Article published In: Terminology
Vol. 31:2 (2025) ► pp.311–334
Pruning translation of logical and accidental polysemy in traditional Chinese medicine terminology
Published online: 14 February 2025
https://doi.org/10.1075/term.24007.hou
https://doi.org/10.1075/term.24007.hou
Abstract
Excessive and arbitrary polysemy within traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) terminology presents a notable challenge to both the intralingual standardization of TCM terms and the interlingual development of a TCM knowledge system. This article categorizes polysemy in TCM based on the origins and relationships of the various senses of a polysemous term: Inherent polysemy, where terms retain their ordinary senses; logical polysemy, which includes both ordinary and technical senses; and accidental polysemy, characterized by exclusively technical senses. For addressing logical and accidental polysemy, this article proposes “pruning translation,” a methodology in terminology translation that refines and aligns a term closely with its original form by reducing multiple senses to its most essential meanings for enhanced clarity and precision. Three approaches, namely “centralization” for an underspecification account, “aggregation” for an overspecification account, and “literal translation” for literalism, are employed to demonstrate the application of pruning translation. This is exemplified through an analysis of five polysemous TCM terms: mào (冒), qīng (清), mài (脉), guǐ tāi (鬼胎), and xià xiè (下泄). The rationale for pruning translation stems from two key aspects: Firstly, the generation of polysemy, highlighting the need to eliminate context-dependent, unrecognized, or superficial senses for accurate cross-lingual translation; secondly, the representation of polysemy, supported by psycholinguistic evidence indicating that multiple senses in one language can often be effectively represented by a single lexical form in another, facilitating the consolidation of senses into a unified translation. This proposed methodology of pruning translation represents an innovative approach in the translation of polysemous TCM terminology, contributing to the field of terminology translation.
Article outline
- 1.Introduction
- 2.Classification of polysemy in TCM terminology
- 3.Techniques of pruning translation
- 3.1Centralization
- 3.2Aggregation
- 3.3Literal translation
- 4.Rationale for pruning translation
- 5.Conclusion
- Acknowledgements
- Notes
References
References (59)
Altman, Magda Elizabeth. 2004. “Making Sense of Traditional Chinese Medicine: A Cognitive Semantic Approach” (master’s thesis, University of South Africa).
Asher, Nicholas. 2011. Lexical Meaning in Context: A Web of Words. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Beinfield, Harriet, and Efrem Korngold. 2001. “Centralism vs pluralism: Language, authority and freedom in Chinese medicine.” Clinical Acupuncture and Oriental Medicine 2(3): 146–155.
Bensky, Dan, Jason Blalack, Charles Chace, and Craig Mitchell. 2006. “Towards a working methodology for translating Chinese medicine.” American Acupuncturist 3(3): 10–14.
Frisson, Steven. 2009. “Semantic underspecification in language processing.” Language and Linguistics Compass 3(1): 111–127.
. 2015. “About bound and scary books: The processing of book polysemies.” Lingua 157 (April): 17–35.
Hartzell, Magda. 2005. “Making sense of indigenous knowledge systems: The case of traditional Chinese medicine.” Southern African Linguistics and Applied Language Studies 23(2): 155–175.
Hou, Guojin. 2009. “The systematicity-distinguishability principle of linguistic terminology translation — With a comment on Jiang Wangqi (2005).” [In Chinese.] Shanghai Journal of Translators (2): 69–73.
Hou, Zhanyuan. 1989. Research on Traditional Chinese Medicine Issues [in Chinese]. Chongqing: Chongqing Publishing House.
. 2000. “Spirit (shen), styles of knowing, and authority in contemporary Chinese medicine.” Culture, Medicine and Psychiatry 24(2): 197–229.
Hsu, Hong-Yen, and William G. Peacher. 1981. Shang Han Lun. Long Beach: Oriental Healing Arts Institute.
Hsu, Hong-Yen, and Su-Yen Wang. 1983. Chin Kuei Yao Lueh. Long Beach: Oriental Healing Arts Institute.
Huang, Yangmo. 2003. Lecture Notes on Essential Prescriptions of the Golden Cabinet [in Chinese]. Beijing: People’s Medical Publishing House.
Huang, Zhonglian. 2019. Translation Methodology [in Chinese]. Rev. ed. Shanghai: East China Normal University Press.
Jia, Shan, and Xiaoqing Jia. 2021. “A study of polysemy translation in the Inner Canon of Huangdi — Su Wen from the perspective of prototype category theory.” Sino-US English Teaching 18(11): 338–342.
Klepousniotou, Ekaterini, Debra Titone, and Carolina Romero. 2008. “Making sense of word senses: The comprehension of polysemy depends on sense overlap.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 34(6), 1534–1543.
Lan, Fengli. 2007. “Linguistic-cultural differences between Chinese and Western Medicine and English translation of traditional Chinese medicine.” [In Chinese.] Chinese Journal of Integrated Traditional and Western Medicine 27(4): 368–370.
. 2010. “English translation of Chinese medical terminology: Single or multiple standards?” [In Chinese.] Chinese Journal of Integrated Traditional and Western Medicine 30(2): 188–192.
