possibly feet in my dictionary -lang

[Guest guest]

,

wrote:

> I agree the Dictionary is a great tool, as were his previous

efforts

> published in taiwan and mainland china.

>

> My concerns are a few. One simply that I am missing something in

the

> medicine that the Wiseman terminology can teach me. Two that we

don't

> accept the vocabulary without discussion and scrutiny. For example

I

> look at " heart blood vacuity " , xin1xue4xu1, and see if there is a

> difference between this and " insufficiency of heart blood "

> xin1xue4bu4zu2. The question for me becomes are the different

words

> describing different body processes or are they the products of

Chinese

> language conventions?

> doug

 

My guess is that these are the same thing, but you would have to

check with Wiseman... or more importantly in the context of the

Chinese usage! BUT, the one thing that I have learned from my

limited Chinese translating is that a) different authors use

different phrases to explain the same thing. b) even the same author

will use different phrases to mean the same thing.

c) Time periods which something is written also influence usages. but

finally d) No matter how much we try to pin down what these things

mean, in Chinese, they seem to have a much more liberal use of

words... (Maybe ken could comments on this) Meaning, we might make

fine distinctions (somehow?) between supplement, nourish, enrich

etc... but it seems to me, that all Chinese authors do not follow

these (Wiseman or whosever's distinctions)... Meaning we must stay

open and it is more important to get the idea vs. trying to pin down

something.. Chinese is much more poetic that English (medical

writing); therefore, authors take more liberties in medical writing

to supply us with color. but this color does not ALWAYS translate

into intended nuance. " One the fish is caught the bait is

forgotten " , " Once the idea is grasped, the words are forgotten "

 

-

 

ChineseMedicineDoc.com

[Guest guest]

or more importantly in the context of the Chinese usage!

>>>>That is the key and why creating a standard is not always wise.

Alon

[Guest guest]

For example

I

> look at " heart blood vacuity " , xin1xue4xu1, and see if

there is a

> difference between this and " insufficiency of heart blood "

 

> xin1xue4bu4zu2. The question for me becomes are the different

 

words describing different body processes or are they the products of

 

Chinese anguage conventions?

> doug

 

Doug - as Jason says below, they are probably the same thing, but said

differently. Just as we do not use the same words every time we say

something - in part because it makes the writing really boring - so too

do the chinese use variations of language to convey the same idea.

 

 

a) different authors use

different phrases to explain the same thing. b) even the same author

 

will use different phrases to mean the same thing.

c) Time periods which something is written also influence usages. but

 

finally

Absolutely correct.

 

d) No matter how much we try to

pin down what these things

mean, in Chinese, they seem to have a much more liberal use of

words... (Maybe ken could comments on this) Meaning, we might make

fine distinctions (somehow?) between supplement, nourish, enrich

etc... but it seems to me, that all Chinese authors do not follow

these (Wiseman or whosever's distinctions)...

 

True they may not all follow the conventions all of the time in terms of

usage, but when terms are used, they have a fairly specific meaning, and

the population of readers (CM practitioners) know and understand their

usage.

 

Meaning we must stay

open and it is more important to get the idea vs. trying to pin down

 

 

Yes, as clinicians we " need to get the idea " , but a precise

translation makes that idea accessible to a larger population and removes

a certain level of the translator's interpretation (it is never possible

to entirely remove the film of the translator's presence).

 

 

something.. Chinese is much

more poetic that English (medical

writing); therefore, authors take more liberties in medical writing

to supply us with color. but this color does not ALWAYS translate

 

into intended nuance. " One the fish is caught the bait is

 

forgotten " , " Once the idea is grasped, the words are

forgotten "

-

 

There is a certain amount of color, but there is also a certain amount of

clear, technical vocabulary and it is only AFTER the idea is grasped that

the words can be forgotten - but if the right words are not used in the

first place then the idea may be more difficult or impossible to grasp,

or, as so often happens, it is misunderstood and then passed on through

the generations.

Marnae

ChineseMedicineDoc.com

 

 

[Guest guest]

I think this is the crux of the issue. As a professor at PCOM, I see

continuously that the clarity of the terms is paramount to

understanding everything else from pattern differentiation to

prescription writing. In order for our profession to progress, we must

grab this issue by the horns.

 

 

On Monday, June 23, 2003, at 01:00 PM, Marnae Ergil wrote:

 

> There is a certain amount of color, but there is also a certain amount

> of clear, technical vocabulary and it is only AFTER the idea is

> grasped that the words can be forgotten - but if the right words are

> not used in the first place then the idea may be more difficult or

> impossible to grasp, or, as so often happens, it is misunderstood and

> then passed on through the generations.

>

> Marnae