Guest guest Posted June 29, 2005 Report Share Posted June 29, 2005 > " " <zrosenbe > June 29, 2005 10:30:02 AM PDT > Jack Miller <jmiller > Cc: Stacy Gomes <sgomes, Robert Damone > <bdamone, <, Tom Haines > <thaines > WHO announcement > > > Folks, > Today the World Health Organization announced the adaptation of > the terminology developed in the Clinical Dictionary of Chinese > Medicine (Wiseman-Feng) as the recommended standard for translation > of Chinese medical concepts into Western languages. In addition: > > 1. The list is 4,000 terms, this clearly indicates that the Asians > themselves > reject the notion of small glosses and the idea that TCM has no real > technical terminology. > > 2. The principle of source oriented translation is explicit in the WHO > decision, this is a clear rejection of the idea that TCM terms > should be > chosen to please the arrival audience. > > 3. The choice of PD terms was supported by both western and asian > representatives, including Paul Unschuld and Christopher Cullen of > the Needham Institute. > > This is, in my opinion, a major advancement in the development of > Chinese medicine in the West as a bona-fide medical discipline. > > > > > > Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine > Pacific College of Oriental Medicine > San Diego, Ca. 92122 > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 29, 2005 Report Share Posted June 29, 2005 Since there are few other choices to be made and if they had to make one then so be it. Unfortunately, all of us are going to be spending more time discussing the whole debate with this official structure over the debate. Perhaps if this is now a public and international standard, forces can come into play so that the concepts and terminology itself can be improved with input from the international community. doug , wrote: > > > > > > " " <zrosenbe@s...> > > June 29, 2005 10:30:02 AM PDT > > Jack Miller <jmiller@P...> > > Cc: Stacy Gomes <sgomes@P...>, Robert Damone > > <bdamone@e...>, , Tom Haines > > <thaines@P...> > > WHO announcement > > > > > > Folks, > > Today the World Health Organization announced the adaptation of > > the terminology developed in the Clinical Dictionary of Chinese > > Medicine (Wiseman-Feng) as the recommended standard for translation > > of Chinese medical concepts into Western languages. In addition: > > > > 1. The list is 4,000 terms, this clearly indicates that the Asians > > themselves > > reject the notion of small glosses and the idea that TCM has no real > > technical terminology. > > > > 2. The principle of source oriented translation is explicit in the WHO > > decision, this is a clear rejection of the idea that TCM terms > > should be > > chosen to please the arrival audience. > > > > 3. The choice of PD terms was supported by both western and asian > > representatives, including Paul Unschuld and Christopher Cullen of > > the Needham Institute. > > > > This is, in my opinion, a major advancement in the development of > > Chinese medicine in the West as a bona-fide medical discipline. > > > > > > > > > > > > Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine > > Pacific College of Oriental Medicine > > San Diego, Ca. 92122 > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 29, 2005 Report Share Posted June 29, 2005 , " " wrote: > Since there are few other choices to be made and if they had to make one then so be it. > Unfortunately, all of us are going to be spending more time discussing the whole debate > with this official structure over the debate. Perhaps if this is now a public and international > standard, forces can come into play so that the concepts and terminology itself can be > improved with input from the international community. It is not true that there are few other choices to be made. Several previously published term lists were proposed by extremely powerful figures within the Chinese community. Nigel's approach was chosen based upon its merits, not based on a lack of competition. The concepts and terminology will indeed have additional input from the three countries involved (China, Japan, and Korea). Eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 30, 2005 Report Share Posted June 30, 2005 Congratulations to Nigel and Feng. A major development that should help to improve translational standards in Asia and has the potential to make a huge difference in the amount of material translated into English and in the quality of that material. Enough of CAM! Personally, no matter how one might feel about the PD terminology, I believe we all owe a debt of gratitude to Nigel and Feng for bringing this conversation to the fore of our field. The man hours that have gone into the production of this work are enormous - a task of love. Thank you. Marnae At 05:04 PM 6/29/2005, you wrote: > > > > " " <zrosenbe > > June 29, 2005 10:30:02 AM PDT > > Jack Miller <jmiller > > Cc: Stacy Gomes <sgomes, Robert Damone > > <bdamone, <, Tom Haines > > <thaines > > WHO announcement > > > > > > Folks, > > Today the World Health Organization announced the adaptation of > > the terminology developed in the Clinical Dictionary of Chinese > > Medicine (Wiseman-Feng) as the recommended standard for translation > > of Chinese medical concepts into Western languages. In addition: > > > > 1. The list is 4,000 terms, this clearly indicates that the Asians > > themselves > > reject the notion of small glosses and the idea that TCM has no real > > technical terminology. > > > > 2. The principle of source oriented translation is explicit in the WHO > > decision, this is a clear rejection of the idea that TCM terms > > should be > > chosen to please the arrival audience. > > > > 3. The choice of PD terms was supported by both western and asian > > representatives, including Paul Unschuld and Christopher Cullen of > > the Needham Institute. > > > > This is, in my opinion, a major advancement in the development of > > Chinese medicine in the West as a bona-fide medical discipline. > > > > > > > > > > > > Chair, Department of Herbal Medicine > > Pacific College of Oriental Medicine > > San Diego, Ca. 92122 > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 30, 2005 Report Share Posted June 30, 2005 , Marnae Ergil <marnae@p...