Proper Yijing terminology.

[Sparhawk]

The proper use of names and relationships is something that goes back to the Classical Chinese period. Whole schools debated these issues, as early as around the time of Confucius, viz:

In the classical period of Chinese philosophy-approximately 500 B.C. to 150 B.c.-discussion of ming (names) and shi (objects/actualities) and their relationship was common to all the major schools of thought: the Confucians, the Legalists, the School of Names, the Daoists, and the Mohists. In this essay my main thesis is that by the late third century B.c., discussions of the ming-shi relationship evidence a shift from nominalist theories of naming to essentialist theories of naming. According to the former, it is the human being who arbitrarily or conventionally determines which ming should be applied to which shi; there is no proper or correct correspondence between a given ming and a given shi other than what has been artificially determined by man. According to the latter, there is a proper or correct correspondence between a given ming and a given shi, determined, variously, by what is ordained by tian ('Heaven')or by what is 'naturally so'/'so of itself' (ziran).

Names, Actualities, and the Emergence of Essentialist Theories of Naming in Classical Chinese Thought
John Makeham
Philosophy East and West, Vol. 41, No. 3. (Jul., 1991), pp. 341-363.

I was recently discussing with Steve Marshall about some of the terminology currently used here and in other forums. Some of it was crafted by fellow students that I respect a lot, both as persons and as scholars. Some other was, I suppose, derived from scholarship like Nielsen's superb, and expensive, glossary of Chinese terms related to the Yijing.

My position in the matter is along the lines of "if the Chinese, in over three thousands years, haven't come up with a proper name for an observed relationship in the Yijing (and they have looked at it, in its current format, from every possible angle, and come up with some of the most twisted Chinese terms for them; thinking otherwise is plain snobbery...) why, or who are we, to come up with new terms in Chinese?". If we find something "new," or, up to that moment, unknown to us, why not use our Western languages to name it.

For those that take Nielsen's work and believe they can extrapolate terms applicable to the lines (yao) from those related to the symbols (gua), and replace the gua for yao, for the sake of correctness and terminology continuity, please don't. If anything, it is a disservice to people new to the Yijing and with a potential interest in continuing their studies.

Please take a look at the updated version of Chinese Yijing Terms at Marhall's site.

Cheers,

 

[bradford]

Boy, my term Fan Yao sure makes Steve Marshalll cranky.
I'll be he'll also hate zhong gua (仲卦) for transitional hexagrams.

 

[peter2610]

why, or who are we, to come up with new terms in Chinese?". If we find something "new," or, up to that moment, unknown to us, why not use our Western languages to name it.

Thanks Luis, I was hoping a post on this would come up, because I think it's well overdue. There appears to be considerable confusion in this area, not just on Clarity, but even more-so in the wider I Ching community. I must admit that I prefer to use Chinese terms, where appropriate, primarily for their succinctness; I've even dabbled with a neologism myself, Cuo Yao, but I'm pretty sure that someone, somewhere will have coined this before me. But let's take this as a working example: the English equivalent would be something like 'the corresponding line in the opposite-polarity hexagram' - not particularly a handy phrase to keep repeating, which is why I searched for a Chinese term in the first place. The same argument applies to Bradford's Fan Yao - the English equivalent would be something like 'the corresponding line in the resulting hexagram' - again, not a very handy term. LiSe's Qian Yao suffers even more if we stick to the English - 'the equivalent line in the inverted paired hexagram.' I fully agree with your sentiments in respecting the original meanings of the Chinese scholars; the problem is that the English equivalents are so clumsy, and if one is giving an interpretation involving, say, three moving lines, using only English terms, the whole process becomes quite tortuous.

Bradford's Zhong Gua is very welcome indeed because, in the context of, say, two or three moving lines, it helps distinguish between a sequential/transitional hexagram and the final Zhi Gua - a very difficult distinction to make clear when giving an interpretation. The problem here, if I understand correctly, is that Steve Marshall's interpretations of both fan yao and zhong gua differ considerably, in fact Marshall's gloss of fan yao appears to be identical to LiSe's qian yao. If the sinologists can't agree, what chance for the rest of us?

Finally, I think it's important to reflect that the I Ching's progression to the West is going to continue to be an evolving and developing process, and it's inevitable that this process will necessitate innovation and adaptation. As Westerners explore 'new' approaches to the I Ching, new terminology will be required, but, as far as possible, this should be incorporated with the fullest respect for, and acknowledgement to, the wisdom of those who have passed on this priceless legacy.

 

[bradford]

Who is this that's not allowing us to think or create in Chinese? I never asked for those chains. If people use words it's because they find them useful.

Zhong means intermediate or transitional. Perfectly appropriate.

Fan has more primary meanings than "stand upside down. If you see the Change as a movement in time, then Fan is simply the change in the opposite direction, the change coming back. From my glossary:
fan3 1781 262a 29+2 09.3 (to) reverse, bring back, come back (to), come around (to), turn back, turn around, come/turn back around; retrace, revert (to), revise, return, repeat, retreat, turn, turn 180 degrees, flipflop, turn against, turn over, combat, oppose,avert, pervert, rebel, retort (s, ed, ing); (to be) turning, contrary, in the opposite direction, instead of, opposing, opposite, refractory, reversed, wild, counter-; (a, the) turnaround, reverse, revision, reversal, reversion to; on the other hand, on the contrary; the opposite of; back to; turns ... around