Li, Li. 2020. “Study on Polysemy in Shang Han Lun from the Perspective of Prototype Category Theory — Based on the Translation Version of Nigel Wiseman and of Luo Xiwen [in Chinese]” (master’s thesis, Nanjing University of Chinese Medicine).
Li, Li, Miao Zhang, and Yuehong Pan. 2018. “Prototype category cognition and translation strategies of polysemy in On Cold Damage” [In Chinese.] Chinese Journal of Integrated Traditional and Western Medicine 38(11): 1392–1394.
Li, Peisheng. 2009. Lecture Notes on Cold Damage [in Chinese]. Shanghai: Shanghai Scientific & Technical Publishers.
Liang, Maoxin, and Yahe Shou. 1991. “On the causes and pros and cons of ambiguity in basic concepts of traditional Chinese medicine.” [In Chinese.] Medicine & Philosophy (2): 23–26.
Liu, Shijing, and Qian Zhu. 1996. “An examination of ‘mao’ in On Cold Damage and Essential Prescriptions of the Golden Cabinet.” [In Chinese.] Journal of Changchun College of Traditional Chinese Medicine 12(56): 6–7.
Long, Hai, Yan Zhu, Lirong Jia, Bo Gao, Jing Liu, Lihong Liu, and Heinrich Herre. 2019. “An ontological framework for the formalization, organization and usage of TCM-Knowledge.” BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 19(S2): 79–89.
MacGregor, Lucy J., Jennifer Bouwsema, and Ekaterini Klepousniotou. 2015. “Sustained meaning activation for polysemous but not homonymous words: Evidence from EEG.” Neuropsychologia 681: 126–138.
Maciocia, Giovanni. 2011. Obstetrics and Gynecology in Chinese Medicine. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: Elsevier Ltd.
. 2019. Diagnosis in Chinese Medicine: A Comprehensive Guide. 2nd ed. St. Louis, Missouri: Elsevier Ltd.
Milsky, Constantin. 1989. “In search of a term translation strategy for Chinese medical classics.” In Approaches to Traditional Chinese Medical Literature, ed. by Unschuld, Paul U. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 77–81.
Mitchell, Craig, Ye Feng, and Nigel Wiseman. 1999. Shang Han Lun (On Cold Damage / Translation and Commentaries). Brookline: Paradigm Publications.
Porkert, Manfred. 1974. The Theoretical Foundations of Chinese Medicine: Systems of Correspondence. Cambridge, Massachusetts: The MIT Press.
Pylkkänen, Liina, Rodolfo Llinás, and Gregory L. Murphy. 2006. “The representation of polysemy: MEG evidence.” Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience 18(1): 97–109.
Ruhl, Charles. 1989. On Monosemy: A Study in Linguistic Semantics. New York: State University of New York Press.
Sandra, Dominiek. 1998. “What linguists can and can’t tell you about the human mind: A reply to Croft.” Cognitive Linguistics 9(4): 361–378.
Scheid, Volker. 2002. Chinese Medicine in Contemporary China: Plurality and Synthesis. Durham: Duke University Press.
Unschuld, Paul U. 1989. “Terminological problems encountered and experiences gained in the process of editing a commentated Nan-Ching edition.” In Approaches to Traditional Chinese Medical Literature, ed. by Unschuld, Paul U. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers. 97–107.
Vicente, Agustin, and Ingrid Lossius Falkum. 2017. “Polysemy.” In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 1–29.
WHO. 2022. WHO International Standard Terminologies on Traditional Chinese Medicine. Geneva: World Health Organization.
Wiseman, Nigel. 1998. Rationale for the Terminology of The Fundamentals of Chinese Medicine: The Case for Literal Translation. Brookline, Massachusetts: Paradigm Publications.
. 2000. “Translation of Chinese Medical Terms: A Source-oriented Approach” (doctoral dissertation, University of Exeter).
. 2016. Translation of Chinese medical terms: Bensky and colleagues’ falsification of the issues. (2016-02-29) [2024.04.09]. [URL]
. 2022. Chinese-English Dictionary of Chinese Medical Terms. Taos, New Mexico: Paradigm Publications.
Wiseman, Nigel, and Ye Feng. 2014. A Practical Dictionary of Chinese Medicine. 3rd ed. Taos, New Mexico: Paradigm Publications.
Wiseman, Nigel, and Sabine Wilms. 2013. Jin Gui Yao Lue: Translation and Commentaries (Essential Prescriptions of the Golden Cabinet). Taos, New Mexico: Paradigm Publications.
Xiong, Manqi. 2007. Study on Cold Damage [in Chinese]. New Century 2nd ed. Beijing: China Press of Traditional Chinese Medicine.
Xu, Zhiquan. 1994. “Polysemy and standardization of traditional Chinese medicine terminology.” [In Chinese.] Journal of Shandong College of Traditional Chinese Medicine 18(5): 329–333.
Zhang, Zhi Bin, and Paul U. Unschuld. 2015. Ben Cao Gang Mu Dictionary Volume One: Chinese Historical Illness Terminology. Oakland: University of California Press.
Zhao, Limei. 2013. “A Cognitive Research on Polysemy in Yellow Emperor’s Canon of Medicine [in Chinese]” (doctoral dissertation, Shanghai International Studies University).
Cited by (1)
Cited by one other publication
This list is based on CrossRef data as of 23 november 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.
