Guest guest Posted February 5, 2005 Report Share Posted February 5, 2005 I have been thinking about gan mao and the way that our profession / Wiseman translates this term - 'Common Cold.' A common (non-medical) Chinese dictionary will translate ganmao as common cold or to catch a cold. When I asked my Chinese Language teacher (no medical training) what she thought the term ganmao meant and she said common cold. I asked her if she thought that it encompassed severe presentations such as deadly flues and she said no. But clearly the Chinese use the term GanMao to incorporate with Flue, Upper respiratory tract infections, or a contraction of a seasonal epidemic pestilence pathogen, and all sorts of externally contracted patterns, making it seem much broader than just 'common cold'. Granted it completely depends on how one defines common cold. It seems that in our society common cold has a more limited definition. Therefore I was wondering what people on this list think common cold means to them, and if they think that this suits the disease entity of Chinese 'GanMao' - IF not, does anyone have a better translation? In my translations I have just left the term in pinyin because it seems to imply anything. It just seems that sometimes the Chinese use the term in a broader sense than the Wiseman definition and the Wiseman terminology choice seems to imply a limited view - but maybe that is just me... I have asked Nigel what he thinks and he has given no response, so I ask you . Comments? -Jason tel: <https://www.plaxo.com/add_me?u=30064918855 & v0=295000 & k0=1975548621> Add me to your address book... <http://www.plaxo.com/signature> Want a signature like this? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 5, 2005 Report Share Posted February 5, 2005 I think common Cold/Gan Mao may be pretty severe but perhaps not deadly flu. When I saw one of my colleagues sneezing I asked if he was " gan mao? " but he just smiled and replied, " xiao feng " . doug , " " <@c...> wrote: > I have been thinking about gan mao and the way that our profession / Wiseman > translates this term - 'Common Cold.' > > > > A common (non-medical) Chinese dictionary will translate ganmao as common > cold or to catch a cold. When I asked my Chinese Language teacher (no > medical training) what she thought the term ganmao meant and she said common > cold. I asked her if she thought that it encompassed severe presentations > such as deadly flues and she said no. > > But clearly the Chinese use the term GanMao to incorporate with Flue, Upper > respiratory tract infections, or a contraction of a seasonal epidemic > pestilence pathogen, and all sorts of externally contracted patterns, making > it seem much broader than just 'common cold'. Granted it completely depends > on how one defines common cold. It seems that in our society common cold > has a more limited definition. Therefore I was wondering what people on this > list think common cold means to them, and if they think that this suits the > disease entity of Chinese 'GanMao' - IF not, does anyone have a better > translation? In my translations I have just left the term in pinyin because > it seems to imply anything. It just seems that sometimes the Chinese use > the term in a broader sense than the Wiseman definition and the Wiseman > terminology choice seems to imply a limited view - but maybe that is just > me... I have asked Nigel what he thinks and he has given no response, so I > ask you . Comments? > > > > -Jason > > > > > tel: > > <https://www.plaxo.com/add_me?u=30064918855 & v0=295000 & k0=1975548621> Add me > to your address book... <http://www.plaxo.com/signature> Want a signature > like this? > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 5, 2005 Report Share Posted February 5, 2005 > > [] > Saturday, February 05, 2005 7:22 PM > > Re: gan mao > > > > I think common Cold/Gan Mao may be pretty severe but perhaps not deadly > flu. > When I saw one of my colleagues sneezing I asked if he was " gan mao? " but > he just smiled > and replied, " xiao feng " . > doug > [Jason] Doug, I think this kind of proves one of my points about terminology... Gan mao, for some Chinese authors and doctors, clearly includes influenza, which can kill people. Some may, as you point out, consider it less severe, or something different entirely. My point is, if it is clear that SOME Chinese use the term ganmao in a broader context, which from my perspective is true, then does 'common cold' suit such a translation / definition?... -Jason > > > , " " <@c...> > wrote: > > I have been thinking about gan mao and the way that our profession / > Wiseman > > translates this term - 'Common Cold.' > > > > > > > > A common (non-medical) Chinese dictionary will translate ganmao as > common > > cold or to catch a cold. When I asked my Chinese Language teacher (no > > medical training) what she thought the term ganmao meant and she said > common > > cold. I asked her if she thought that it encompassed severe > presentations > > such as deadly flues and she said no. > > > > But clearly the Chinese use the term GanMao to incorporate with Flue, > Upper > > respiratory tract infections, or a contraction of a seasonal epidemic > > pestilence pathogen, and all sorts of externally contracted patterns, > making > > it seem much broader than just 'common cold'. Granted it completely > depends > > on how one defines common cold. It seems that in our society common > cold > > has a more limited definition. Therefore I was wondering what people on > this > > list think common cold means to them, and if they think that this suits > the > > disease entity of Chinese 'GanMao' - IF not, does anyone have a better > > translation? In my translations I have just left the term in pinyin > because > > it seems to imply anything. It just seems that sometimes the Chinese > use > > the term in a broader sense than the Wiseman definition and the Wiseman > > terminology choice seems to imply a limited view - but maybe that is > just > > me... I have asked Nigel what he thinks and he has given no response, so > I > > ask you . Comments? > > > > > > > > -Jason > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > tel: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > <https://www.plaxo.com/add_me?u=30064918855 & v0=295000 & k0=1975548621> > Add me > > to your address book... <http://www.plaxo.com/signature> Want a > signature > > like this? > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 6, 2005 Report Share Posted February 6, 2005 I've always assumes that gan mao was the prodromal phase of a viral disease, since they manifest the same and tend to get treated the same. - " " Saturday, February 05, 2005 9:40 PM RE: Re: gan mao > > > >> >> [] >> Saturday, February 05, 2005 7:22 PM >> >> Re: gan mao >> >> >> >> I think common Cold/Gan Mao may be pretty severe but perhaps not deadly >> flu. >> When I saw one of my colleagues sneezing I asked if he was " gan mao? " but >> he just smiled >> and replied, " xiao feng " . >> doug >> > [Jason] > Doug, > > I think this kind of proves one of my points about terminology... Gan mao, > for some Chinese authors and doctors, clearly includes influenza, which > can > kill people. Some may, as you point out, consider it less severe, or > something different entirely. My point is, if it is clear that SOME > Chinese > use the term ganmao in a broader context, which from my perspective is > true, > then does 'common cold' suit such a translation / definition?... > > -Jason > > > > >> >> >> , " " >> <@c...