Concerning the use of Western medical terms to represent traditional Chinese medical concepts —Answer to Prof. Xie and his colleagues

Publisher Website
Google Scholar
Abstract
This paper strongly rejects the notion that the use of biomedical terms to represent traditional Chinese medical concepts is helpful to the internationalization of Chinese medicine. It further argues that this practice destroys the integrity and independence of Chinese medical concepts. Taking the term fēng hu< o y < an as an example, it shows that the biomedical term “acute conjunctivitis” often suggested as the translation for this term is unsatisfactory, because (1) the clinical reference is not identical, (2) it introduces the concepts of “conjunctiva” and “inflammation”, which are not Chinese medical concepts, and (3) destroys the Chinese medical concepts “wind” and “fire” expressed in the Chinese, which reflect the way the disease is traditionally diagnosed and treated. While for English readers not familiar with Chinese medicine, “acute conjunctivitis” may be immediately intelligible, for those seeking a deep understanding of the subject, the literal translation (loan translation) “wind-fire eye” is much more helpful. This paper supports these arguments with numerous other examples.

This publication has 1 reference indexed in Scilit: