Guest guest Posted March 16, 2006 Report Share Posted March 16, 2006 Hi Eric, Gabe forwarded your post to me on another (Australian) forum, and I wrote you a reply: Thank you for your response and your contribution to the ongoing discussions and debate regarding how best to represent the unique concepts of TCM in the English language. Your comments merit a reply from me and I will answer you in point form; for the sake of brevity as well as clarity. 1. `Ad hominem' arguments have very little place in this (or any other) discussion, IMHO. I am a fallible human being, with a limited fund of knowledge – as indeed we all are. I appreciate the opportunity to correct my mistakes and to learn something new. 2. I make a very precise distinction between the issues involved in `translation' as opposed to `developing a standardized terminology' in TCM. It seems to me that you as well as N.W. blur this distinction, and thus place unrealistic expectations on the words that you have chosen. My focus is solely on the latter issue. I think that if it is possible a transparent word should be chosen. Otherwise the next best choice should be one that at least encompasses some of the actual meaning in contemporary clinical practice. Word choice for the art of translation is a different issue and can include allusions to the historical origins of words, stylistic features of the Chinese language, poetic associations, cultural metaphors, etc. However, this is more of a `museum of Chinese medicine' approach and may not be in the best interests of modern clinicians. 3. My recent article in the Lantern was meant as a general critique of what I consider to be poor practices for conveying TCM concepts into English, so the scope of the article would, of course, include N.W.'s work because he is such a prolific contributor. However, it was not meant to be restricted to the PD. 4. In spite of the impression I may have given, I believe that some of the terms that NW has coined are, in fact, very good. I have mentioned some of these earlier in this thread (http://forums.acupuncture.net.au), e.g. counterflow, external contraction, gastrointestinal heat bind. 5. I believe that it is valid to criticize a system (that really only exists in theory, or as a set of ideas) based on the way it is (and has been) applied in practice. In other words I think that I am quite justified in criticizing the PD based on the many (IMHO – again) poor quality English texts that have tried to follow this methodology. I believe I am not alone in this opinion; see Marnae Ergil's (translator of `Practical Diagnosis in Traditional Chinese Medicine by Tietao Deng) comments regarding her work on this book, elsewhere on this forum. 6. I was impressed with your comments regarding the use of the word depression and its derivatives. I apologise for my lack of clarity in the original article, but I was referring to the whole `depression' tribe. In a medical context, depression always has a specific meaning (see DSM IV). This is complex issue, and were it not for the fact that in contemporary Western medicine the vested interests of multinational drug companies have lead to the dramatic expansion of the number of conditions that are included under this category, I would definitely consider using this word to convey the nuances that you point out. However, I fear that this may further the `widening of the net' that is already flung far too wide. Also any second year TCM student knows already that sluggish movement of the Liver Qi (which I would refer to as `Liver Qi stagnation') is associated with emotional disturbances of one kind or another. It is not necessary to highlight this with a separate word. We must not forget that this whole issue is being conducted within a medical context. 7. Re: na dai. The Wiseman term that I am referring to is `torpid intake', not `torpid stomach'. `Torpid stomach' is a lot better than torpid intake in that it covers both appetite and digestion. However, if you look at literature that has been influenced by NW, the term `torpid intake' is generally used. Torpid 'intake' only refers to appetite and not digestion and is therefore equivalent to `anorexia' or `loss of appetite'. This is another example of the `system' falling down in real life practice, regardless of whether or not its originator has made revisions to his original suggestions. (at the time of writing this, I presumed that NW had revised the term) 8. Re: `ying'. See my comments above regarding the `museum of TCM approach'. Anyway to be realy conistent you would have to call it the 'camp aspect' or the 'camping aspect', neither of which would be acceptable. 9. Re: `sprout and orifice'. See item 2 above. Also the tongue is not an orifice. 10. There are only two original ideas in this article (and approximately the same proportion also applies to my first article, published in the previous issue of the Lantern). These are the comments relating to `orifice' and `depression'. With the exception of the discussion on `phases' vs. `elements' (which comes from Nathan Sivin's `Traditional Medicine in Contemporary China') all of the ideas are taken directly from Professor Xie Zhu-fan's book `On the Standard Nomenclature of Traditional '. I have already discussed my ideas re `depressive/depression' above; and my choice of `sense organ' for `qiao' in the context of `miao qiao' is, IMO, more transparent than `orifice'. Personally, my first mental association for `orifice' is the fundamental one – but that is just the way my mind works (and I also come from Australia!). 11. While the qualifications of Wiseman and Feng are generally well known, I would like to list for the benefit of your good self, as well as the readers of this thread, the qualifications of Professor Xie Zhu-fan. - Native speaker of Chinese - Fluent in English (has published books in English) - University level training in both Western and Chinese medicine – professor of both - Honorary director of Institute of Integrative Chinese-Western Medicine, First Clinical Medical College, Peking University - Has been appointed three times as consultant on traditional medicine by the WHO - Has lectured on Chinese medicine in China and other countries (i.e. he has experience in teaching TCM in English) - English publications include: Chinese Acupuncture and Moxibustion; Traditional Chinese Internal medicine; Best of Traditional Chinese Medicine; Practical Traditional ; Classified Dictionary of Traditional (co-author). - Has worked with the WHO on the standardization of Acupuncture terminology and drafted the document: ` International Standard Terminology in Acupuncture for Basic Training' - Is one of the editors of the Pharmacopoeia of the Peoples Republic of China - Contributor to the Chinese medicine part of the Chinese-English Medical Dictionary, for which contributions he was honored with a special award from the Chinese Ministry of Health. It is evident from the above that Professor Xie has, IMHO, done more `homework' than most of us can expect to achieve in our very short lifetimes. 