> >> wrote: >> > I have been thinking about gan mao and the way that our profession / >> Wiseman >> > translates this term - 'Common Cold.' >> > >> > >> > >> > A common (non-medical) Chinese dictionary will translate ganmao as >> common >> > cold or to catch a cold. When I asked my Chinese Language teacher (no >> > medical training) what she thought the term ganmao meant and she said >> common >> > cold. I asked her if she thought that it encompassed severe >> presentations >> > such as deadly flues and she said no. >> > >> > But clearly the Chinese use the term GanMao to incorporate with Flue, >> Upper >> > respiratory tract infections, or a contraction of a seasonal epidemic >> > pestilence pathogen, and all sorts of externally contracted patterns, >> making >> > it seem much broader than just 'common cold'. Granted it completely >> depends >> > on how one defines common cold. It seems that in our society common >> cold >> > has a more limited definition. Therefore I was wondering what people on >> this >> > list think common cold means to them, and if they think that this suits >> the >> > disease entity of Chinese 'GanMao' - IF not, does anyone have a better >> > translation? In my translations I have just left the term in pinyin >> because >> > it seems to imply anything. It just seems that sometimes the Chinese >> use >> > the term in a broader sense than the Wiseman definition and the Wiseman >> > terminology choice seems to imply a limited view - but maybe that is >> just >> > me... I have asked Nigel what he thinks and he has given no response, >> > so >> I >> > ask you . Comments? >> > >> > >> > >> > -Jason >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > tel: >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > <https://www.plaxo.com/add_me?u=30064918855 & v0=295000 & k0=1975548621> >> Add me >> > to your address book... <http://www.plaxo.com/signature> Want a >> signature >> > like this? >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 6, 2005 Report Share Posted February 6, 2005 Chinese medical theory did not historically recognize viruses and bacteria as causes of disease because they did not possess the technology to perceive them. The distinction between influenza viruses and coryza viruses is a distinction made by modern medicine. It is a distinction that is made in our culture as well as in modern Chinese culture, but it is not a distinction that was historically present. Wai gan (externally contracted) diseases include conditions with a wider range of severity than the colloquial use of common cold implies in English. Gan mao presentations generally correspond to common cold. Because the parameters of disease classification in Chinese medicine are not mutually exclusive, practitioners can use different diagnostic systems to describe the same illness. Thus, the same condition can be described through cold damage theory (shang han), warm disease theory (wen bing), or the disease classifications and patterns breakdowns found in texts organized by TCM diseases. The fact that the heading of gan mao as a disease category contains multiple patterns of varying symptoms and severities tells us that the concept of common cold in Chinese medicine is wider than that of Western medicine. Because of the inability to differentiate influenza from coryza viruses, or viruses from bacteria, the conditions were described by the prominence of symptoms, the severity, and the patterns. Most gan mao cases, are in fact, common colds, thus common cold is used as a translation for gan mao. However, when learning Chinese medical theory, one must understand that the Chinese concept of a common cold includes conditions that are classified as influenza in modern medicine. Generally, anything that is as severe as a life-threatening flu is going to be perceived and assessed through a variety of diagnostic parameters. It may be described using shang han theory or wen bing theory in addition to being classified as a case of external contraction with heat toxins (for example). None of these are mutually exclusive. Common cold is a phrase in English that is often used by the general public as a LGP (language for general purposes) term. Practitioners of Chinese medicine use the phrase common cold as an LSP (language for special purposes) term rather than an LGP term, because our definition of the word is specific to Chinese medical theory. As professionals, our definition of common cold reflects the traditional Chinese disease category, complete with its nebulous understanding (in the eyes of science) of causative factors and its wider range of possible severity and progression. Confusion between the traditional Chinese concept of common cold and the Western concept of common cold is thus caused by a failure to understand what the full range of common cold includes in Chinese medical theory vs. WM theory. Common cold means one thing when used as an LGP term in colloquial English, it means a different thing when used as an LSP term in CM. Because most people on this list are experienced practitioners, we have all learned that there is a different definition of common cold in Chinese medicine than there is in Western medicine. The assumption of students that there is a one-to-one correlation between Chinese medical concepts and Western concepts is the only source of confusion here. If students understand what common cold includes in Chinese medical terms, they will have no problem integrating the fact that it includes things that WM would classify as influenza. Any shortcomings in this understanding are due to a poor education in Chinese medical theory, not a poor translation of the term gan mao. Chinese medicine abounds with many concepts that are not identical to Western concepts. We cannot use pinyin to translate all of these terms, because there are too many such terms and too many homophones. The only solution is to use English words and to teach students that these words have a special meaning in the context of Chinese medicine. This is not a difficult thing for most students to grasp, so it is a good solution for the problem of how to transmit Chinese medical information (the ultimate goal of CM translation). Let's look a few examples: Jin1 is translated by Wiseman as " sinew(s), " but it is often translated as " tendon(s). " A tendon in the West is a type of tissue that joins the end of each muscle belly to the bone that it attaches to. In Chinese medicine, a jin1 is any type of ropy tissue that can be " plucked " (if you think back to your tui na classes)- plucking is a technique that is applied to jin1. So some things that are classified as jin1 in CM are actually muscle bellies in WM, such as the SCM or the upper part of the Trapezius. Because these things are definitely not tendons, " tendon " is a poor translation for jin1. Wiseman calls these " sinews " to reinforce the notion that they describe ropy flesh that includes, but is not limited to, tendons. An English term is preferable to pinyin here, because jin pronounced in the identical tone can also mean a unit of measurement (=600g everywhere but within the PRC, where it =500g), metal, or liquids. If we say that the liver nourishes the jin1, we cannot discern whether the liver nourishes metal, whether it nourishes liquids, or nourishes the sinews. So pinyin is out. Incidentally, metal and liquids are both LGP terms in normal English that