Over the years opinions concerning the translation of traditional Chinese medical literature into English have narrowed. Today, there are some who believe that T.C.M. either has no technical vocabulary, or has a very small one. These beliefs sometime include the idea that any form of term standardization denies “depth” or “spiritual value.” Obviously, those who hold this opinion rarely comment on translation methodology and offer only limited glossaries. Others believe that their practice-garnered perspective is a sole and sufficient guarantee of validity, thus their own native-language expression is all that is required. Those who hold this opinion also have been understandably silent as regards translation principles and methods. By definition, their opinion requires neither scrutiny in the manner of peer review nor explicit evidence. Recently however more and more people have recognized the value to the westward transmission of Chinese medicine of a standard English representation of traditional Chinese ideas. Some have called for multi-disciplinary conferences to develop a standard capable of addressing the text, teaching, record-keeping and research problems that are created by the present lack of even reliable cross-referencing.

If you are new to the term debate, this free ebook will introduce the topic with hundereds of examples.

Rationale for the Terminology of Fundamentals of Chinese Medicine