Some Wei Shuren

[bamboo leaf]

I always thank and respect those who took the time to do this. I think it takes a lot of work to translate something while not injecting your own limitations or insights into it still making it somewhat readable, allowing others to draw what they may from there own experiences.

On this site there are a number of very talented people helping in the understanding of what they translate. I would hope that those same people also share in understandings that others may have derived from the translations provided but understood in a different context. in this way we can help each other.



[This message has been edited by bamboo leaf (edited 11-10-2006).]

[Yuri Snisarenko]

//

[This message has been edited by Yuri Snisarenko (edited 11-27-2006).]

[Yuri Snisarenko]

For those who are interested here are the links for buying the books of WSR that contain the info I translated.

http://www.dragonsource.com/gb/asp/viewbook.asp?isbn=7-5009-2016-4
http://www.dragonsource.com/gb/asp/viewbook.asp?isbn=7-5009-2017-2

[ZMS]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by bamboo leaf:
<B>I didn’t write that it was a translation from another site describing some of Wie shurens working theories that very much fit into my own understanding. The clapper for me using this idea would be ones own center in the ground. One moves it first by intent allowing the kua to fallow. this is done by tilting the kua the rest of the body will follow all actions arise from this. the idea of the clapper allows it to be still while the rest of the body moves or it moves while the rest of the body is still. mind froward body back, body forward mind back.

In either case it cancels the bodies own momentum while allowing it to move retaining its feeling of emptiness.


[This message has been edited by bamboo leaf (edited 11-10-2006).]</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

thanks BL - no wonder when i read what was written it sounded out of whack with what you would normally write. no wonder, no wonder

[ZMS]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial">quote:</font><HR><font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Louis Swaim:
<B> Greetings Zenmindsword,

I would just like to point out that it would be a mistake to think that one could translate difficult taijiquan materials “word-for-word with a dictionary.” Anyone who thinks that is what foreign language translation consists of has probably never done any.

Take care,
Louis

</B></font><HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


greetings louis, excellent point!

[Audi]

Greetings all,

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">It's also a mistake to think that you have to be a chess master yourself to translate a book by a chess master. You need a good grounding in the subject, but the rest is knowing the languages involved.</font>

I agree with this statement, but would like to expand on it, because I think it makes a good point about the philosophical principle of taiji. Knowledge of the languages is perhaps ti3 ("substrate") and Yin, and knowledge of Taijiquan is yong4 ("function") and Yang.

The Yin knowledge of the languages can be further subdivided into Yin and Yang: knowledge of Chinese and English, which is again ti3 and Yin, and knowledge of Chinese and Western philosophy, which is again yong4 and Yang. The Yang knowledge of Taijiquan can likewise be subdivided into Yin and Yang: wen (approximately, "culture"/"phisophy"), which is ti3 and Yin, and into wu (approximately, "martial application"), which is again yong4 and Yang.

I would assert that knowledge of all these are necessary for good translations if Yin cannot leave Yang and Yang cannot leave Yin; however, there are any number of combinations of Yin and Yang that are sufficient to uphold the unity of Taiji and yield good and reasonably reliable translations.

Take care,
Audi

[JerryKarin]

Keep in mind that most of the books written about taijiquan are not esoteric texts meant to be conferred upon the reader with an initiation ceremony and personal explication by a master. They are just books, meant to be read by a general reader. If a general reader can read them, someone with slightly more expertise in the subject can translate them.

[This message has been edited by JerryKarin (edited 11-13-2006).]

[Louis Swaim]

Greetings Audi,

Another way of looking at tiyong is from the perspective of strategy (ti) and tactics (yong). This may be helpful in understanding the notion of cheng as “creativity” in our earlier discussion. At the tactical level, some degree of adaptive innovation is always required, hence the necessity of creativity.

I recently began reading a book by a French thinker, Michel de Certeau, titled _The Practice of Everyday Life_, in which he keys in on this strategy/tactics distinction as a method of social analysis. Strategy has to do with institutions, with theory, production, planning, and engineering. Tactics has to do with consumers, and with how they actually get by in society. He uses an interesting term coined by Claude Lévi-Strauss—“bricolage”—which means “make-do” or “do-it-yourself.” We engage in bricolage more often than we may think. Another tiyong breakdown in light of this might be “recipe/cooking.” The recipe (ti) is the theory/procedure/protocol, while cooking is what you actually do (yong) when your stir-fry ingredients are not exactly what the recipe calls for. My mom taught me the art of bricolage. Her motto: “Make do, use it up, wear it out, do without.”

I agree with Jerry’s remarks about translation, although I think we would have to define what is meant by “general reader.” Perhaps the general reader is an endangered species if it refers to a well-rounded reader of a variety of materials. In the publishing trade, “general reader” generally is a designation for non-specialist readers. A book on differential equations may be inaccessible to a general reader, while a book on mathematics written for the general reader could certainly make reference to differential equations in an accessible way.

Take care,
Louis