have an LSP usage in Chinese medicine. No one on this list confuses the Chinese concept of metal (in the 5 phases) with the Western concept of metal, nor do we confuse the CM concept of liquids (jin as in jin-ye, again an LSP use) with the Western concept of liquids. Why should gan mao be any more difficult to learn as an LSP term than any of these others? No one is arguing that we translate metal or fluids any differently, even though they have an LSP use in CM that differs from their LGP meaning in English. These are the fundamental difficulties in Chinese medical education, learning what concepts really ARE in Chinese medicine, rather than assuming that one knows what they are or assuming that they correspond to pre-existing Western categories. This is exactly why translation should be done with specificity rather than simplification. Using simple and common English words gives the reader the impression that they understand the concept, but their assumption may not actually be correct (as in the example of tendon). Poor Wiseman cannot win. If he chooses a term that has greater accuracy but is not common, his words are called obscure. If he chooses a term that is familiar, people say he is confusing the issue. It doesn't matter what you call something if you understand what it means in CM use. It is only a problem if one assumes that it means the same thing as a familiar Western concept. Incidentally, if gan mao is left as pinyin instead of translating it into an LSP English term for use in Chinese medicine, it must be pronounced VERY carefully. If you say it in the wrong tone, it means " (to) F*ck cats. " Your doctor will be far too polite to ever say anything, but your Chinese friends will tease you to no end. Eric Brand , " Par Scott " <parufus@e...> wrote: > I've always assumes that gan mao was the prodromal phase of a viral disease, > since they manifest the same and tend to get treated the same. > - > " " <@c...> > > Saturday, February 05, 2005 9:40 PM > RE: Re: gan mao > > > > > > > > > >> > >> [taiqi@t...] > >> Saturday, February 05, 2005 7:22 PM > >> > >> Re: gan mao > >> > >> > >> > >> I think common Cold/Gan Mao may be pretty severe but perhaps not deadly > >> flu. > >> When I saw one of my colleagues sneezing I asked if he was " gan mao? " but > >> he just smiled > >> and replied, " xiao feng " . > >> doug > >> > > [Jason] > > Doug, > > > > I think this kind of proves one of my points about terminology... Gan mao, > > for some Chinese authors and doctors, clearly includes influenza, which > > can > > kill people. Some may, as you point out, consider it less severe, or > > something different entirely. My point is, if it is clear that SOME > > Chinese > > use the term ganmao in a broader context, which from my perspective is > > true, > > then does 'common cold' suit such a translation / definition?... > > > > -Jason > > > > > > > > > >> > >> > >> , " " > >> <@c...> > >> wrote: > >> > I have been thinking about gan mao and the way that our profession / > >> Wiseman > >> > translates this term - 'Common Cold.' > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > A common (non-medical) Chinese dictionary will translate ganmao as > >> common > >> > cold or to catch a cold. When I asked my Chinese Language teacher (no > >> > medical training) what she thought the term ganmao meant and she said > >> common > >> > cold. I asked her if she thought that it encompassed severe > >> presentations > >> > such as deadly flues and she said no. > >> > > >> > But clearly the Chinese use the term GanMao to incorporate with Flue, > >> Upper > >> > respiratory tract infections, or a contraction of a seasonal epidemic > >> > pestilence pathogen, and all sorts of externally contracted patterns, > >> making > >> > it seem much broader than just 'common cold'. Granted it completely > >> depends > >> > on how one defines common cold. It seems that in our society common > >> cold > >> > has a more limited definition. Therefore I was wondering what people on > >> this > >> > list think common cold means to them, and if they think that this suits > >> the > >> > disease entity of Chinese 'GanMao' - IF not, does anyone have a better > >> > translation? In my translations I have just left the term in pinyin > >> because > >> > it seems to imply anything. It just seems that sometimes the Chinese > >> use > >> > the term in a broader sense than the Wiseman definition and the Wiseman > >> > terminology choice seems to imply a limited view - but maybe that is > >> just > >> > me... I have asked Nigel what he thinks and he has given no response, > >> > so > >> I > >> > ask you . Comments? > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > -Jason > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > tel: > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > <https://www.plaxo.com/add_me?u=30064918855 & v0=295000 & k0=1975548621> > >> Add me > >> > to your address book... <http://www.plaxo.com/signature> Want a > >> signature > >> > like this? > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 6, 2005 Report Share Posted February 6, 2005 Eric, I see all the points you made and pretty much agree. ** I do think that using pinyin is optimal, ** I adequately understand the different uses of 'common cold', historical and modern/ in English and Chinese. ** I also agree that students should know what words mean in a Chinese Medical context and not rely on English understanding (if it is clear in the PD for example) But the fact remains that students do not know what gan mao means in this broader context. Every student I asked thought it could not be severe or life-threatening, hell it is translated as common-cold. They pretty much thought it is a wind-cold or wind-heat. Most thought that the flue, or severe presentations would not be ganmao. I.e. gan mao can be a fulminantly contagious rapidly spreading virus that causes death. {Note: Historical usage is nice, but I am purely looking at things through a modern TCM perspective where they acknowledge viruses - Which is common in the literature} I don't have the PD in front of me, but I think that is does not really show the diversity of the use of the term. {could someone check it out?} If I remember, it basically defines gan mao as; wind-cold (listing the symptoms) then says it can also be wind-heat and that is about it... What about warm-dryness, summerheat heat, exterior dampness patterns, or the above?... Point being I have a whole book on GanMao with 100's of formulas and patterns. For example check out 'Fulminant desertion of yang qi gan mao' " chills and fever, perspiration, then: palps, chest oppression, urgent respiration, copious perspiration, aversion to cold, rapid bound intermittent pulse...lack of spirit, lying recumbent with legs drawn up... cough and chest pain or fecal incontinence... " etc etc. One may not consider this above pattern ganmao, or even a reference to the influenza virus pattern as ganmao, but Modern Chinese will use ganmao in this broader way. I still don't like 'common cold' as a translation. It does not incorporate the extensive usage and deflates its meaning. It is a colloquial usage that misses the medical boat, IMO... Think about this.. Case study: the patient gets a common cold, and after 3 visits... he dies from this common cold. Yes one may argue it doesn't matter what you call it, you can look it up. And this may be true in many situations. But, Point being: I ask everyone, from