12. I look forward to reading Nigel Wiseman's response to my article (hopefully he will address both articles) in the next issue of the Lantern. As you so aptly put it, this sort of discussion tends to make people's eyes glaze over. For this reason I adopted a more conversational, if not colloquial, sort of style: this is better at keeping people's interest, but unfortunately is more likely to cause offence! Anyway, I suppose the old adage of `if you can dish it out, you should also be able to take it' holds good here. Kind regards, Tony Reid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 16, 2006 Report Share Posted March 16, 2006 Actually, in a historical/anthropological context, camp qi for ying qi is quite acceptable, is it not? This is how Paul Unschuld translates it, in his " Huang Di Nei Jing Su Wen " text. He explains his usage there. On Mar 16, 2006, at 4:24 PM, tonyreidepiphany wrote: > 8. Re: `ying'. See my comments above regarding the `museum of TCM > approach'. Anyway to be realy conistent you would have to call it > the 'camp aspect' or the 'camping aspect', neither of which would be > acceptable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 16, 2006 Report Share Posted March 16, 2006 , " " <zrosenbe wrote: > > Actually, in a historical/anthropological context, camp qi for ying > qi is quite acceptable, is it not? This is how Paul Unschuld > translates it, in his " Huang Di Nei Jing Su Wen " text. He explains > his usage there. > > > On Mar 16, 2006, at 4:24 PM, tonyreidepiphany wrote: > > > 8. Re: `ying'. See my comments above regarding the `museum of TCM > > approach'. Anyway to be realy conistent you would have to call it > > the 'camp aspect' or the 'camping aspect', neither of which would be > > acceptable. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 17, 2006 Report Share Posted March 17, 2006 " Fluent in English (has published books in English) " P-l-ease. Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 17, 2006 Report Share Posted March 17, 2006 Tony I don’t know why you would post Dr xie’s qualifications, being you that posted the critic on PD terminology. But I would also like to comment a few thing’s for the benefit of the readers regarding Nigel Wiseman, Nigel’s Educational background has been in translation and the study of language’s, he has been living in Taiwan for 25 years Teaching Medical English and Chinese medical terminology in English as well as other courses at China Medical and Chang gun and also has published numerous books and article’s on Chinese medicine , he has been in constant dialog with practitioners and scholars from Asia and the west on the selection of terms and issues of lexiconography and language transference for the past 20 plus years. His Chinese language skills are excellent, speaking, reading and writing, he has been in Asia long enough to become intimately acquainted with the Chinese language at a level that most foreigners that come to Asia for many years are not able to reach, even some of the doctors I know at China medical will tell me that Nigel’s knowledge and understanding of ancient and modern medical literature far surpasses theirs, and statements like that are not easily made. It is this, Nigel’s love of language that set’s him apart from everyone else, there is not a day that goes by that he is not discussing terms or pondering how to best convey meaning, you only have to look at the material that he has published like the Chinese medical grammar and vocabulary to see how he presents to the readers some of the complexities of learning medical Chinese, I would highly recommend you get this book it has helped me tremendously in understanding the nuances of the Chinese language. And it is this, the nuances of the language that makes the difference, I have looked at Dr.Xies book and I can honestly say that the majority of the text does not convey the true language of Chinese medicine, it reads more like a western terminology text and is not the way Chinese Doctors communicate in their own language, book’s like these were the reason I came to Taiwan to study Chinese, because even my Chinese teachers in the states would say well this is not the true meaning of this or that regarding translations that would come from the main land. I personally want to know the metaphors and imagery that is used in conveying meaning, to me as well as many other’s it is not a museum of Chinese medicine but a live every day occurrence in many Chinese hospitals and private clinics, if you have any experience studying in a Chinese clinic you will hear senior doctors using metaphorical language to convey clinical ideas to their student’s ,even when you are in the street’s and you are engaged in common conversation you will hear metaphorical statements that will imply a double meaning, this is just part of the culture. Every student of Chinese medicine should have some understanding of not only the language but also the culture just to better understand their craft. As westerners we think that we can supper impose our own western ideas over concepts and ideas that are so culturally different, to me western biomedical terms don’t work in conveying these ideas. That is why as a student of Chinese medicine and language I recommend to student or practitioner to learn the source language and the cultural history of their medicine so they too can have a deeper appreciation and knowing of their craft. And yes Tony this does affect clinical outcome if we are to get the same results as our Asian counter parts, we need to have some understanding of the same ideas and concepts that