translation

[Guest guest]

I asked Nigel Wiseman what he thought was required for clinical

proficiency in TCM visa ve language. As you can see below, his goal is to

elevate the profession by introducing EVERY student to chinese with the

expectation that perhaps a few will grab the ball and run with it. Given

the process of ongoing rigorous translation and a growing body of scholars

to support the development of the field, Nigel does NOT believe that ALL

those practicing need be proficient in the language. PCOM will require

such training for our DAOM students so that this more reasonable goal may

be realized.

 

It is a shame that the CCAOM, ACAOM and other doctoral programs have

decided this is not essential. PCOM just got approved to award the DAOM a

few days ago. Given the status of other applications, I have been told

that besides ACTCM, no other school is far enough along in the process to

expect approval in less than 3-4 years from now. I apologize if my source

inside ACAOM was incorrect. Feel free to correct this, anyone. I think

Nigel is right. At least those of us who teach should have a basic

understanding (again, what would that be?). In light of this, I have

asked PCOM to make the medical chinese portion of the DAOM program open to

ALL faculty for free. And in the next few years, we need to pressure the

ACAOM to bite this important bullet. All the doc programs have plenty of

western med (which make alon happy).

 

But we all agree that some of us need to be translating. If we don't lay

the foundation somewhere, who will do it? We have already decided as a

community that it will not be in the masters program. I have worked for

three schools and there is zero impetus to change this. Since the

doctoral is the terminal degree of our field, if we let students do this

also without learning chinese, then we will never be able to mandate it in

any other arena (just imagine a state law that required us to speak

chinese to practice TCM -- think that would go over well?? -- it

probably wouldn't even be constitutional). I guess at least we will have

a small number of scholars coming out of PCOM and SIOM. Imagine that, San

diego becomes the capital of academic excellence in TCM. Tell that to the

surfers.

 

 

 

 

> " Nigel A.R. Wiseman " <nigel.wiseman

> Fri Nov 29, 2002 12:06:00 PM US/Pacific

> " '' " <

> RE: FW: translations

>

> I am not saying everyone should be proficient in Chinese.

>

> I am saying everyone should start to learn a little Chinese.  When that

> happens, one in ten bite the hook and learn Chinese to a level at which

> they can read primary texts.

>

> When PhD courses demand Chinese language to a level that grants access to

> primary texts,  future authorities of TCM will have a full access to

> primary Chinese sources.

>

> When everyone is required to learn a bit, we provide people with the

> direction to learn Chinese.  When PhD students are required to know

> Chinese, future teachers of TCM will provide greater knowledge for

> students.

>

> Chinese-language education benefits the individual.  No-one who has

> learned Chinese ever says to others, ``Don’t bother learning Chinese’’.

>

> Tell your students, that when ten seeds are sown, at least one will

> sprout.  Everyone should try to learn Chinese. The one or two that

> succeed will become high fliers who influence their peers.

>

> This is a synopsis of what I said.  I hope it reaches you.

>

> Nigel

>

>  

 

 

Chinese Herbs

 

 

" Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocre

minds " -- Albert Einstein

[Guest guest]

All the doc programs have plenty of western med (which make alon happy

>>>I hope its clinical

alon

[Guest guest]

I guess at least we will have a small number of scholars coming out of PCOM and SIOM

>>And that is great we need some good translators

Alon

[Guest guest]

 

 

, <@i...> wrote:

> I asked Nigel Wiseman what he thought was required for clinical

> proficiency in TCM visa ve language. As you can see below, his

goal is to

> elevate the profession by introducing EVERY student to chinese

[...]

 

Thanks for posting Nigel's input to the

discussion. After working with him on

several projects, I'm always amazed to

find that we agree on anything.

 

It might also interest folks on the

list to know that I had a chance to

chat with Ma Kan Wen last night for

several hours. We talked specifically

about some of the issues that have

been raised on this list over the

past several days regarding language

learning and its relevance and importance

in the study and transmission of Chinese

medicine in the West.

 

Prof. Ma, for those who aren't familiar

with him, is one of the early pioneers

in the translation of Chinese medicine

into English. In fact, he is the source

of the phrase English phrase, " Traditional

. "

 

He told me quite clearly that it is

extremely important for non Chinese

to have some familiarity with Chinese

medical language to enhance their

understanding of Chinese medical

terms and theories. He also said

that it's a very good idea for

those unfamiliar with Chinese culture

and philosophy to explore these

subjects as an adjunct to medical

studies, as they play a pivotal role

in the understanding of medical theory.

 

 

Ken

[Guest guest]

this is a repost of something I posted in November. It includes a

forwarded message from Nigel wiseman in which he states his position

on this topic. I agree completely with Nigel. FYI, this constitutes a

citation from the premier translation authority in our field

(nigel,not myself).

