Chinese language requirements

[Guest guest]

This, I believe comes right to the point ofthe current "debate" which takes on the curiouscharacteristics of a conversation in whichsighted and blind argue which is better.>>>>>>Ken that is misunderstand my points. I am sure it is better to have a skill than not to. The question is the cost benefit ratio. And I guess since I am not planning to learn Chinese I would never really know

Alon

 

-

dragon90405

Tuesday, December 18, 2001 8:31 PM

Re: Chinese language requirements

Dan,> Ken asked a couple of questions:> 1) Is the change in our requirements a lessening of the Chinese > language instruction?> > No. We are continuing the same amount of instruction in the > school's curriculum. Now that as of next fall all incoming > students will have at least one semester of Chinese before > coming here, we expect that we will be able to cover significantly > more material and have better outcomes. If there is something > that I wrote that gave you the opposite impression, please point it > out to me so that I can correct it.No. I just got confused as to whether therequirement for a semester of college levelChinese replaced the other language relatedparts of the curriculum or was, as you havenow clarified it to be, being added as aprerequisite to it. Thanks for clarifying it.Again, I find it to be an enlightened stepand I hope that other schools will see thatit is in everyone's best interest to follow.> > 2) How could I say that Chinese in not requisite for successful > practice [Todd's paraphrase] yet have it as a prerequisite for> our > school?> > I found this an interesting question, though not one that made > immediate sense to me. One has to do with the way things are; > the other with the way I want to do things. The number of > thoughtful successful practitioners just on this list who read no > East Asian language are obvious evidence that one can get > along without this skill. Practicing medicine is such a humbling > experience that it has taught even someone like me that it is > hubris to think anyone really knows what it takes to do it well.> > On the other hand, when Paul Karsten (who is the educational > specialist behind our school - I am just along for the ride) and I > started thinking about starting SIOM many years ago, it was just > as obvious to me that without a language component it just > would not be worth my while to be involved in the school. I think a > decent analogy is that while there are good cooks who only have > one arm and brilliant rock climbers who are blind, it is easier to > cook with two arms and rock climb if you can see.This, I believe comes right to the point ofthe current "debate" which takes on the curiouscharacteristics of a conversation in whichsighted and blind argue which is better.> This gets back to our mission and goals. In the simplest terms, > we have been trying to provide the students with the right > dynamic, to set them off on a good trajectory so that with the > tools that they have learned from us, the experience that their > patients give them, and the further learning they will get in post-> graduate seminars, they will continue to grow as practitioners > and deepen their understanding of the medicine. It is way too > soon to tell if we have been successful.Understood. In the end, all we can do is toconduct ourselves after the fasion of whatwas successful in our own educational experiences.It dawns on me that all I'm really sayingabout this whole subject is that whateverunderstanding and skill I have been ableto develop appears to me to have come fromstudying in certain ways both in the Statesand here in China with various teachers.As I've written about at some length, I'veconcluded that familiarity with the languagelies at the roots of the study. Coincidentally,my wife and I picked up a new dictionary herejust yesterday which begins with a statementfrom the authors that expresses the sameconclusion. This is a dictionary written for Chinesestudents. When I get home this afternoonI'll put up a brief translation of thisstatement along with the citation on thisrather useful little book. Here in China there is really no question about whether or not one needsto understand the language of Chinese medicinein order to study the subject. As I'm surethere was no question in Macau when youstudied there.Thanks, again, for the clarifications.If you have time, I'd still like to understandbetter your sentiments about translationstandards. KenChinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education.

[Guest guest]

There are always nuances and "untranslatable" aspects in every language (like jokes, for example); but they can be dealt with and accomodated. How the elements of theory interact should make sense in English, too.One or two years of studying Chinese alone won't solve this problem. I think the greater importance of learning the Chinese langauge is to find yet untranslated materials that will fill in the lacuna of present theory and clarify what is undeveloped.>>>>I agree and I hope Dan will do more books like Warm-diseases.

Alon

 

-

jramholz

Saturday, December 15, 2001 6:46 PM

Re: Chinese language requirements

, "dragon90405" <yulong@m...> wrote:> It's not just a matter of "knowing the language."> Without knowing the language, one does not know> the way in which the elements of theory interact.> > Therefore, being proficient with this aspect> of language learning is critically important > in the education of a doctor of Chinese medicine.This can be the case when translation is only done literally term for term. But with a more literary translation, glossaries, commentaries, or footnotes, there should be no obstacle to learning. There are always nuances and "untranslatable" aspects in every language (like jokes, for example); but they can be dealt with and accomodated. How the elements of theory interact should make sense in English, too.One or two years of studying Chinese alone won't solve this problem. I think the greater importance of learning the Chinese langauge is to find yet untranslated materials that will fill in the lacuna of present theory and clarify what is undeveloped.Jim RamholzChinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education.