> wrote: > Congratulations to Nigel and Feng. A major development that should help to > improve translational standards in Asia and has the potential to make a > huge difference in the amount of material translated into English and in > the quality of that material. Enough of CAM! > > Personally, no matter how one might feel about the PD terminology, I > believe we all owe a debt of gratitude to Nigel and Feng for bringing this > conversation to the fore of our field. The man hours that have gone into > the production of this work are enormous - a task of love. Thank you. Yes, it is truly a great development. Our range of usable literature will expand tremendously if the Chinese at last start producing high- quality translations that preserve the spirit of CM. As Z'ev pointed out, the WHO conclusions are very significant because they explictly illustrate the importance of terminology and the value of source- based translations. Congratulations to Nigel and Feng Ye for their pioneering work! And thank you Marnae for your consistently thoughtful and well- written posts. Eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 30, 2005 Report Share Posted June 30, 2005 I just wanted to point out that the comments in my post were edited from a longer post by Bob Felt to me, and are basically his thoughts and sentiments. On Jun 30, 2005, at 9:50 AM, Eric Brand wrote: > Yes, it is truly a great development. Our range of usable literature > will expand tremendously if the Chinese at last start producing high- > quality translations that preserve the spirit of CM. As Z'ev pointed > out, the WHO conclusions are very significant because they explictly > illustrate the importance of terminology and the value of source- > based translations. Congratulations to Nigel and Feng Ye for their > pioneering work! > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 30, 2005 Report Share Posted June 30, 2005 , " Eric Brand " <smilinglotus> wrote: forces can come into play so that the concepts and > terminology itself can be > > improved with input from the international community. > > > The concepts and terminology will indeed have additional input from > the three countries involved (China, Japan, and Korea). > > Eric We continue to deal with this straw man, that wiseman terminology was created by some kind of cabal that shut out all competitors, when in fact it has been an open evolving terminology for 20 years. Everyone has been invited to the table and as we have heard on this list many times, no one accepted the invitation nor chose to create their own equivalent option. They just complained bitterly and devoted all efforts to jockeying for position through political rather than scholarly methods. The crux of this is the continuing requirement of certain outdated, nonstandardized texts as board exam reference texts. Now here we are twenty years later and whether the Englsih speaking community sees the need or not, the Asians who outnumber us in this field at least ten to one have made their decree. As they have long used technical standards in their own language, the whole matter was really a no brainer to them. Then when it came down to choosing between a few Asian options and Wiseman, Wiseman no doubt made the most sense since it is the only standardized terminology already in widespread use in the US. Personally, I think much of the time for comment and revision is over. I propose a limited period of time to submit any revisions or alternate term choices to whatever committee made this decision. Then after that, any further revisions should be few and far between. As I have mentioned, if one is interested in digitizing the TCM literature, including modern research, searching becomes nightmarish very quickly if there is not a single standardized terminology. How does one create keywords, for example? And it would be very disruptive to established databases if the terms are easily changed. I am sure a large part of the reason the Chinese themselves want this standard is for digital reasons, including extremely accurate instant computerized translation that is just around the corner. So once the period of official comment is over, it pretty much needs to be set in stone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 2, 2005 Report Share Posted July 2, 2005 In a message dated 6/30/05 5:00:22 PM, writes: > As they have long used technical standards in their own language, the whole > matter was really a no brainer to them. Then when it came down to choosing > between a > few Asian options and Wiseman, Wiseman no doubt made the most sense since it > is the > only standardized terminology already in widespread use in the US. > Americacentric, eh? Probably, they chose this because it did the best job and was most comprehensive. The WHO is in Geneva, and although the person who heads up the Oriental Medicine aspect is indeed Chinese, I am sure she has worked with people in Europe on making this decision as well as American MD's, who seem to have a better " in " with the WHO than acupuncture professionals. By the way, this is how I differentiate between those professionals who use acupuncture as a clinical modality and those with complete training, a la the WHO standards. There are indeed MD's, DO's, ND's and DC's who are acupuncture professionals, but they are few compared to the folks who are lay acupuncturists (or hobbyists) and should be referring out to acupuncture professionals when they don't get results and not just reverting to drugs, saying acupuncture didn't work. This is like a family medicine doc referring out to an ENT when s/he doesn't get a response, and it is the ethical thing to do. However, it is not done presently. Whoops! I may have started a new thread. David Molony David Molony 101 Bridge Street Catasauqua, PA 18032 Phone (610)264-2755 Fax (610) 264-7292 **********Confidentiality Notice ********** This electronic transmission and any attached documents or other writings are confidential and are for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) identified above. This message may contain information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from disclosure under applicable law, including the FTC Safeguard Rule and U.S.