reading the PD as well as the word itself, does one get a sense of the broadness of how these authors are using the term ganmao? Can Wiseman Win??? Really Wiseman can't lose because: anytime that a translation of a term is not-liked or said to give a incorrect or vague meaning (from the translated word(s) themselves), the response is : " Well just look it up in the PD and you get the 'true' meaning " - Transparency is forgone for precise dictionary meanings. But if the PD definition is vague or incomplete (or even missing) the response is : " Well... the PD of course can't have every detail. " . And If i.e. Another author comes up with his term choice, which in his opinion seems more transparent, even if footnoted, the response has been, why re-invent to wheel.. Wiseman has already done the work... Win Win Win... Bonus gan mao : Unified three yang Pattern Would you consider this gan mao? Alternating chills and fever, pain and fullness in the chest and ribs, abdominal fullness, wry mouth and grim face, lumbar and spinal pain. Tongue is thin yellow (may be thick yellow and dry in extreme situations). Floating, wiry, large, and rapid. Disclaimer : Just for clarity sake, before so some big brewahhahahha starts... I use Wiseman's work daily. It is invaluable. I am not attacking his whole work, methodology or whatever... I do, though, find times that I (and my colleagues) do not agree with some of his choices. I am open either way... I.e. I might end up using 'common cold' as a translation, but to date it seems like an odd pick, and don't really understand it. Yes I am challenging his pick of a term / definition - Or should I say just trying to understand it through dialogue. Knowing that Nigel (and of course Eric) are going to defend the term pick, which I am very interested in... I am also interested in the non-translator's CHA reader's opinions. For example, what does common cold or gan mao mean to you? Where did you acquire that information, and does the translation of 'common cold' (with the PD definition) seem to suit the contexts presented above. Comments...? - > > smilinglotus [smilinglotus] > Sunday, February 06, 2005 7:42 AM > > Re: gan mao > > > > Chinese medical theory did not historically recognize viruses and > bacteria as causes of disease because they did not possess the > technology to perceive them. The distinction between influenza > viruses and coryza viruses is a distinction made by modern medicine. > It is a distinction that is made in our culture as well as in modern > Chinese culture, but it is not a distinction that was historically > present. Wai gan (externally contracted) diseases include conditions > with a wider range of severity than the colloquial use of common cold > implies in English. > > Gan mao presentations generally correspond to common cold. Because the > parameters of disease classification in Chinese medicine are not > mutually exclusive, practitioners can use different diagnostic systems > to describe the same illness. Thus, the same condition can be > described through cold damage theory (shang han), warm disease theory > (wen bing), or the disease classifications and patterns breakdowns > found in texts organized by TCM diseases. > > The fact that the heading of gan mao as a disease category contains > multiple patterns of varying symptoms and severities tells us that the > concept of common cold in Chinese medicine is wider than that of > Western medicine. Because of the inability to differentiate influenza > from coryza viruses, or viruses from bacteria, the conditions were > described by the prominence of symptoms, the severity, and the > patterns. Most gan mao cases, are in fact, common colds, thus common > cold is used as a translation for gan mao. However, when learning > Chinese medical theory, one must understand that the Chinese concept > of a common cold includes conditions that are classified as influenza > in modern medicine. > > Generally, anything that is as severe as a life-threatening flu is > going to be perceived and assessed through a variety of diagnostic > parameters. It may be described using shang han theory or wen bing > theory in addition to being classified as a case of external > contraction with heat toxins (for example). None of these are > mutually exclusive. > > Common cold is a phrase in English that is often used by the general > public as a LGP (language for general purposes) term. Practitioners > of Chinese medicine use the phrase common cold as an LSP (language for > special purposes) term rather than an LGP term, because our definition > of the word is specific to Chinese medical theory. As professionals, > our definition of common cold reflects the traditional Chinese disease > category, complete with its nebulous understanding (in the eyes of > science) of causative factors and its wider range of possible severity > and progression. Confusion between the traditional Chinese concept of > common cold and the Western concept of common cold is thus caused by a > failure to understand what the full range of common cold includes in > Chinese medical theory vs. WM theory. Common cold means one thing > when used as an LGP term in colloquial English, it means a different > thing when used as an LSP term in CM. > > Because most people on this list are experienced practitioners, we > have all learned that there is a different definition of common cold > in Chinese medicine than there is in Western medicine. The assumption > of students that there is a one-to-one correlation between Chinese > medical concepts and Western concepts is the only source of confusion > here. If students understand what common cold includes in Chinese > medical terms, they will have no problem integrating the fact that it > includes things that WM would classify as influenza. Any shortcomings > in this understanding are due to a poor education in Chinese medical > theory, not a poor translation of the term gan mao. > > Chinese medicine abounds with many concepts that are not identical to > Western concepts. We cannot use pinyin to translate all of these > terms, because there are too many such terms and too many homophones. > The only solution is to use English words and to teach students > that these words have a special meaning in the context of Chinese > medicine. This is not a difficult thing for most students to > grasp, so it is a good solution for the problem of how to transmit > Chinese medical information (the ultimate goal of CM translation). > Let's look a few examples: > > Jin1 is translated by Wiseman as " sinew(s), " but it is often > translated as " tendon(s). " A tendon in the West is a type of tissue > that joins the end of each muscle belly to the bone that it attaches > to. In Chinese medicine, a jin1 is any type of ropy tissue that can > be " plucked " (if you think back to your tui na classes)- plucking is a > technique that is applied to jin1. So some things that are classified > as jin1 in CM are actually muscle bellies in WM, such as the SCM or > the upper part of the Trapezius. Because these things are definitely > not tendons, " tendon " is a poor translation for jin1. Wiseman calls > these " sinews " to reinforce the notion that they describe ropy flesh > that includes, but is not limited to, tendons. An English term is > preferable to pinyin here, because jin pronounced in the identical > tone can also mean a unit of measurement (=600g everywhere but within > the PRC, where it =500g), metal, or