they have in practice and in the classroom, culturally this is not our medicine and that is why we should even more so become acquainted with it’s history and metaphorical language, and this is why I think Nigel’s work is so important because it conveys in many ways ideas and metaphors that are woven into the everyday life of a Chinese practitioner, and the Chinese medical literature. Something that Dr.xie does very poorly in conveying in his text. Respectfully Gabriel Fuentes Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 17, 2006 Report Share Posted March 17, 2006 , gabe gabe <fuentes120 wrote: > > I personally want to know the metaphors and imagery > that is used in conveying meaning, to me as well as > many other's it is not a museum of Chinese medicine > but a live every day occurrence in many Chinese > hospitals and private clinics, if you have any > experience studying in a Chinese clinic you will hear > senior doctors using metaphorical language to convey > clinical ideas to their student's ,even when you are > in the street's and you are engaged in common > conversation you will hear metaphorical statements > that will imply a double meaning, this is just part of > the culture. > > Every student of Chinese medicine should have some > understanding of not only the language but also the > culture just to better understand their craft. As > westerners we think that we can supper impose our own > western ideas over concepts and ideas that are so > culturally different, to me western biomedical terms > don't work in conveying these ideas. > That is why as a student of Chinese medicine and > language I recommend to student or practitioner to > learn the source language and the cultural history of > their medicine so they too can have a deeper > appreciation and knowing of their craft. > Gabe, do you think that every Chinese doctor thinks the way you describe here? I am thinking that this is only true for part of the Chinese medical community. For example, many Chinese doctors are trained in both Western and Chinese medicine. In clinical practice, they will use blood tests, stool tests, scans etc to make a good diagnosis. Even when they use Chinese herbs as a treatment. ( I also look at blood tests, X-ray picitures etc in my clinical practice) I believe that while it is true that Chinese language has a lot of metaphors, some doctors will not use these metaphors in clinical practice (or might even avoid them). This is not true for the more classical-oriented. However, let us not forget that not everyone wants/ needs? to become an expert in the classics. The biomedicalisation of Chinese medicine is a fact in China, so I find it understandable that many Western medical terms appear in modern clinical journals. Just have a look at the articles in Chinese medical journals and one knows that this is a fact. For preservation of the authenticity of Chinese medical theories and language, Wiseman terminology is undoubtedly the best in the field. But does this cover the whole terrain of Chinese medicine? Tom. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 18, 2006 Report Share Posted March 18, 2006 Tom you are absolutely right not all doctors in major combined Chinese western medical hospitals use metaphorical language in clinic, It all depends on their specialty and training, many of the Chinese doctors that go into medical programs here in Taiwan will only want to specialize in western medicine but will go thru the entire combined western and traditional programs, but once out of school they will focus mostly on western medicine and will not utilize their traditional training, in fact many will go into research or surgery, on the other hand you have doctors that use both systems and doctors that stick to a more traditional approach and utilize more of the modern and classical literature of Chinese medicine. Going back to metaphorical language the Chinese classical literature is highly metaphorical and it conveys meaning that is very dense like a conversation I had today about using a terms with Dr.Lin Jung-Chih of China medical hospital acupuncture department I asked him about using the term conjunctivitis to convey feng1 huo3 yan3 wind fire eye and he told me that it was an erroneous term because conjunctivitis does not convey the other possible meanings inherent in feng1 huo3 yan3 and he added that the traditional name gives you the idea clinically that it is wind and fire and that you would go directly to the wind expelling heat clearing category of medicinals or use appropriate points according to the pattern, were as using a total biomedical term will not guide you to the proper selection of medicinals or treatment principals. You are also right in that many Chinese practitioners of Chinese medicine will use western diagnostic methods but in their treatment they will mostly always use pattern differentiation, I have even heard of some doctors developing a system of pattern differentiation based on western diagnostic methods in the main land, but I am not to familiar with this but I know that it is out there, but on the other hand there are floors like the one that I am currently observing at, were very few of the doctors use western diagnostic methods, they just take the pulse and look at the tongue and do their inquiry and treat the patient and that’s it, unless it is a special case, this afternoon I observed a few doctors treating well over 70 plus patients and not a single one pulled out a blood panel or an MRI, and I am in the acupuncture department of China medical and I am not saying either that it does not happen because it does, but I will have to say also that in most private clinic’s of traditional medicine that I have been to here in Taiwan the doctors will rarely use western diagnostic methods but this has been my experience so far and here I am talking of traditional clinics that focus on oriental medicine. Going back to your statement about journals being published, the system set up in Taiwan and I am sure this is true for the mainland is that doctors are encouraged to publish articles that have been in some way done as a clinical trial and that provide some scientific evidence, and if they can publish their research in a western journal they will be compensated with points and with upward mobility in their careers, for this