A modest attempt... --- The Chinese language does not specify for number, tense, definiteness and other grammatical categories which are obligatory in Indo-Eurpoepan languages. Its characters also have a wider semantic scope than many of our equivalents, as you note. This is not a 'problem' except in translation, where the more encompassing meaning of the original has to be narrowed down into the more Procrustean categories of the target language. If you have ever translated poetry you will certainly have encountered the challenge of non-equivalence.

As for annotating Confucius, he wrote around 500 BC. The language has changed since then, as have the cultural references. These two divergences inevitably give rise to different interpretations. Additionally, the Chinese traditionally do not presume to explain what sages and poets thought, but to add their own thoughts and reactions.

Source author: Biljana Scott biscott@diplomacy.edu