liquids. If we say that the liver > nourishes the jin1, we cannot discern whether the liver nourishes > metal, whether it nourishes liquids, or nourishes the sinews. So > pinyin is out. Incidentally, metal and liquids are both LGP terms in > normal English that have an LSP usage in Chinese medicine. No one on > this list confuses the Chinese concept of metal (in the 5 phases) with > the Western concept of metal, nor do we confuse the CM concept of > liquids (jin as in jin-ye, again an LSP use) with the Western concept > of liquids. Why should gan mao be any more difficult to learn as an > LSP term than any of these others? > > No one is arguing that we translate metal or fluids any differently, > even though they have an LSP use in CM that differs from their LGP > meaning in English. These are the fundamental difficulties in Chinese > medical education, learning what concepts really ARE in Chinese > medicine, rather than assuming that one knows what they are or > assuming that they correspond to pre-existing Western categories. > This is exactly why translation should be done with specificity rather > than simplification. Using simple and common English words gives the > reader the impression that they understand the concept, but their > assumption may not actually be correct (as in the example of tendon). > > Poor Wiseman cannot win. If he chooses a term that has greater > accuracy but is not common, his words are called obscure. If he > chooses a term that is familiar, people say he is confusing the issue. > It doesn't matter what you call something if you understand what it > means in CM use. It is only a problem if one assumes that it means > the same thing as a familiar Western concept. > > Incidentally, if gan mao is left as pinyin instead of translating it > into an LSP English term for use in Chinese medicine, it must be > pronounced VERY carefully. If you say it in the wrong tone, it means > " (to) F*ck cats. " Your doctor will be far too polite to ever say > anything, but your Chinese friends will tease you to no end. > > Eric Brand > > > > > > , " Par Scott " <parufus@e...> > wrote: > > I've always assumes that gan mao was the prodromal phase of a viral > disease, > > since they manifest the same and tend to get treated the same. > > - > > " " <@c...> > > > > Saturday, February 05, 2005 9:40 PM > > RE: Re: gan mao > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > >> [taiqi@t...] > > >> Saturday, February 05, 2005 7:22 PM > > >> > > >> Re: gan mao > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> I think common Cold/Gan Mao may be pretty severe but perhaps not > deadly > > >> flu. > > >> When I saw one of my colleagues sneezing I asked if he was " gan > mao? " but > > >> he just smiled > > >> and replied, " xiao feng " . > > >> doug > > >> > > > [Jason] > > > Doug, > > > > > > I think this kind of proves one of my points about terminology... > Gan mao, > > > for some Chinese authors and doctors, clearly includes influenza, > which > > > can > > > kill people. Some may, as you point out, consider it less severe, or > > > something different entirely. My point is, if it is clear that SOME > > > Chinese > > > use the term ganmao in a broader context, which from my > perspective is > > > true, > > > then does 'common cold' suit such a translation / definition?... > > > > > > -Jason > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > > >> > > >> , " " > > >> <@c...> > > >> wrote: > > >> > I have been thinking about gan mao and the way that our > profession / > > >> Wiseman > > >> > translates this term - 'Common Cold.' > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > A common (non-medical) Chinese dictionary will translate ganmao as > > >> common > > >> > cold or to catch a cold. When I asked my Chinese Language > teacher (no > > >> > medical training) what she thought the term ganmao meant and > she said > > >> common > > >> > cold. I asked her if she thought that it encompassed severe > > >> presentations > > >> > such as deadly flues and she said no. > > >> > > > >> > But clearly the Chinese use the term GanMao to incorporate with > Flue, > > >> Upper > > >> > respiratory tract infections, or a contraction of a seasonal > epidemic > > >> > pestilence pathogen, and all sorts of externally contracted > patterns, > > >> making > > >> > it seem much broader than just 'common cold'. Granted it > completely > > >> depends > > >> > on how one defines common cold. It seems that in our society > common > > >> cold > > >> > has a more limited definition. Therefore I was wondering what > people on > > >> this > > >> > list think common cold means to them, and if they think that > this suits > > >> the > > >> > disease entity of Chinese 'GanMao' - IF not, does anyone have a > better > > >> > translation? In my translations I have just left the term in > pinyin > > >> because > > >> > it seems to imply anything. It just seems that sometimes the > Chinese > > >> use > > >> > the term in a broader sense than the Wiseman definition and the > Wiseman > > >> > terminology choice seems to imply a limited view - but maybe > that is > > >> just > > >> > me... I have asked Nigel what he thinks and he has given no > response, > > >> > so > > >> I > > >> > ask you . Comments? > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > -Jason > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > tel: > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > <https://www.plaxo.com/add_me?u=30064918855 & v0=295000 & k0=1975548621> > > >> Add me > > >> > to your address book... <http://www.plaxo.com/signature> Want a > > >> signature > > >> > like this? > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 6, 2005 Report Share Posted February 6, 2005 , " " <@c...> wrote: > Eric, > > I see all the points you made and pretty much agree. > ** I do not think that using pinyin is optimal, > ** I adequately understand the different uses of 'common cold', historical > and modern/ in English and Chinese. > ** I also agree that students should know what words mean in a Chinese > Medical context and not rely on English understanding (if it is clear in the > PD for example) > > But the fact remains that students do not know what gan mao means in > this broader context. Eric: Naturally, you understand how wide the use of the phrase is because you had an education that instilled in you the importance of understanding the CM paradigm. You know how to look through different lenses simultaneously. Not everyone has that advantage, nor does everyone have the opportunity that you have to be able to read Chinese. You are able to consult books that show a use of the term gan mao employed in an even wider context than most of us are even aware of. Your materials suggest that the whole spectrum of external contraction can be classed under gan mao. Because we are born in a fortunate time with such developed and accessible knowledge, we have the advantage of being able to study " pure " Chinese medical theory, " modern " Chinese medical theory, and Western medicine. This allows for multiple viewpoints to overlap that were not always historically available. We can thus use many different lenses to look at the same problem, and select the viewpoint that most adequately explains the condition and follow the prescribed treatment. If influenza or meningitis hit it on the head, you can follow the WM treatment for that, if shang han theory fits more cleanly, you can apply that instead. I