<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Be very careful using this translation
Review: This translation is a paraphrase at best, and contains some disturbing contradictions to other translations of the same text, including my own spot translations to check on these. While I'm not a classical scholar, some of these are fairly obvious. Also, a lot of interpolated material is not set off in any way. It is interesting to read this translation in the context of the two other main translations now available, Lianshang Wu's (which has the Chinese text, but has a poor English text which is closer to the original) and Veith's (which is more arbitrary, possibly because she had no background in TCM), but don't rely on this for clinical advice, it is spoon feeding you one man's opinion, and in this persons opinion, it isn't very good.
Rating: 
Summary: Not really a translation, but still interesting
Review: Translation purists will not have much use for this book. Those new to the subject of Chinese medicine or to Chinese literary classics probably won't get much out of it, either. Ni's translation of the Inner Classic is not especially scholarly, though it is not without scholarship, nor is it really a translation if you want to use that term strictly, any more than Fitzgerald's Rubaiyat is the same work as Khayyam's. Ni himself is very clear in the foreword that his intent was not to produce a scholarly edition. Rather, he hoped his rendition of the Inner Classic would be accessible to a wider audience.Still, it is an interesting presentation of most of the themes present in the Inner Classic, and it reads more easily than a scholarly treatise. You may call it Inner Classic "lite," but it's at least an earnest attempt. When you consider the age of the Inner Classic and the fact that contemporary Chinese doctors take a semester or a year or more of ancient medical Chinese, reading modern Chinese translations of the ancient text of the Inner Classic, with commentary... this book doesn't seem too bad. This is not damning by faint praise. The Inner Classic is counted as one of the most difficult to approach of the Chinese literary classics. Ni's effort, however flawed, is still impressive. Ni is a teacher of Chinese medicine and a Chinese doctor from a medical lineage, and his book, on the balance, does a respectable job of conveying the spirit of the Inner Classic to the reader of English - no easy task. As an introduction, and to the extent that this book sparks an interest in further study of the ancient medical literature, it should not be considered a failure.
Rating: 
Summary: a solid paraphrase for the practitioner
Review: While this book is sometimes criticised for its lack of scholarly style, it is important to realize that the writer is approaching a 2,500 year old work, the seminal theoretical treatise of Chinese medicine, from the point of view of a clinician. It is frankly not much easier for native speakers of Chinese to approach the Neijing in its original form than it is for Westerners. Moreover, Mr Ni comes from a medical family spanning several generations of physicians. Being a practitioner myself, I can attest to the correctness of the decisions made in preparing this book. He has done a commendable job in making this ancient classic accessible to modern readers. Chinese physicians make use of this material during nearly every moment spent in the clinic. It is practical in a way that sinologists locked in their ivory towers can scarcely imagine. Those who would prefer a dry, smugly academic translation with separate footnotes, devoid of historical context or cultural annotation, would do well to investigate Ilza Veith's translation of the Neijing; a valiant effort which inevitably fails as a result of its refusal to acknowledge the living traditions surrounding the text itself.
<< 1 >>
| 