 

 

, <@i...> wrote:

> I asked Nigel Wiseman what he thought was required for clinical

> proficiency in TCM visa ve language. As you can see below, his goal

is to

> elevate the profession by introducing EVERY student to chinese with the

> expectation that perhaps a few will grab the ball and run with it.

Given

> the process of ongoing rigorous translation and a growing body of

scholars

> to support the development of the field, Nigel does NOT believe that

ALL

> those practicing need be proficient in the language. PCOM will require

> such training for our DAOM students so that this more reasonable

goal may

> be realized.

>

> It is a shame that the CCAOM, ACAOM and other doctoral programs have

> decided this is not essential. PCOM just got approved to award the

DAOM a

> few days ago. Given the status of other applications, I have been told

> that besides ACTCM, no other school is far enough along in the

process to

> expect approval in less than 3-4 years from now. I apologize if my

source

> inside ACAOM was incorrect. Feel free to correct this, anyone. I

think

> Nigel is right. At least those of us who teach should have a basic

> understanding (again, what would that be?). In light of this, I have

> asked PCOM to make the medical chinese portion of the DAOM program

open to

> ALL faculty for free. And in the next few years, we need to

pressure the

> ACAOM to bite this important bullet. All the doc programs have

plenty of

> western med (which make alon happy).

>

> But we all agree that some of us need to be translating. If we

don't lay

> the foundation somewhere, who will do it? We have already decided as a

> community that it will not be in the masters program. I have worked

for

> three schools and there is zero impetus to change this. Since the

> doctoral is the terminal degree of our field, if we let students do

this

> also without learning chinese, then we will never be able to mandate

it in

> any other arena (just imagine a state law that required us to speak

> chinese to practice TCM -- think that would go over well?? -- it

> probably wouldn't even be constitutional). I guess at least we will

have

> a small number of scholars coming out of PCOM and SIOM. Imagine

that, San

> diego becomes the capital of academic excellence in TCM. Tell that

to the

> surfers.

>

 

>

>

>

>

> > " Nigel A.R. Wiseman " <nigel.wiseman@m...>

> > Fri Nov 29, 2002 12:06:00 PM US/Pacific

> > " '' " <@i...>

> > RE: FW: translations

> >

> > I am not saying everyone should be proficient in Chinese.

> >

> > I am saying everyone should start to learn a little Chinese. When

that

> > happens, one in ten bite the hook and learn Chinese to a level at

which

> > they can read primary texts.

> >

> > When PhD courses demand Chinese language to a level that grants

access to

> > primary texts, future authorities of TCM will have a full access to

> > primary Chinese sources.

> >

> > When everyone is required to learn a bit, we provide people with the

> > direction to learn Chinese. When PhD students are required to know

> > Chinese, future teachers of TCM will provide greater knowledge for

> > students.

> >

> > Chinese-language education benefits the individual. No-one who has

> > learned Chinese ever says to others, ``Don't bother learning

Chinese''.

> >

> > Tell your students, that when ten seeds are sown, at least one will

> > sprout. Everyone should try to learn Chinese. The one or two that

> > succeed will become high fliers who influence their peers.

> >

> > This is a synopsis of what I said. I hope it reaches you.

> >

> > Nigel

> >

> >

>

>

> Chinese Herbs

>

> voice:

> fax:

>

> " Great spirits have always found violent opposition from mediocre

> minds " -- Albert Einstein

[Guest guest]

 

 

Thanks for posting Nigel's comments. I asked him

to update and clarify his point of view for the

benefit of those who read this list. The following

is therefore another citation from the premier

translation authority in the field.

 

Nigel has devoted his life to providing

tools to help people understand the language

and traditions of Chinese medicine. His latest

published works are the Chinese Medical

Chinese books. I believe his message is loud and clear.

 

The following comes from a personal email

he sent me today. And I will only add that

I largely share his views, although we differ

on many points, and whenever we collaborate

we work through our differences in great

detail.

 

Every time this thread comes up, you and

others try to treat it as if it is simply

so much water under the bridge. But the

bridge of Chinese language is one that the

whole field, and that means each and every

individual in the field, is responsible

to build and cross.

 

The larger issues cannot simply be dispensed

with by framing the question simplistically as " Must

you know Chinese language in order to

practice Chinese medicine? " It is a red herring,

a straw man argument.

 

Here is what Nigel said.

 

FIRST, CLINICAL EXPERIENCE AND KNOWLEDGE OF THE CHINESE LANGUAGE

ARE NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSDIVE.