[Guest guest]

Alon,

 

> >>>>>>Ken that is misunderstand my points. I am sure it is better

to have a skill than not to. The question is the cost benefit ratio.

And I guess since I am not planning to learn Chinese I would never

really know

 

OK. Here's what you're missing in the words of

Wang Xiao Long, the editor in Chief of the recently

published Shi Yong Zhong Yi Zi Dian, Beijing, 2001,

Xue Yuan Chu Ban She, ISBN 7-80060-178-1:

 

" Mastering the words and characters of ancient

Chinese medical language is the critical path to

study and research of Chinese medicine. [To

proceed] otherwise is just like water with

no spring or wood with no root. "

 

We certainly seem to be missing each other's

points, because I haven't been talking about

you or about cost benefit ratios. I'm sure

that as a clinician you rely upon those

methods and substances that have long proven

their efficacy.

 

I'm suggesting that we as a community adopt

that same approach to pedagogy. Does that

mean that we have to chant like Chinese

children? Well, it doesn't mean that to me.

It means that we have to study the original

material well enough to know how to adapt

it to ourselves and to our circumstances.

 

Looking back in history, you see that this

is the same problem that has faced each and

every successive generation that has passed

along the traditions of this medicine. Included

in each and every such transmission is a generous

helping of Chinese language.

 

I find it entirely incredible that anyone can

imagine that we might be the first generation

to accomplish the continued existence of these

traditions without adequate attention paid to

these fundamentals.

 

But that seems to me what you are suggesting

we attempt, in the name of cost/benefit ratios.

 

My point is that the whole community including

students, teachers, administrators, school

owners and other entrepreuners involved in

Chinese medicine as a commercial undertaking,

legislators, policy makers, doctors, patients,

in other words everybody involved, has to

wake up to the fact described above by Wang Xiao

Long and begin to demand the inclusion of

Chinese medical language instruction in

the curricula employed to train doctors

of Chinese medicine.

 

We must, as we have for so long now in

the States, follow Dr. Bensky's lead.

 

Ken

[Guest guest]

 

 

I wrote two (and only two) books in the late 80s that were an

integration of Chinese and Western naturopathic medicines, Scatology &

the Gate of Life and Cervical Dysplasia & Prostate Cancer. Yes, I got

reasonably good clinical results using the protocols I shared in those

books. But I used those protocols because, deprived of direct personal

access to the Chinese medical literature, I was casting about for

whatever would help my patients more effectively.

 

However, the multi-modal treatments described in those books were very

expensive because of the large number of medicines and supplements

prescribed. Since honing my specifically Chinese medical skills (in

great part to gaining access to the literature through learning to

read Chinese), I get even better results, faster, with less expense to

the patients and all without leaving the scope of my licensed and

advertised profession.

 

Those protocols in the late 80s were an expression of my considerable

innate curiousity. They are a direct expression of the paucity of

materials I had available to me when I did not read Chinese. As such,

the existence of those books itself mitigates for the study of

Chinese. I had exhausted what was available at that time in English.

So my restless mind went looking elsewhere. Like the movie character

Johnny-5, I'm always searching for " more in-put. " Since teaching

myself to read Chinese, I now have all the in-put I could ever want.

Since that in-put is now more narrowly focused on Chinese medicine

alone, I have gotten better and better at Chinese medicine.

 

Let me also point out, those two books are not still in print. This is

not because we couldn't sell them. For lands sake, people still by

Prince Wen Hui's Cook! (Bob F., please let this go out of print.

Please.) We have let these books go out of print because, my further

experience suggests that one can do even better for one's patients by

getting better specfically at Chinese medicine. I took these books out

of print because I did not want to mislead members of our profession

down unnecessary paths.

 

If the state of Chinese medicine in the West is in better shape now

than it was in the late 80s (and I would argue it is), that is mostly

because more people are translating more (e.g., Marnae Ergil, Craig

Mitchell, Steven Clavey, Andy Ellis, Ken Rose, Simon Becker, Philippe

Sionneau, Lynn Kuchinski, Joanne Ehret, Jane Bean, Bob Damone, et

al.). Think of what the situation might be if even more people were

translating and publishing, or, even more importantly, if more people

did not need translations but could access the info directly

themselves.