they will try to make their research methods geared towards western physicians but not all are like this there is large plurality here and there is research done in many areas, but the ones that are usually published are the ones that have more of a biomedical flavor. As far as Nigel’s terms covering the whole terrain of Chinese medicine, of course not! The whole of Chinese medicine is to vast to be covered by one set of terms, remember that the medicine that we practice is just a small part of Chinese medicine and it does not represent the whole. Gabriel Fuentes --- Tom Verhaeghe <tom.verhaeghe wrote: > , gabe gabe > <fuentes120 > wrote: > > > > I personally want to know the metaphors and > imagery > > that is used in conveying meaning, to me as well > as > > many other's it is not a museum of Chinese > medicine > > but a live every day occurrence in many Chinese > > hospitals and private clinics, if you have any > > experience studying in a Chinese clinic you will > hear > > senior doctors using metaphorical language to > convey > > clinical ideas to their student's ,even when you > are > > in the street's and you are engaged in common > > conversation you will hear metaphorical statements > > that will imply a double meaning, this is just > part of > > the culture. > > > > Every student of Chinese medicine should have some > > understanding of not only the language but also > the > > culture just to better understand their craft. As > > westerners we think that we can supper impose our > own > > western ideas over concepts and ideas that are so > > culturally different, to me western biomedical > terms > > don't work in conveying these ideas. > > That is why as a student of Chinese medicine and > > language I recommend to student or practitioner to > > learn the source language and the cultural history > of > > their medicine so they too can have a deeper > > appreciation and knowing of their craft. > > > Gabe, do you think that every Chinese doctor thinks > the way you > describe here? I am thinking that this is only true > for part of the > Chinese medical community. > For example, many Chinese doctors are trained in > both Western and > Chinese medicine. In clinical practice, they will > use blood tests, > stool tests, scans etc to make a good diagnosis. > Even when they use > Chinese herbs as a treatment. ( I also look at blood > tests, X-ray > picitures etc in my clinical practice) > I believe that while it is true that Chinese > language has a lot of > metaphors, some doctors will not use these metaphors > in clinical > practice (or might even avoid them). This is not > true for the more > classical-oriented. However, let us not forget that > not everyone > wants/ needs? to become an expert in the classics. > The biomedicalisation of Chinese medicine is a fact > in China, so I > find it understandable that many Western medical > terms appear in > modern clinical journals. Just have a look at the > articles in Chinese > medical journals and one knows that this is a fact. > For preservation of the authenticity of Chinese > medical theories and > language, Wiseman terminology is undoubtedly the > best in the field. > But does this cover the whole terrain of Chinese > medicine? > > Tom. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 18, 2006 Report Share Posted March 18, 2006 I believe that while it is true that Chinese language has a lot of metaphors, some doctors will not use these metaphors in clinical practice (or might even avoid them). This is not true for the more classical-oriented. However, let us not forget that not everyone wants/ needs? to become an expert in the classics. The biomedicalisation of Chinese medicine is a fact in China, so I find it understandable that many Western medical terms appear in modern clinical journals. Just have a look at the articles in Chinese medical journals and one knows that this is a fact. For preservation of the authenticity of Chinese medical theories and language, Wiseman terminology is undoubtedly the best in the field. But does this cover the whole terrain of Chinese medicine? >>>>>>>>>> I wander why the bottom line is not talked about when these issues are discussed? Oakland, CA 94609 - Tom Verhaeghe Friday, March 17, 2006 10:12 PM Re: Reply from Tony Reid , gabe gabe <fuentes120 wrote: > > I personally want to know the metaphors and imagery > that is used in conveying meaning, to me as well as > many other's it is not a museum of Chinese medicine > but a live every day occurrence in many Chinese > hospitals and private clinics, if you have any > experience studying in a Chinese clinic you will hear > senior doctors using metaphorical language to convey > clinical ideas to their student's ,even when you are > in the street's and you are engaged in common > conversation you will hear metaphorical statements > that will imply a double meaning, this is just part of > the culture. > > Every student of Chinese medicine should have some > understanding of not only the language but also the > culture just to better understand their craft. As > westerners we think that we can supper impose our own > western ideas over concepts and ideas that are so > culturally different, to me western biomedical terms > don't work in conveying these ideas. > That is why as a student of Chinese medicine and > language I recommend to student or practitioner to > learn the source language and the cultural history of > their medicine so they too can have a deeper > appreciation and knowing of their craft. > Gabe, do you think that every Chinese doctor thinks the way you describe here? I am thinking that this is only true for part of the Chinese medical community. For example, many Chinese doctors are trained in both Western and Chinese medicine. In clinical practice, they will use blood tests, stool tests, scans etc to make a good diagnosis. Even when they use Chinese herbs as a treatment. ( I also look at blood tests, X-ray picitures etc in my clinical practice) I believe that while it is true that Chinese language has a lot of metaphors, some doctors will not use these metaphors in clinical practice (or might even avoid them). This is not true for the more classical-oriented. However, let us not forget that not everyone wants/ needs? to become an expert in the classics. The biomedicalisation of Chinese medicine is a fact in China, so I find it understandable that many Western medical terms appear in modern clinical journals. Just have a look at the articles in Chinese medical journals and one knows that this is a fact. For preservation of the authenticity of Chinese medical theories and language, Wiseman terminology is undoubtedly the best in the field. But does this cover the whole terrain of Chinese medicine? Tom. 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...