-EU Safe Harbor Principles. If you are the intended recipient, you are responsible for establishing appropriate safeguards to maintain data integrity and security. If the receiver of this information is not the intended recipient, or the employee, or agent responsible for delivering the information to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any use, reading, dissemination, distribution, copying or storage of this information is strictly prohibited. If you have received this information in error, please notify the sender by return email and delete the electronic transmission, including all attachments from your system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 2, 2005 Report Share Posted July 2, 2005 , acuman1@a... wrote: > > Americacentric, eh? Probably, they chose this because it did the best job and > was most comprehensive. I am sure you know I believe the last sentence goes without saying. I was actually referring to the entire English speaking world where Wiseman is the only standard commonly available. The quality is a given. But something tipped the balance. rather than even suggesting anglocentricism (even though we are talking about translation into english, aren't we), it is probably just more of that Chinese pragmatism. It works. why reinvent the wheel? Is wiseman american anyway? He lives in Taiwan. definitely an international man of mystery. so no kowtowing here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2005 Report Share Posted July 3, 2005 A few important things should be pointed out about the recent WHO meetings. Firstly, PD (Wiseman) terminology was approved by the WHO to be the foundation upon which the WHO terminology is based. Individual term disputes will be resolved by discussions (for instance, xiao qing long tang's English name is likely to change), and terms that have exact Western medical equivalents will be open to be translated based upon the traditional name or the WM name (largely depending on whether the publication is for Evidence Based Medicine or WM-based research, or for use by CM professionals). The WHO didn't blanketly adopt PD terminology, they just agreed that PD terminology is accurate and based on appropriate principles of translation. Their final list will use PD terms as a base and discuss variations and inclusions as needed. The other key point was alluded to by Todd (with regard to the need for professional terms for keyword journal searches in the digital age, etc). A primary motive for the WHO is the promotion of Evidence Based Medicine (EBM). EBM is an important facet of the changing landscape of modern healthcare. Journal articles, publications, education, etc require consistent and professional term use. Terminology is deemed to be the first essential step towards allowing CM to progress into the modern world of integrated healthcare. The agreement by Asian nations to develop standards in their terminology obviously demonstates the importance of clear terms. They also went through the source language terms to eliminate the use of problematic phrases within the Asian world. They are assessing their own terms at the same time as they are implementing standards for effective discussion and transmission in English. Eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2005 Report Share Posted July 3, 2005 , " " wrote: > , acuman1@a... wrote: > > > > > Americacentric, eh? Wiseman is British (but arguably more Taiwanese than anything by now), Unschuld was there (German), and the big cats from China, Japan, and Korea. Hardly an Americentric bunch. Eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2005 Report Share Posted July 3, 2005 This is starting to make sense now as some of my colleagues have been on the working group for W.H.O. terminology for the last few years. The announcement that WHO had adopted PD was confusing to them and seemed premature. doug , " Eric Brand " <smilinglotus> wrote: The WHO didn't > blanketly adopt PD terminology, they just agreed that PD terminology > is accurate and based on appropriate principles of translation. Their > final list will use PD terms as a base and discuss variations and > inclusions as needed. > > The agreement by Asian nations to develop standards in their > terminology obviously demonstates the importance of clear terms. > They also went through the source language terms to eliminate the use > of problematic phrases within the Asian world. They are assessing > their own terms at the same time as they are implementing standards > for effective discussion and transmission in English. > > Eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2005 Report Share Posted July 3, 2005 They are assessing their own terms at the same time as they are implementing standards for effective discussion and transmission in English. >>>>That would be interesting as it may be harder done than said Oakland, CA 94609 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 3, 2005 Report Share Posted July 3, 2005 , " " <alonmarcus@w...> wrote: > They are assessing > their own terms at the same time as they are implementing standards > for effective discussion and transmission in English. > >>>>That would be interesting as it may be harder done than said Apparently they didn't actually need to eliminate too many terms in the source languages when assessing which terms were meaningful and which were not. Eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 5, 2005 Report Share Posted July 5, 2005 At 07:14 PM 7/2/2005, you wrote: Nope - he is English. Marnae > Is >wiseman american anyway? He lives in Taiwan. definitely an international >man of mystery. >so no kowtowing here. > >Todd > > > > >Chinese Herbal Medicine offers various professional services, including >board approved continuing education classes, an annual conference and a >free discussion forum in Chinese Herbal Medicine. > > > > 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.