 

Bob

 

, " 1 " <@i...> wrote:

> , " dfbensky " <dbensky@e...> wrote:

>

> >

> > 1) There are at least a few important words that as far as I can

> > tell are impossible to translate well. If the students learn

these

> > words and what they mean, the Chinese can be used in clinical

> > discussions enabling everyone to " cut to the chase. " One

> > example of this is tong1 " unblocked, free-flowing, free, unstop,

> > etc. " There are many other examples.

>

> this is a good example of what I alluded to before. being familiar

> with technical terms and their meanings to a chinese reader reveals

a

> lot about the nuances of the medicine. I think this is essential.

> However, this is a far cry from being able to pick up a book and

read

> it. Accomplishing the former is vital and really not so difficult.

 

> Accomplishing the latter seems a quantum leap to me, one which I am

> sure has its own rewards, as well. Does everyone who wants to be

> competent at internal medicine need to make this final leap? that

is

> the question. While I know we cannot extrapolate from anecdotes, my

> own practice seems to support the idea that one can be successful

> without making this leap. could I be more successful? Perhaps.

Would

> the incremental gain in clinical success be worth the effort? I

don't

> know. I also think it is interesting that clinical research in TCM

> shows such a high rate of effectiveness even when using very

formulaic

> methods that clearly require no thought at all on the part of the

px.

> It is probably in extremely knotty diseases that one truly sees the

> difference between those with access to sources and those who do

not.

> Maybe that is why Benschoten takes a pharmacological approach. Not

> being able to penetrate the finest nuances of TCM, he tackles the

> nuances of pharmacology instead. Perhaps this is why integrative

med

> appeals to me, as well. I know Bob Flaws has written elsewhere that

he

> only immersed himself fully into chinese studies when he stopped

> practicing integrative medicine that incorporated naturopathic

methods.

> Yet he apparently had great success in this approach and his books

in

> the late eighties reflect this methodology (excuse me if I have

> mistated any of this; feel free to correct)

>

 

[Guest guest]

(e.g., Marnae Ergil, Craig Mitchell, Steven Clavey, Andy Ellis, Ken Rose, Simon Becker, Philippe Sionneau, Lynn Kuchinski, Joanne Ehret, Jane Bean, Bob Damone, et al.).

>>>>>>I thank you all, I will read them, a more efficient use of my time

Alon

 

-

pemachophel2001

Wednesday, December 19, 2001 8:41 AM

Re: Chinese language requirements

I wrote two (and only two) books in the late 80s that were an integration of Chinese and Western naturopathic medicines, Scatology & the Gate of Life and Cervical Dysplasia & Prostate Cancer. Yes, I got reasonably good clinical results using the protocols I shared in those books. But I used those protocols because, deprived of direct personal access to the Chinese medical literature, I was casting about for whatever would help my patients more effectively. However, the multi-modal treatments described in those books were very expensive because of the large number of medicines and supplements prescribed. Since honing my specifically Chinese medical skills (in great part to gaining access to the literature through learning to read Chinese), I get even better results, faster, with less expense to the patients and all without leaving the scope of my licensed and advertised profession.Those protocols in the late 80s were an expression of my considerable innate curiousity. They are a direct expression of the paucity of materials I had available to me when I did not read Chinese. As such, the existence of those books itself mitigates for the study of Chinese. I had exhausted what was available at that time in English. So my restless mind went looking elsewhere. Like the movie character Johnny-5, I'm always searching for "more in-put." Since teaching myself to read Chinese, I now have all the in-put I could ever want. Since that in-put is now more narrowly focused on Chinese medicine alone, I have gotten better and better at Chinese medicine.Let me also point out, those two books are not still in print. This is not because we couldn't sell them. For lands sake, people still by Prince Wen Hui's Cook! (Bob F., please let this go out of print. Please.) We have let these books go out of print because, my further experience suggests that one can do even better for one's patients by getting better specfically at Chinese medicine. I took these books out of print because I did not want to mislead members of our profession down unnecessary paths.If the state of Chinese medicine in the West is in better shape now than it was in the late 80s (and I would argue it is), that is mostly because more people are translating more (e.g., Marnae Ergil, Craig Mitchell, Steven Clavey, Andy Ellis, Ken Rose, Simon Becker, Philippe Sionneau, Lynn Kuchinski, Joanne Ehret, Jane Bean, Bob Damone, et al.). Think of what the situation might be if even more people were translating and publishing, or, even more importantly, if more people did not need translations but could access the info directly themselves.Bob, "1" <@i...> wrote:> , "dfbensky" <dbensky@e...> wrote:> > > > > 1) There are at least a few important words that as far as I can > > tell are impossible to translate well. If the students learn these > > words and what they mean, the Chinese can be used in clinical > > discussions enabling everyone to "cut to the chase." One > > example of this is tong1 " unblocked, free-flowing, free, unstop, > > etc." There are many other examples.> > this is a good example of what I alluded to before. being familiar > with technical terms and their meanings to a chinese reader reveals a > lot about the nuances of the medicine. I think this is essential. > However, this is a far cry from being able to pick up a book and read > it. Accomplishing the former is vital and really not so difficult. > Accomplishing the latter seems a quantum leap to me, one which I am > sure has its own rewards, as well. Does everyone who wants to be > competent at internal medicine need to make this final leap? that is > the question. While I know we cannot extrapolate from anecdotes, my > own practice seems to support the idea that one can be successful > without making this leap. could I be more successful? Perhaps. Would > the incremental gain in clinical success be worth the effort? I don't > know. I also think it is interesting that clinical research in TCM > shows such a high rate of effectiveness even when using very formulaic > methods that clearly require no thought at all on the part of the px. > It is probably in extremely knotty diseases that one truly sees the > difference between those with access to sources and those who do not. > Maybe that is why Benschoten takes a pharmacological approach. Not > being able to penetrate the finest nuances of TCM, he tackles the > nuances of pharmacology instead. Perhaps this is why integrative med > appeals to me, as well. I know Bob Flaws has written elsewhere that he > only immersed himself fully into chinese studies when he stopped > practicing integrative medicine that incorporated naturopathic methods. > Yet he apparently had great success in this approach and his books in > the late eighties reflect this methodology (excuse me if I have > mistated any of this; feel free to correct)> Chinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education.