think that wen bing, shang han, simple internal medicine texts, and Harrison's all give us overlapping pictures to choose from for each given scenario. This selection of which information to employ and which school to choose from is a hallmark freedom of Chinese medicine. Chinese medicine evolved through many different phases and each generation did not discard old theories even as new, sometimes more accurate, ones were developed. They were just all added on top of each other and doctors to this day flip between schools of thought as needed to explain a given condition. So our ability to use WM superimposed on 2000 years of differing theories is a huge advantage. Another problematic thing is that modern Chinese medicine has been influenced so much by Western thought that it is difficult to be sure of the origin of some ideas. The very idea of having organized textbooks and didactic training was inspired by Western sciences and Western-style learning to some degree. Words like gan mao are so common in colloqial use that it is hard to even be sure if they are terms that were historically used. There are people who would know the answer to this, of course, but I do not. It is possible that gan mao is a borrowed phrase from WM. WM in China has borrowed a huge amount of words from Chinese medicine. Take, for example, lin bing- gonorrhea. It is the same as lin zheng, or strangury patterns = painful dribbling urination patterns, but with the word disease instead of pattern. Surely some lin patterns seen by Chinese medicine were gonorrhea, and surely some were not. With the advantage we possess by having modern medicine, we could do a culture and let that decide the appropriate first line of treatment. Treatment aside, we can see that the Chinese WM term borrowed from the indigenous understanding. We can still understand the WM use and the CM use of the terms, and choose paradigms accordingly. Gan mao may have been a term that moved the other direction, into Chinese medicine. Witness the fact that formulas such as gan mao ling are essentially allopathic rather than traditional in their use. Basically, the more lens we have to look through and treatment options to pursue it, the better off we are. Maybe we should just use gan mao as a simple tool for knowing where in a given modern textbook to find our external contraction differential diagnosis and treatment therapies, and leave it at that. I asked Nigel what he thought, and he replied with the following thoughts below: Sincerely, Eric I DON'T REALLY REGARD GAN MAO AS A CHINESE MEDICAL TERM. I AM NOT SURE WHEN IT APPEARED IN THE LANGUAGE, WHETHER IT CAME FROM A CHINESE MEDICAL USAGE, A WESTERN MEDICAL TRANSLATION THAT JUST BECAME POPULAR, OR SIMPLY A POPULAR TERM. SINCE IT IS NOT REALLY A TECHNICAL TERM IN MODERN TCM, WE MIGHT RENDER IT COLDS AND FLU, OR COLDS (AND FLU). I THINK THE ENGLISH " COLD " IS THE COLLOQUIAL DISEASE NAME. IN GERMAN IT IS CALLED ERKAELTUNG (THE KAELT IS COGNATE WITH THE ENGLISH COLD). I THINK PHYSICIANS TURNED IT INTO COMMON COLD TO DISTINGUISH IT FROM INFLUENZA. " COLD " MIGHT BE THE RIGHT TERM TO USE. HOWEVER, " COLD " SUGGESTS " Han " IN CHINESE. PARADOXICALLY, THIS IS VERY CLOSE TO THE IDEA OF " SHANG Han " . I HAVE A FEELING THAT THE COLOQUIAL CHINESE TERM MAY HAVE BEEN " SHANG FENG " , WHICH MAY HAVE BEEN REPLACED BY GAN MAO UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF WESTERN MEDICINE (WHERE WIND HAS NO MEANING). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 6, 2005 Report Share Posted February 6, 2005 This is largely the result of over use of the formula 'gan mao ling' by students and practitioners. Rather than 'doing the math' (i.e. pattern differentiation) in choosing prescriptions, this formula is often given to everyone who complains of colds or flu, without considering if it is wind/cold, wind/heat/, wind/cold/damp, tai yang, tai yang/yang ming, defense aspect, early stage qi aspect, or any other combination pattern. Just another example of the over-simplication of Chinese herbal medicine. On Feb 6, 2005, at 8:33 AM, wrote: > > But the fact remains that students do not know what gan mao > means in > this broader context. Every student I asked thought it could not be > severe > or life-threatening, hell it is translated as common-cold. They > pretty much > thought it is a wind-cold or wind-heat. Most thought that the flue, > or > severe presentations would not be ganmao. I.e. gan mao can be a > fulminantly > contagious rapidly spreading virus that causes death. {Note: > Historical > usage is nice, but I am purely looking at things through a modern TCM > perspective where they acknowledge viruses - Which is common in the > literature} > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 6, 2005 Report Share Posted February 6, 2005 To all, Interesting discussion... Just for clarity sake, my examples of this broader use of GanMao are from pure CM sources, meaning there is no Western Medical diagnosis or treatments. Puzzling is that Nigel does not seem to feel that ganmao is a Chinese medical term. Yet it is in the PD as a term, and it appears throughout CM literature as one (IMO)... Therefore historically maybe ganmao meant something else (purely colloquial), but it is clearly being used in the CM literature and we should evaluate how to translate this. The term choice should reflect the current usage, not some outdated historical or colloquial one. Or maybe we should have multiple words for its different usages... I ask everyone, including Eric, do you think 'common cold' does justice to this modern more broad usage? Is this a case that common cold = ganmao fits in many situations, but not all of them, and for those others maybe another term should be used..? I also don't see how I looking at different sources or lenses should change our pick of a term and definition... It seems like the more broad one's reading is the more thorough and correct one's understanding of a word or term is. If it does not match the current term choice / definition, then I question it... We shouldn't reduce a definition or term choice to the lowest common denominator... Furthermore, does it matter were the term ganmao came from? Does it make it invalid if it came from Western Medicine? IMO, I don't think so... Anyway... comments? - > > smilinglotus [smilinglotus] > > > Eric: > > Naturally, you understand how wide the use of the phrase is because > you had an education that instilled in you the importance of > understanding the CM paradigm. You know how to look through different > lenses simultaneously. Not everyone has that advantage, nor does > everyone have the opportunity that you have to be able to read > Chinese. You are able to consult books that show a use of the term > gan mao employed in an even wider context than most of us are even > aware of. Your materials suggest that the whole spectrum of external > contraction can be classed under gan mao. > > Because we are born in a fortunate time with such developed and > accessible knowledge, we have the advantage of being able to study > " pure " Chinese medical theory, " modern " Chinese medical theory, and > Western medicine. This allows for multiple viewpoints to overlap that > were not always historically available. We can thus use many > different lenses to look at the same problem, and select the viewpoint > that most adequately explains the condition and follow the prescribed > treatment. If influenza or meningitis hit