Guest guest Posted March 18, 2006 Report Share Posted March 18, 2006 Tom, There are a few Chinese/English medical dictionaries out there that cover the biomedical terminology. While biomedicalization is a fact in China, I don't think it does justice to Westerners learning Chinese medicine to have the source materials translated in such a way that the original connections are lost. Or if you'd like a metaphor, MacDonalds and KFC are everywhere in the world, even in Lhasa, Tibet. But fine authentic restaurants using native ingredients are hard to find. Why should everything end up tasting like a chain food restaurant when unique dishes are available? If I want biomedical information, I can point and click anytime, or pick up any publication I choose. True Chinese medicine is much harder to find, and I want to have full access to it. On Mar 17, 2006, at 10:12 PM, Tom Verhaeghe wrote: > The biomedicalisation of Chinese medicine is a fact in China, so I > find it understandable that many Western medical terms appear in > modern clinical journals. Just have a look at the articles in Chinese > medical journals and one knows that this is a fact. > For preservation of the authenticity of Chinese medical theories and > language, Wiseman terminology is undoubtedly the best in the field. > But does this cover the whole terrain of Chinese medicine? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 19, 2006 Report Share Posted March 19, 2006 , " " <zrosenbe wrote: > > Tom, > There are a few Chinese/English medical dictionaries out there > that cover the biomedical terminology. While biomedicalization is a > fact in China, I don't think it does justice to Westerners learning > Chinese medicine to have the source materials translated in such a > way that the original connections are lost. At the core of the issue is that there are multiple valid paths to take with Chinese medicine. Some people primarily interact with integrative medicine and use pharmacology or WM disease differentiation-based treatments, and operate under the basic perspective of Western medicine when they apply Chinese medicine. Others are traditionalists who rely purely on CM disease names and theory while determining their treatments. Both are valid methods that get results, and both have a wide following in the Chinese medical community. Therefore, both traditional and modern niches need to be filled in the literature so that all the material is available. At the WHO terminology meetings, Wiseman advocated interface terms for biomedical and Chinese medical usage. I still feel that this is the best approach. Because my interest tends towards traditional medicine, I want to see it fully preserved. At least represented as a part of the overall literature. But there is also a lot of modern material that should be translated in a way that preserves its biomedical orientation. We should have both types of literature. The world uses both. Whatever system is used, it should have options of terms so that it preserves the intended meaning in the context in which its used. Eric Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 19, 2006 Report Share Posted March 19, 2006 Zev The integrative methodologies of new TCM are not the same as have biomedical information. We need as much access to these as to any other CM information. To me the only bottom line is clinical outcome and since we do not have clear data we need all the information Oakland, CA 94609 - Saturday, March 18, 2006 10:08 PM Re: Re: Reply from Tony Reid Tom, There are a few Chinese/English medical dictionaries out there that cover the biomedical terminology. While biomedicalization is a fact in China, I don't think it does justice to Westerners learning Chinese medicine to have the source materials translated in such a way that the original connections are lost. Or if you'd like a metaphor, MacDonalds and KFC are everywhere in the world, even in Lhasa, Tibet. But fine authentic restaurants using native ingredients are hard to find. Why should everything end up tasting like a chain food restaurant when unique dishes are available? If I want biomedical information, I can point and click anytime, or pick up any publication I choose. True Chinese medicine is much harder to find, and I want to have full access to it. On Mar 17, 2006, at 10:12 PM, Tom Verhaeghe wrote: > The biomedicalisation of Chinese medicine is a fact in China, so I > find it understandable that many Western medical terms appear in > modern clinical journals. Just have a look at the articles in Chinese > medical journals and one knows that this is a fact. > For preservation of the authenticity of Chinese medical theories and > language, Wiseman terminology is undoubtedly the best in the field. > But does this cover the whole terrain of Chinese medicine? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 19, 2006 Report Share Posted March 19, 2006 Alon, No doubt " clinical outcome " is important if CM as a 'profession' is going to flourish within the current medical model. However, there are those who are more interested in seeing " life style changes " on those we treat even if the outcome is not measurable by clinical standards. The longer I practice, the more importance I place in teaching patients to relax by embracing meditation, qi gong, taiji or any other method of inner contemplation. This, I consider to be the real medicine; with acupuncture, bodywork and herbal medicine as adjuncts. Fernando , " " <alonmarcus wrote: > > Zev > The integrative methodologies of new TCM are not the same as have biomedical information. We need as much access to these as to any other CM information. To me the only bottom line is clinical outcome and since we do not have clear data we need all the information > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 19, 2006 Report Share Posted March 19, 2006 The longer I