[Guest guest]

My point is that the whole community includingstudents, teachers, administrators, schoolowners and other entrepreuners involved inChinese medicine as a commercial undertaking,legislators, policy makers, doctors, patients,in other words everybody involved, has towake up to the fact described above by Wang XiaoLong and begin to demand the inclusion ofChinese medical language instruction inthe curricula employed to train doctorsof Chinese medicine.>>>>As a community yes, that does not mean each student of Chinese medicine. I would never be able to be as competent as you in Chinese, as you have been living it for a long time. So in the community different individuals will have different contributions. I am talking from a practitioner perspective not schools, or translators, or publishers, just a mere student/practitioner.

And I am very thankful for guys like you that help me in my voyage. Its a question of overall community standert and I think best use of time

Alon

 

 

-

dragon90405

Tuesday, December 18, 2001 11:40 PM

Re: Chinese language requirements

Alon,> >>>>>>Ken that is misunderstand my points. I am sure it is better to have a skill than not to. The question is the cost benefit ratio. And I guess since I am not planning to learn Chinese I would never really knowOK. Here's what you're missing in the words ofWang Xiao Long, the editor in Chief of the recentlypublished Shi Yong Zhong Yi Zi Dian, Beijing, 2001,Xue Yuan Chu Ban She, ISBN 7-80060-178-1:"Mastering the words and characters of ancientChinese medical language is the critical path tostudy and research of Chinese medicine. [Toproceed] otherwise is just like water withno spring or wood with no root."We certainly seem to be missing each other'spoints, because I haven't been talking aboutyou or about cost benefit ratios. I'm surethat as a clinician you rely upon thosemethods and substances that have long proventheir efficacy.I'm suggesting that we as a community adoptthat same approach to pedagogy. Does thatmean that we have to chant like Chinesechildren? Well, it doesn't mean that to me.It means that we have to study the originalmaterial well enough to know how to adaptit to ourselves and to our circumstances.Looking back in history, you see that thisis the same problem that has faced each andevery successive generation that has passedalong the traditions of this medicine. Includedin each and every such transmission is a generoushelping of Chinese language.I find it entirely incredible that anyone canimagine that we might be the first generationto accomplish the continued existence of thesetraditions without adequate attention paid tothese fundamentals.But that seems to me what you are suggestingwe attempt, in the name of cost/benefit ratios.My point is that the whole community includingstudents, teachers, administrators, schoolowners and other entrepreuners involved inChinese medicine as a commercial undertaking,legislators, policy makers, doctors, patients,in other words everybody involved, has towake up to the fact described above by Wang XiaoLong and begin to demand the inclusion ofChinese medical language instruction inthe curricula employed to train doctorsof Chinese medicine.We must, as we have for so long now inthe States, follow Dr. Bensky's lead.KenChinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety of professional services, including board approved online continuing education.