wpgtaiji wrote:pete5770 wrote:I originally wrote about this...
..because you like to be argue for the sake of arguing, nothing more!
pete, if you take a look at what Erle wrote/recorded/etc, he used the word that best fit. For example, he used the word kata for form as that was what his market used. He used very few chinese words in any of his explanations, and those he did use, he explained how HE used them (for example, Sung), and he was still misunderstood! mate, there is no "easy" way! Look at yourself pete! 40 years in taiji and you dont understand or accept fundamental concepts! FUNDAMENTAL concepts! LOL It runs deep mate.
pete5770 wrote:I realize that you yourself have found the ultimate truths and want to share them with everyone.
Still, that quote about "Believe those seeking the truth. Be wary of those claiming to have found it." keeps flashing through my mind. Why is that?
adamfuray wrote:pete is on to something with this. Is this thread about ancient chinese etymology or is this thread about using english words in place of chinese words to avoid confusion between english speaking people? Most Chinese martial arts terms have a very clear english translation that is only confusing to people who don't understand them, or wish to purposefully keep them confusing and mystical.
adamfuray wrote:Pete has a pretty firm grasp on reality, and martial arts. As far as I have seen, his only transgression has been de-railing threads with advice that isn't relevant to the OP's question, but serves to illuminate that the question is flawed to begin with. EXAMPLE: why ask about qigong when qigong isn't real? This is a legitimate perspective, but poor forum etiquette.
Josh Young wrote:I have seen fluent Mandarin speakers and readers have issue with meanings and translations of terms, like Peng.
Some Chinese terms have clear translations, but some seem to require explanations that involved contexts that required explanations etc.
Some people give their opinion of what they think words (should) mean and totally ignore the literal translation, true.
....Then you have the basic fact that Chinese characters and words often have multiple meanings and interpretations, this can often complicate translations as that some old writers would employ a context where both readings were valid and gave rise to different aspects in a way akin to puns.
If even native speakers of the language have issues with definitions and connotations, and they do, then it is dubious to think that translations can be had simply in all cases.
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 1 guest