practice, the more importance I place in teaching patients to relax by embracing meditation, qi gong, taiji or any other method of inner contemplation. This, I consider to be the real medicine; with acupuncture, bodywork and herbal medicine as adjuncts. >>>>>>>> Agreed but that is a totally different issue. While one can inform one self on life style changes from CM one can also do that from many other perspectives. If we charge patients for actual treatments than we need this information Oakland, CA 94609 - Fernando Bernall Sunday, March 19, 2006 9:21 AM Re: Reply from Tony Reid Alon, No doubt " clinical outcome " is important if CM as a 'profession' is going to flourish within the current medical model. However, there are those who are more interested in seeing " life style changes " on those we treat even if the outcome is not measurable by clinical standards. The longer I practice, the more importance I place in teaching patients to relax by embracing meditation, qi gong, taiji or any other method of inner contemplation. This, I consider to be the real medicine; with acupuncture, bodywork and herbal medicine as adjuncts. Fernando , " " <alonmarcus wrote: > > Zev > The integrative methodologies of new TCM are not the same as have biomedical information. We need as much access to these as to any other CM information. To me the only bottom line is clinical outcome and since we do not have clear data we need all the information > > 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...
Guest guest Posted March 19, 2006 Report Share Posted March 19, 2006 Dear Tony, Thanks for your reply as well as your article in the Lantern. I think that discussions on these issues are informative and useful for the profession. I¡¯ve replied to your main points below (my replies are headed by *** to distinguish them from the original letter). [TR] 1. `Ad hominem' arguments have very little place in this (or any other) discussion, IMHO. I am a fallible human being, with a limited fund of knowledge as indeed we all are. I appreciate the opportunity to correct my mistakes and to learn something new. ***[EB] " Ad hominem¡± implies some level of personal critique of one¡¯s character rather than the relevant issues. This is nothing personal, just a difference of professional opinion. I think you have a lot of valid criticisms about Nigel¡¯s work, but when you publish an article in a professional journal, you need to do your homework and phrase your arguments clearly so that you are accurately representing the views of those who you criticize. That's all. Anyway, everyone makes mistakes, lots of them. The important thing is that we all learn and keep an open mind. [TR] 2. I make a very precise distinction between the issues involved in `translation' as opposed to `developing a standardized terminology' in TCM. It seems to me that you as well as N.W. blur this distinction, and thus place unrealistic expectations on the words that you have chosen. My focus is solely on the latter issue. ***[EB] Standardized terminology is intimately connected to translation because all the primary sources in Chinese medicine are generally expressed in Chinese. Standardized terminology in English is necessarily related to the terminology of CM found in Chinese. Dr. Wiseman favors a method of transmission that relates the English to the source concepts in a systematic way. The habits of the Chinese language cause the information to be conceptually dense and PD-based works reflect that. The PD works are no more confusing or complex than the Chinese originals, but the fact that the content is virtually identical to the Chinese content makes the books appear more difficult to read than books in colloquial English. *It is not necessary to preserve the Chinese concepts so precisely for all types of literature, but it is helpful to have these books fill a niche in the field so that people who want to read Chinese-level material without learning Chinese can have the option available to them. It is much easier to learn a few dozen English words than it is to learn the Chinese language, and doing so allows English readers to access the material to the same depth as Chinese readers enjoy. [TR] I think that if it is possible a transparent word should be chosen. Otherwise the next best choice should be one that at least encompasses some of the actual meaning in contemporary clinical practice. ***[EB] Transparent words are ideal for transparent concepts. Most of the words used in the PD are transparent, simple words like stagnation, obstruction, vomiting, draining, etc. But there are some words that lack a native English equivalent. Trying to make these concepts transparent with a common English word often confuses the issue because it provides a false sense of understanding and makes the reader think that the traditional concept is the same as our natural lay concept. *The ¡°actual meaning in contemporary clinical practice¡± varies depending on the context of the written work and the perspective of the practitioner. Some practitioners think in terms of traditional CM diseases and some think in terms of modern WM disease categories. When we use English to describe these diseases, we need to preserve the traditional disease categories in some contexts and we need to use modern biomedical language in other contexts. A Chinese word in an integrative journal may be used differently that the same word when it appears in a textbook on traditional disease categories. Thus, term standards need to be inclusive of words that preserve the traditional (CM) diseases as well as the modern (WM) diseases. Traditional ideas should not obscure the biomedical uses of the Chinese words, but neither should biomedical words obscure the traditional concepts. One approach should not be the exclusively correct method because both are applicable in different contexts. [TR] Word choice for the art of translation is a different issue and can include allusions to the historical origins of words, stylistic features of the Chinese language, poetic associations, cultural metaphors, etc. However, this is more of a `museum of Chinese medicine' approach and may not be in the best interests of modern clinicians. ***[EB] Actually, for better or worse, Chinese medicine has evolved with a variety of metaphors and concepts that cannot be relegated to a museum of history. Many of these metaphors are in constant clinical use. For sure, many modern practitioners are not interested in traditional theory and the PRC in particular is heavily slanted towards an integrated approach. While such practitioners are using a valid and prominent form of modern Chinese medicine, there are also many practitioners who heavily rely on the metaphors and natural imagery of traditional medicine. The English expression of CM should not exclude either camp. [TR] 5. I believe that it is valid to criticize a system (that really only exists in theory, or as a set of ideas) based on the way it is (and has been) applied in practice. In other words I think that I am quite justified in criticizing the PD based on the many (IMHO again) poor quality English texts that have tried to follow this methodology. I believe I am not alone in this opinion; see Marnae Ergil's (translator of `Practical Diagnosis in Traditional Chinese Medicine by Tietao Deng) comments regarding her work on this book, elsewhere on this forum. ***[EB] I guess here we have a difference in opinion. I think that the Paradigm Shang Han Lun is an exemplary text for PD terminology, and many other books such as the Jiao Shu-De texts or Bob Flaw¡¯s Treatment of Modern WM Diseases with CM are extremely readable and accurate. As for Marnae Ergil, she is a proponent of the PD approach, so I am not sure exactly what point you are making here. Perhaps you find Deng Tie-Tao¡¯s book to be a poor quality text, but actually the Churchhill Livingston translation of it is just a straight translation of an extremely well-regarded Chinese text. [TR] 6. I was impressed with your comments regarding the use of the word depression and its derivatives. I apologise for my lack of clarity in the original article, but I was referring to the whole `depression' tribe¡¡.Also any second year TCM student knows already that sluggish movement of the Liver Qi (which I would refer to as `Liver Qi stagnation') is associated with emotional disturbances of one kind or another. It is not necessary to highlight this with a separate word. ***[EB] The point here is that stagnation (zhi) and depression (yu) are separate but related concepts that should be differentiated. While you may dislike the English rendering of ¡°depression, " collapsing the distinction between zhi and yu causes a loss of a clinically important concept (this concept, incidentally, goes far beyond any connotations of emotional disturbance or a limitation of use with the liver qi). If the two concepts of zhi and yu were purely synonymous, they would not be distinguished from each other by definition and usage in Chinese. Because the concepts are distinct, English readers should be introduced to their differences and similarities. [TR] 7. Re: na dai. The Wiseman term that I am referring to is `torpid intake', not `torpid stomach'. `Torpid stomach' is a lot better than torpid intake in that it covers both appetite and digestion. However, if you look at literature that has been influenced by NW, the term `torpid intake' is generally used. ***[EB] This was a typo that I corrected in a separate post, it should have read ¡®torpid intake,¡¯ not ¡®torpid stomach.¡¯ As I have mentioned previously, ¡°torpid¡± is not a word that I am particularly fond of because it is on the periphery of my common American vocabulary. But I think simply rendering the term as anorexia or loss of appetite deprives the reader of the fact that the term also implies poor digestion. Thus, my bias against the word ¡®torpid¡¯ is tempered by the fact that I think the concept merits further investigation, and the phrase ¡®torpid intake¡¯ causes readers to seek further understanding rather than assuming that the concept is narrower than it truly is. Too many practitioners see the phrase ¡°loss of appetite¡± and never investigate the concept because there is a sense of false transparency present. [TR] 8. Re: `ying'. See my comments above regarding the `museum of TCM approach'. Anyway to be realy conistent you would have to call it the 'camp aspect' or the 'camping aspect', neither of which would be acceptable. ***[EB] Actually, Unschuld does translate this as ¡®camp¡¯ in Han Dynasty historical works where this is the predominant meaning. I find ¡®camp qi¡¯ to sound, well, ¡®campy,¡¯ so it doesn't roll of the tongue well despite its accuracy for Han Dynasty usage. ¡®Nutritive¡¯ is acceptable for Wen Bing era usage in my opinion. Finding an inclusive term for both is difficult. I know that Dr. Wiseman was not the original coiner of the word ¡°construction¡± and I know that he has never been completely satisfied with it, but coming up with a good term is challenging for this word because it has two contexts that are common in clinical literature. Fortunately, most of us have had teachers that can clarify the meaning of the term in its different contexts, such as SHL and Wen Bing. *Of course, we colloquially just call this ying qi. Terminology use evolves naturally and follows general trends of human use. Some languages adopt loan words readily and other languages vigorously attempt to create target language vocabulary for new concepts. For example, Japanese adopts loan words very freely, while French and Chinese are both regulated by government agencies that create standard terms for foreign concepts. English falls somewhere in the middle; it tends to create its own words for foreign concepts more than Japanese, but takes on more loan words than standard French or Chinese. *For example, Chinese has a habit of creating a Chinese word for every foreign idea, and this is mediated by a national department of language. All geographic locations have a rendering in Chinese, as do all chemical names. However, sometimes popular use of loan words eclipses the use of the official word. This is the case with the word CD (compact disc). Because the abbreviation ¡°CD¡± itself does not describe what the thing is, there is a Chinese phrase that is equivalent to compact disc, a descriptive term in the target language that has inherent meaning. However, no one uses the official Chinese word. They all just say " CD " because everyone knows what the thing is. The same phenomena exists with the computer; a computer is officially called a ¡°ji suan ji " in the PRC, but it is called " dian nao " much more often, even though this is not it¡¯s officially sanctioned term. Both China and France have government regulation of the official language. As a consequence, Canadian French is distinguishable from the French of France because Canadian French takes on more loan words from English. The same pattern is found in Chinese- Taiwanese Mandarin takes on more loan words from English and Japanese than PRC Mandarin does. *Similarly, in Chinese medicine, we have some loan words from pinyin that represent familiar concepts. Because ¡°bi4¡± means nothing in English, Dr. Wiseman translates the term as impediment so that it has an English word that provides information about the concept. However, in practical use in the field, we all know what ¡°bi¡± is, so we generally say the word ¡°bi¡± instead of ¡°impediment.