Drunken Monkey

but in order to find something that works for you, you have to try everything to see what is for you. and in order to try something properly, you have to be shown/taught that thing properly. hence, the need for an instructor at every stage of learning.

jutsu/do. i (kinda)remember an article that i felt deals with this quite well. the main difference is in the focus. taking karate as the subject. initially, karate was something that trained you to be an effective fighter. it took as its key, training to reach 'no mind'; to fear nothing in your actions. this was, if you like, a legacy of the old budo way of life where how to best serve your master was all that a warrior was concerned with. where life and death made no matter as long as it served. karate-do's main difference is that it is less about fighting (and the 'serving') and more about self development. this self development's aim is to help you reach 'no mind'. along the way, you just happen to learn to fight. i have to say that i'm recalling this from memory. i'll try to find it again and post the actual article or details of said article.

see. now you're just arguing for the sake of arguing. Depends on whom I am interpreting it from. Depends on whom is interpeting from me. For example, if I as the speaker, and my listener, we are both Southerners, it makes sense to us if you were both southerners, you wouldn't need interpreting. Bad interpretation for whom? Depends on the place and the people in conversation again. interpreting would be for people who might not understand. (cos after all, we are talking about languages). Sorry, I am not on a different version topic but you were the one who brought up the use of 'make gorceries' as opposed to 'do the groceries'; which are both versions of the same language. I don't care how it is done in China at this point. The people of Shaolin Do don't seem to care either and that is kind of the point. if this place that is so focused on teaching traditional shaolin arts don't even care enough to use the correct terms, then what does that say about them? why insist on using the in-correct romanised chinese form of 'shaolin-do' instead of the correct english form of 'shaolin way'?

sorry shorin ryuu..... My interpretation on what you are saying IS my UNDERSTANDING of it but in the context of languages. (what i am talking about) if you do not fully understand the language, when translating, errors wil occur when interpreting. understanding leads to good interpreting. you have to understand how the language works. simply translating like for like is what leads to bad interpretations. remember, we are talking about two very different langauges here, not different 'versions' of the same one.

but 'interpret' and 'understand' aren't the same. especially when we are talking about a relatively fixed thing like a language. 'interpret' is to explain or translate. 'understand' is to know and comprehend. in the case of the mis-use of the word 'do'. they interpreted/translated it as 'way of' but they didn't understand that it isn't the same as the english 'way of'.

this is nothing like finnegans wake. and the mis-use of 'do' is not the same as the example of 'make groceries'. Is it butchering the English language. Yes and no. Because the English language allows for slang and metaphors again. this is not the english language. i go back to the chinese word 'do/tao' has a very specific meaning. as such that meaning is also reference to a way of life/culture that is verging on being a religion. you can't take that term and separate it from it's meaning just because you want to.

Perhaps they knew all, but being in Amercia, chose to not interpret it that way. Chosing instead to create something that a commoner can interpret. but they are using it in a chinese context. how can you create a new meaning for a term that belongs to another language which has a very specific meaning? it's like me deciding that 'fish' actually means 'dog'. ****edit**** still chasing them typos.

salmon and sake? which is why i keep going on about context and not looking at singular terms. are you really going to mis-read sake teri bento as 'rice wine soya sauce lunch box'?

that last one was a bit hard to understand. what i see about their use of 'do' (which is all i am talking about). they know that 'do' means 'way of'. what they didn't know is that that particular 'way of' is in chinese always about the tao (although the actual meaning of tao is very very complicated). so, when they wanted 'shaolin way' but in romanised chinese, they chose to use 'do' not realising that it is the wrong term to use. ****edit***** so are you saying it's ok to butcher someone else's language as long as it suits your need?

some people tend to think do as simply meaning "way" and not those towards Taoism which goes back to not understanding how the language works. 'do' does mean 'way of' but that 'way of' isn't the same as the english meaning. in chinese when you talk about 'do' YOU ARE talking about the tao, without exception. if you are talking about 'way of' as in method, it is a totally different term. so here, it is simply that they did not the correct term. hence, the name is incorrect (incorrect=wrong)

english words do not need to be romanised. interpret and understand are not the same thing. if they wanted a new identity then why choose to use names of existing schools and why use them in romanised chinese form? why not just stick to the 'english' shaolin way? and there's a little button at the top of the post called the edit buton. when i say it is wrong, i am saying it in the (meaning) context of it's chinese form. once again. it equates to a 'catholic-jew'.

in this case yes. we're not talking about the words and waht they mean here, we're talking about what 'shaolin' is and what 'do' is. the two things do not go together because they are two separate entities; two different school of thoughts. chances are the intended name is 'shaolin way'. BUT they didn't know that the name doesn't/can't work in chinese. in other words, they 'translated' the name 'shaolin way' into chinese that they then romanised. which resulted in something that is 'wrong'.

....not a mis-interpretation. a misunderstanding of the differences between shaolin and do as subject matters.

why can't you just answer the question?

so, what do you see is 'wrong' with that name?

confusion maybe. but like i said, that would depend on how well you know the language and the topic at hand. for example. take the romanised word kung/gung. one of the original (chinese) words has many meanings. the other only has one. but they are two different words/characters. which I wouldn't get confused for each other but someone who doesn't know the language might. which is why i get a bit narky when someone who does not have the same kind of understanding of the language argues with me over what a word/term means.....

they are not 'translations' of si. they are romanisations of words, that end up being spelt the same. si=4 does not sound the same as si=temple does not sound like si=die/death does not sound like si=poo. grammtical context plays an important part in your understanding. there is no way you can misunderstand four for temple, or death or poo or anything else when you look at the context. your whole point of there being many uses for the same spelling of mandarin/cantonese/chinese words and misunderstand because of the many uses of 'si' is pretty much moot unless you are only looking at singular terms. would you mis-read shaolin si/tzi as being shaolin 4 or shaolin death or shaolin poem when we are talking about temples? romanisation, can cause mis-interpretations of certain things that would depend on how much chinese you know. i'm still trying to figure out what your point is.

that would depend on how you set up the hit and what your intended target is.

same subject but different ways of spelling them? not quite. when you say 'shaolin' you are talking about shaolin in general. i.e that particular 'chain' of temples, teachings, that sort of thing. when you say 'shaolin tzi' (my romanisation), you are talking about the actual temple building. that is the correct grammer. in most cases, when spoken, most people omit the 'tzi' part.

......and it all goes back to the kids who 'read' a book, copy the pictures and say that they know that style. there's more to knowing something than just being able to ape the movements. well, i guess you can teach yourself something. the question is how good can you get by yourself?

but don't you think doubting every claim of shaolin kung fu is a bit well, OTT and unfair? it's like saying all pizza is bad cos of the existance of pizza hut. fact is, there is legit shaolin kung fu out there. AND there is the chinese government supported shaolin temple thing. don't discount one because of the other. then of course we can go onto technical details as to what constitutes shaolin. technically, hung gar, mok gar, mantis, pheonix fist and many others are technically shaolin styles.

short answer from me. there is a world of difference between learning how to do something and training to be good in that thing.

there's a very simple question i like to ask. "why do you do tai-chi slowly?" how they answer tells a lot about what they know. the best way to get a feel for things is to simply ask. have a nice natter with the instructor/s. like i have said before; if it doesn't feel right, it probably isn't.

Shaolin per Shaolin Si per Sil lum not a lot. one is a matter of subject. the other is a matter of spelling.

sticky toffee pudding? so tempting but i'll refrain from making comments about you needing to try a mouthful of my spotted..... ahem.....