it on the head, you can > follow the WM treatment for that, if shang han theory fits more > cleanly, you can apply that instead. > > I think that wen bing, shang han, simple internal medicine texts, and > Harrison's all give us overlapping pictures to choose from for each > given scenario. This selection of which information to employ and > which school to choose from is a hallmark freedom of Chinese medicine. > Chinese medicine evolved through many different phases and each > generation did not discard old theories even as new, sometimes more > accurate, ones were developed. They were just all added on top of > each other and doctors to this day flip between schools of thought as > needed to explain a given condition. So our ability to use WM > superimposed on 2000 years of differing theories is a huge advantage. > > Another problematic thing is that modern Chinese medicine has been > influenced so much by Western thought that it is difficult to be sure > of the origin of some ideas. The very idea of having organized > textbooks and didactic training was inspired by Western sciences and > Western-style learning to some degree. Words like gan mao are so > common in colloqial use that it is hard to even be sure if they are > terms that were historically used. There are people who would know > the answer to this, of course, but I do not. > > It is possible that gan mao is a borrowed phrase from WM. WM in China > has borrowed a huge amount of words from Chinese medicine. Take, for > example, lin bing- gonorrhea. It is the same as lin zheng, or > strangury patterns = painful dribbling urination patterns, but with > the word disease instead of pattern. Surely some lin patterns seen by > Chinese medicine were gonorrhea, and surely some were not. With the > advantage we possess by having modern medicine, we could do a culture > and let that decide the appropriate first line of treatment. > Treatment aside, we can see that the Chinese WM term borrowed from the > indigenous understanding. We can still understand the WM use and the > CM use of the terms, and choose paradigms accordingly. Gan mao may > have been a term that moved the other direction, into Chinese > medicine. Witness the fact that formulas such as gan mao ling are > essentially allopathic rather than traditional in their use. > > Basically, the more lens we have to look through and treatment options > to pursue it, the better off we are. Maybe we should just use gan mao > as a simple tool for knowing where in a given modern textbook to find > our external contraction differential diagnosis and treatment > therapies, and leave it at that. > > I asked Nigel what he thought, and he replied with the following > thoughts below: > > Sincerely, > Eric > > > I DON'T REALLY REGARD GAN MAO AS A CHINESE MEDICAL TERM. I AM NOT > SURE > WHEN IT APPEARED IN THE LANGUAGE, WHETHER IT CAME FROM A CHINESE > MEDICAL > USAGE, A WESTERN MEDICAL TRANSLATION THAT JUST BECAME POPULAR, OR > SIMPLY A > POPULAR TERM. SINCE IT IS NOT REALLY A TECHNICAL TERM IN MODERN TCM, > WE > MIGHT RENDER IT COLDS AND FLU, OR COLDS (AND FLU). > > I THINK THE ENGLISH " COLD " IS THE COLLOQUIAL DISEASE NAME. IN GERMAN > IT IS > CALLED ERKAELTUNG (THE KAELT IS COGNATE WITH THE ENGLISH COLD). I > THINK > PHYSICIANS TURNED IT INTO COMMON COLD TO DISTINGUISH IT FROM INFLUENZA. > " COLD " MIGHT BE THE RIGHT TERM TO USE. HOWEVER, " COLD " SUGGESTS " Han " > IN > CHINESE. PARADOXICALLY, THIS IS VERY CLOSE TO THE IDEA OF " SHANG Han " . > > I HAVE A FEELING THAT THE COLOQUIAL CHINESE TERM MAY HAVE BEEN " SHANG > FENG " , WHICH MAY HAVE BEEN REPLACED BY GAN MAO UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF > WESTERN MEDICINE (WHERE WIND HAS NO MEANING). > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 6, 2005 Report Share Posted February 6, 2005 I > ask everyone, including Eric, do you think 'common cold' does justice to > this modern more broad usage? You could always call it common cold in normal situations and " uncommon cold " in unusual situations. The vast majority of gan mao presentations are just common colds or minor flus, and I really don't think that anyone is going to their doctor complaining of gan mao when they have something really bad- they would add many clarifying words to get their doctor's attention. Common cold may not be a really old or a really well-defined term in Chinese medicine, but it is definitely used frequently so it is a term that we should all be familiar with. We should know that 95% of the times it is used, the phrase is used to refer to things like wind-heat, wind-dry, wind-cold, etc., but we should also be aware that it can apparently be used in an all-encompassing way. It makes sense to translate it as common cold when it implies common cold and to explain it or translate it differently when it is talking about life-threatening cases. Materia medica texts often use the phrase gan mao in the exterior-resolution chapter. I've never seen the phrase gan mao used in that type of book to indicate the " uncommon colds " that you have mentioned, because fulminant desertion and such are not usually referred to as gan mao, they would be classed under other diseases like yang collapse. Now, if you were writing the big book of complications and progressions that originate with external contraction, it would make more sense to clarify the broader use that is implied by your source text. I think that by and large, most Chinese people and most Chinese books use gan mao more frequently in the narrower sense of acute, short-lived, externally contracted mild illnesses (that can, of course, transform and progress to severe conditions in very weak patients or with very strong evils). It seems that whenever the condition progresses beyond the point of gan mao, it is usually clarified by other modifiers or other classifications. At the stage of life-threatening danger, we might look at it through other disease categories in a internal medicine text that were more specific to the presentation at hand. You should simply call it whatever you like and tell the reader that in this book, gan mao is translated as " uncommon colds " or whatever term you like. There are a number of words in Chinese that are rendered differently in English when they mean different things. Just translate it one way for one use and another way for another use. Tell the reader the source term and briefly mention why you choose your translation over the more limited " common cold " or " acute exterior disorders, " as used by Will Maclean and Jane Lyttleton in their clinical handbook of int'l medicine. Some of the stuff in the book that you are using is no longer in the exterior, nor is it either " common " or " cold. " I agree that the PD definition could be wider and more explicit for this term. But the PD simply reflects what the zhong yi da ci dian and similar books say in their explanations, and, encyclopedic as it is, it can't cover the topic to the depth that exists in all scenarios. There are entire books written about external contraction, entire books about astragalus, etc. Cheers to your efforts to make more info known about externally contracted diseases! Eric -- In , " " <@c...