¡± Because the popular pinyin terms are so widely used, PD-based books often write impediment (bi4) and thoroughfare (chong1) vessel, adding the pinyin in italics after the English for clarity. Naming things like the eight extra channels or bi syndrome in English makes the terms more meaningful, but such names are not actually used in speech as much as the pinyin is. These English words in CM are rather like the words endorsed by the French government or the Chinese government to express things like email- a local word exists as a standard but the natural evolution of the language causes the loan word (such as ¡°email¡± or " bi4 " ) to be more commonly used in speech. *Thus, I believe that term standards can only really evolve naturally. People use the terms that they are the most familiar with, which are generally the terms that their teachers used during the student's basic education. The reason that we see so many translators using PD terminology is because it is complemented by the best resources for Chinese medical language study, so most translators have studied it more than any other approach. But even translators and students who begin their studies with PD terminology tend to a shortcut word like bi4 instead of the more cumbersome phrase impediment. At the end of the day, standards are not something that can be imposed by a committee agreement; they can only naturally evolve by popular use. [TR] 11. While the qualifications of Wiseman and Feng are generally well known, I would like to list for the benefit of your good self, as well as the readers of this thread, the qualifications of Professor Xie Zhu-fan. ***[EB] Yes, I am well aware of Xie¡¯s credentials and his work. He has made some major contributions to the field. I am happy that we have the benefits of all of Xie¡¯s homework, because in many situations he has researched which biomedical and traditional diseases correspond to each other. Xie tends to have inconsistent application of a variety of CM terms, some conflation of concepts such as zhi and yu (stagnation and depression), and some biomedical correspondences that are imprecise, but overall his methodology is fairly well-suited to modern integrative Chinese medicine. What I would like to see is a system that includes Xie¡¯s biomedical correspondences with Wiseman and Bensky's traditional disease names. I am not in any way opposed to Xie¡¯s achievements; I just don¡¯t think that the biomedicalized terminology system should be the exclusive methodology because it is not well-suited to the needs of people who are trying to preserve all the traditional disease categories and concepts. Best, Eric Brand Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 19, 2006 Report Share Posted March 19, 2006 Alon, You're right in that these are different issues and I think the differences hinge on what we see as " actual treatments " and for whom is our work defined..Sorry.. Fernando , " " <alonmarcus wrote: If we charge patients for actual treatments than we need this information > > > > Oakland, CA 94609 > > > - > Fernando Bernall > > Sunday, March 19, 2006 9:21 AM > Re: Reply from Tony Reid > > > Alon, > > No doubt " clinical outcome " is important if CM as a 'profession' is > going to flourish within the current medical model. However, there are > those who are more interested in seeing " life style changes " on those > we treat even if the outcome is not measurable by clinical standards. > > The longer I practice, the more importance I place in teaching > patients to relax by embracing meditation, qi gong, taiji or any other > method of inner contemplation. This, I consider to be the real > medicine; with acupuncture, bodywork and herbal medicine as adjuncts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 Eric, Thank goodness you have the time, energy, and inclination to write these excellent posts. I learn something new every time I read one. Thanks, Bob Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 I also appreciate your taking your time to write these very informative posts. I know the time and effort that it takes. On Mar 20, 2006, at 9:08 AM, Bob Flaws wrote: > Eric, > > Thank goodness you have the time, energy, and inclination to write > these excellent posts. I learn something new every time I read one. > > Thanks, > > Bob > > > > > > 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...
Guest guest Posted March 20, 2006 Report Share Posted March 20, 2006 Same here, very informative and objective. Thanks Eric Gabe --- <zrosenbe wrote: > I also appreciate your taking your time to write > these very > informative posts. I know the time and effort that > it takes. > > > On Mar 20, 2006, at 9:08 AM, Bob Flaws wrote: > > > Eric, > > > > Thank goodness you have the time, energy, and > inclination to write > > these excellent posts. I learn something new > every time I read one. > > > > Thanks, > > > > Bob > > > > > > > > > > > > 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...
Guest guest Posted March 22, 2006 Report Share Posted March 22, 2006 , " Eric Brand " <smilinglotus wrote: > > Dear Tony, > > Thanks for your reply as well as your article in the Lantern..... Dear Eric, Thank you for your reply. I appreciate the time and effort that you took to provide both myself as well as those whose `eyes do not glaze over' with a deeper appreciation of the issues involved in this discussion. I too have learned much from our interchange. Kind regards, Tony 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.