 

SECOND, WHAT IS A GOOD TEACHER? A GOOD TEACHER HAS CLINICAL

EXPERIENCE. BUT A

TEACHER WHO HAS CLINICAL EXPERIENCE BUT NO ACCESS TO AGES OF CHINESE

CLINICAL

EXPERIENCE IS NOT A TEACHER WHO REPRESENTS THE FIELD OF KNOWELDGE.

 

I REPEAT. NOT EVERYONE HAS TO LEARN CHINESE TO PRACTICE CHINESE

MEDICINE. BUT

AUTHORITIES ON CHINESE MEDICINE MUST HAVE ACCESS TO PRIMARY

LITERATURE TO BE

CONSIDERED AS AUTHORITES.

 

WE WANT TO CREATE A CULTURE IN WHICH OUR AUTHORITIES HAVE ACCESS TO

CHINESE

CLINICAL EXPERIENCE.

 

THE AUTHORITIES OF ANY FIELD ARE FAMILIAR WITH THE MAIN CURRENTS OF

THOUGHT AND

PRACTICE TO DATE. TO BE SUCH AN AUTHORITY IN CHINESE MEDICINE, YOU

MUST HAVE

ACCESS TO THE CHINESE TRADITION. YOU CAN ONLY HAVE COMPLETE ACCESS

TO THAT

TRADITION IF YOU CAN READ CHINESE.

 

PEOPLE WHO CLAIM THAT CLINICAL EXPERIENCE IS MORE IMPORTANT THAN

ACCESS TO

KNOWLEDGE, VAINLY CONSIDER THEIR OWN EXPERIENCE MORE IMPORTANT THAN

THE

TRADITION. ALL THEIR ARGUMENTS ARE VACUOUS, AND INTENDED ONLY TO

COVER UP THEIR

LAZINESS TO GAIN ACCESS TO THE KNOWLEDGE OF PREDECESSORS.

 

PEOPLE HAVE TO ACCEPT THAT CHINESE MEDICINE IS A BODY OF KOWLEDGE.

THAT BODY OF

KNOWLEDGE IS NOT JUST A BODY OF BORING THEORY. IT CONTAINS THE

CLINICAL

EXPERIENCE OF CHINESE PHYSICIANS OVER THE PAST 2000 YEARS.

 

NO AMOUNT OF CLINICAL EXPERIENCE IN THE LIFETIME OF ONE PHYSICIAN

CAN REPLACE

THE UTILITY OF THE EXPERIENCE OF 2000 YEARS OF CHINESE EXPERIENCE.

 

THE OPPONENTS OF LEARNING CHINESE TAKE A MINIMALIST PATH. THEY

ALWAYS ASK, WHY

DO WE NEED TO LEARN CHINESE, WHEN WE CAN SIMPLY LEARN CHINESE

MEDICINE FROM A

TEACHER WITH EXPERIENCE WHO CAN PRACTICE SUCCESSFULLY. WHY BE

MINIMALIST?

WESTERN MEDICINE BY CONTRAST IS MAXIMALIST. PEOPLE WHO WANT TO BE

BRAIN

SURGEONS HAVE TO LEARN THE ANATOMY OF THE FOOT AND THE KIDNEY. WHY

DOES CHINESE

MEDICINE HAVE TO BE SO PARSIMONIOUS?

 

CLEARLY, IT DOES NOT HAVE TO BE. THE MINIMALIST APPROACH COMES FROM

PEOPLE WHO

WOULD LIKE TO CONSIDER THEMSELVES AS AUTHORITIVE HEALERS WITHOUT

TAKING THE

TROUBLE OF GAINING ACCESS TO THE EXPERIENCE OF CHINESE HEALERS.

 

WITHOUT BOTHERING TO LEARN CHINESE, THEY WRITE

THEIR OWN LITTLE VIEW OF CHINESE MEDICINE, LABEL IT AS REPRESENTING

A TRADITION

THAT CANNOT UNDERSTAND. THEYH DON'T GIVE US CHINESE EXPERIENCE.

THEY FOIST

THEIR EXPERIENCE ON THE REST OF THE COMMUNITY AS ``CHINESE

EXPERIENCE.'' FROM A

MORAL POINT OF VIEW, THIS IS FUNDAMENTALLY WRONG.

 

ANY AUTHORITY IN ANY FIELD HAS ACCESS TO ALL OF THE KNOWLEDGE IN

THAT FIELD. YOU

CANNOT BE AN AUTHORITY OF CHINESE MEDICINE WITHOUT ACCESS TO THE

WHOLE OF

CHINESE MEDICAL THOUGHT. CLINICAL EXPERIENCE IS VERY IMPORTANT, BUT

PERSONAL

EXPERIENCE THAT IS NOT BUILT ON THE EXPERIENCE OF OTHERS IS VIRTUALLY

MEANINGLESS

 

Nigel