> wrote: > To all, > > > > Interesting discussion... > > > > Just for clarity sake, my examples of this broader use of GanMao are from > pure CM sources, meaning there is no Western Medical diagnosis or > treatments. > > > > Puzzling is that Nigel does not seem to feel that ganmao is a Chinese > medical term. Yet it is in the PD as a term, and it appears throughout CM > literature as one (IMO)... Therefore historically maybe ganmao meant > something else (purely colloquial), but it is clearly being used in the CM > literature and we should evaluate how to translate this. The term choice > should reflect the current usage, not some outdated historical or colloquial > one. Or maybe we should have multiple words for its different usages... I > ask everyone, including Eric, do you think 'common cold' does justice to > this modern more broad usage? Is this a case that common cold = ganmao fits > in many situations, but not all of them, and for those others maybe another > term should be used..? I also don't see how I looking at different sources > or lenses should change our pick of a term and definition... It seems like > the more broad one's reading is the more thorough and correct one's > understanding of a word or term is. If it does not match the current term > choice / definition, then I question it... We shouldn't reduce a definition > or term choice to the lowest common denominator... Furthermore, does it > matter were the term ganmao came from? Does it make it invalid if it came > from Western Medicine? IMO, I don't think so... Anyway... comments? > > > > - > > > > > > > > > > smilinglotus [smilinglotus] > > > > > > > > > Eric: > > > > > > Naturally, you understand how wide the use of the phrase is because > > > you had an education that instilled in you the importance of > > > understanding the CM paradigm. You know how to look through different > > > lenses simultaneously. Not everyone has that advantage, nor does > > > everyone have the opportunity that you have to be able to read > > > Chinese. You are able to consult books that show a use of the term > > > gan mao employed in an even wider context than most of us are even > > > aware of. Your materials suggest that the whole spectrum of external > > > contraction can be classed under gan mao. > > > > > > Because we are born in a fortunate time with such developed and > > > accessible knowledge, we have the advantage of being able to study > > > " pure " Chinese medical theory, " modern " Chinese medical theory, and > > > Western medicine. This allows for multiple viewpoints to overlap that > > > were not always historically available. We can thus use many > > > different lenses to look at the same problem, and select the viewpoint > > > that most adequately explains the condition and follow the prescribed > > > treatment. If influenza or meningitis hit it on the head, you can > > > follow the WM treatment for that, if shang han theory fits more > > > cleanly, you can apply that instead. > > > > > > I think that wen bing, shang han, simple internal medicine texts, and > > > Harrison's all give us overlapping pictures to choose from for each > > > given scenario. This selection of which information to employ and > > > which school to choose from is a hallmark freedom of Chinese medicine. > > > Chinese medicine evolved through many different phases and each > > > generation did not discard old theories even as new, sometimes more > > > accurate, ones were developed. They were just all added on top of > > > each other and doctors to this day flip between schools of thought as > > > needed to explain a given condition. So our ability to use WM > > > superimposed on 2000 years of differing theories is a huge advantage. > > > > > > Another problematic thing is that modern Chinese medicine has been > > > influenced so much by Western thought that it is difficult to be sure > > > of the origin of some ideas. The very idea of having organized > > > textbooks and didactic training was inspired by Western sciences and > > > Western-style learning to some degree. Words like gan mao are so > > > common in colloqial use that it is hard to even be sure if they are > > > terms that were historically used. There are people who would know > > > the answer to this, of course, but I do not. > > > > > > It is possible that gan mao is a borrowed phrase from WM. WM in China > > > has borrowed a huge amount of words from Chinese medicine. Take, for > > > example, lin bing- gonorrhea. It is the same as lin zheng, or > > > strangury patterns = painful dribbling urination patterns, but with > > > the word disease instead of pattern. Surely some lin patterns seen by > > > Chinese medicine were gonorrhea, and surely some were not. With the > > > advantage we possess by having modern medicine, we could do a culture > > > and let that decide the appropriate first line of treatment. > > > Treatment aside, we can see that the Chinese WM term borrowed from the > > > indigenous understanding. We can still understand the WM use and the > > > CM use of the terms, and choose paradigms accordingly. Gan mao may > > > have been a term that moved the other direction, into Chinese > > > medicine. Witness the fact that formulas such as gan mao ling are > > > essentially allopathic rather than traditional in their use. > > > > > > Basically, the more lens we have to look through and treatment options > > > to pursue it, the better off we are. Maybe we should just use gan mao > > > as a simple tool for knowing where in a given modern textbook to find > > > our external contraction differential diagnosis and treatment > > > therapies, and leave it at that. > > > > > > I asked Nigel what he thought, and he replied with the following > > > thoughts below: > > > > > > Sincerely, > > > Eric > > > > > > > > > I DON'T REALLY REGARD GAN MAO AS A CHINESE MEDICAL TERM. I AM NOT > > > SURE > > > WHEN IT APPEARED IN THE LANGUAGE, WHETHER IT CAME FROM A CHINESE > > > MEDICAL > > > USAGE, A WESTERN MEDICAL TRANSLATION THAT JUST BECAME POPULAR, OR > > > SIMPLY A > > > POPULAR TERM. SINCE IT IS NOT REALLY A TECHNICAL TERM IN MODERN TCM, > > > WE > > > MIGHT RENDER IT COLDS AND FLU, OR COLDS (AND FLU). > > > > > > I THINK THE ENGLISH " COLD " IS THE COLLOQUIAL DISEASE NAME. IN GERMAN > > > IT IS > > > CALLED ERKAELTUNG (THE KAELT IS COGNATE WITH THE ENGLISH COLD). I > > > THINK > > > PHYSICIANS TURNED IT INTO COMMON COLD TO DISTINGUISH IT FROM INFLUENZA. > > > " COLD " MIGHT BE THE RIGHT TERM TO USE. HOWEVER, " COLD " SUGGESTS " Han " > > > IN > > > CHINESE. PARADOXICALLY, THIS IS VERY CLOSE TO THE IDEA OF " SHANG Han " . > > > > > > I HAVE A FEELING THAT THE COLOQUIAL CHINESE TERM MAY HAVE BEEN " SHANG > > > FENG " , WHICH MAY HAVE BEEN REPLACED BY GAN MAO UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF > > > WESTERN MEDICINE (WHERE WIND HAS NO MEANING). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 13, 2005 Report Share Posted February 13, 2005 Hi Folks: Last night, I was thumbing through an index to a book on formulas (ZhongYi Shi Da Lei Fang) & noticed two different entries in the list of indications: " pu3 tong1 gan3 mao4 " & " liu2 xing2 xing4 gan3 mao4 " I don't have a reference to the first term in any of my Chinese-English dictionaries, but it's the same putong as putonghua, i.e. " common, universal " ; the 2nd term is found in 2 of my dictionaries (_The Pinyin Chinese-English Dictionary_ and _A Pocket Chinese-English Medical Dictionary_) as " flu; influenza; grip " . I couldn't find another such specific differentiation in my other formula discussion books, so I guess this would suggest a " borrowing " of Western/English terminology. --chris flanagan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.