of

>language, and this is very difficult to translate since the associations

>that one makes in one language are usually not shared with those of the

>other language, because of different cultural and historical contexts.

>Chinese medical texts are similar to poetry and philosophy in this sense,

>especially the older texts. Chinese medicine has its roots in Daoism, the

>entire Chinese cultural civilization has strong roots in the Yi Jing. In

>order to understand the metaphors being used by ancient medical authors, it

>is necessary to adequately comprehend the Yi Jing (and not merely as a

>fortune-telling device) as well as Daoism. The more ancient medical writers

>were not only doctors but also scholars. In fact many of them were

>primarily scholars. Sometimes when they wrote they would quote the classics

>of Chinese civilization. These quotations would be immediately recognized

>as such by fellow scholar-doctors who were also well-versed in the classics;

>and the context would be immediately understandable to them. But without

>this cultural background we are often at best lost when we encounter some of

>their statements and at worst we misunderstand and apply our own connotative

>understanding which comes out of our own historical context. This is why

>commentary is so necessary, commentary by someone familiar with the four

>things I cited above. In addition, it is quite obvious that the classical

>authors often used word associations based upon puns. When one reads a

>translation without any knowledge of the original Chinese text one has no

>chance to even consider this word play. An example would be the name of

>Large Intestine 4, which is He Gu, which can mean, " union valley " but can

>also mean " grain gathering " and then as a pun it is called " Hu Kou " which

>means the " Tiger's Mouth, " all of these names bring up associations related

>to the functioning of the point. But if one merely reads in English, " grain

>gathering, " " union valley " and " tiger's mouth " one has no concept of why all

>three names are given to this point let alone why the point is given this

>name. Two good books that I have found which deal with the difficulties of

>understanding ancient thought and culture include:

[Guest guest]

" Jonathan Alexander Daniel " <jalexd

 

Jonathan,

 

Thank you for your feedback, it was like a fresh breeze of lucid culture !!

 

I have myself translated in French* the work of Wang Ang: <Tangtou gejue>

(Formulas in rhymes) for my Master's degree in Chinese language studies (1991).

(Although I am French, I am not practicing French Acupuncuture but Chinese

Herbal Medicine and Classical Acupuncture).

 

To expand our subject, let me tell you a few words about a recent

publication (in French and unfortunately not translated yet):

Anna GHIGLIONE

<La pensee Chinoise ancienne et l'abstraction>

(Ancient Chinese thinking and Abstraction)

You-Feng editor, 1999

ISBN: 2-842279-078-2

(For those who decipher French:) this is a major contribution to understand

from inside the philosophy of Ancient China.

 

Philippe Riviere

 

PS.Yesterday,I took delight in reading the article of R.L.Felt, posted on

the JCM website:

<The Tyranny of familiar words

(Concept summarization and loss of meaning in translation)>.