poll

[Guest guest]

Re the poll: I think the current question is very poorly conceived.

According to the Council of Oriental Medical Publishers (COMP), there are

various different types of translations, each with their own criteria and

standards. No one glossary is going to be appropriate for every type of

translation or for every audience or specialty field.

 

According to COMP labeling guidelines, if one labels their translation

either a denotative denotative translation, they must specify a " freely

available " (as opposed to a private proprietary) glossary which gives the

Chinese characters, Pinyin romanization, and English language term choice

for all technical Chinese medical terms.

 

For sure, Wiseman is the best of these for my money.

 

However, once one has specified there term choice standard, they are then

free to use any term choice they want as long as they identify their

divergences. In other words, if someone feels they have a sound

philological reason why they don't want to use the word vacuity for xu,

then that's no problem as long as they alert the reader or the listener to

that the first time they introduce a different English choice. The issue is

ease of cross-referencing and translational transparency.

 

This is very different from the implications of the question as worded in

this poll. Although I am a supporter of Nigel's terminology, I also cannot

vote for anything other than sometimes. It seems to me that the fact that

this question was poorly worded shows the depth of confusion about this

entire issue.

 

Bob

 

--- Robert Flaws

--- bobflaws

--- EarthLink: It's your Internet.