Hi All,

As many of you know, I have had my fair share of discontent with Aaron
Fisher. But fair is fair, for some reason he chose to see to it that I
got an early copy of the mag. Lo and behold I actually liked it, for
the most part anyway, so I am putting my personal prejudice aside and
presenting an open minded review.

The Art of Tea #1
Roughly 192 pages for list price of USD$12.99

Only 14 pages of advertising, I hope this is a trend that continues as
some of the publisher's Chinese language publications are dominated by
advertising. While there are some articles written by Vendors, the
articles are quite legitimate, they are not masqueraded advertising at
all.

Nice selection of articles, probably half were on puerh, the rest
varied from Oolongs, Arts, Yixing, Gong Fu, Teaware, Cooking,
spirituality (Fisher style), and more.

Of the puerh articles, many of which appear to be ongoing columns,
there are blind tea tastings narrated by a panel, an expose' on the
Chang Tai 16 Mountain set, some pages about vintage puerh that appear
to be translated from one of Chan Kam Pong's books, a Q&A section, a
very interesting science article (that I think I originally saw on the
now defunct 858tea.com site), plenty of puerh porn (pictures), as well
as several ala carte articles by people in the business.

The magazine is polished, the photos are very good, however much of
the material is somewhat elementary, much of it assumes no prior
knowledge whatsoever. I suppose this is to be expected in a first
issue, I just hope the series gets progressively more in depth as time
goes on. All in all the magazine is well worth a look,especially if
you don't read Chinese. It is rather expensive though, considering a
National Geographic magazine is half of it's price. I guess that's the
trade off for low advertising.

Copies will soon be available from:
http://tinyurl.com/yg758j (Hou De Asian Arts)
and
http://tinyurl.com/rx9l9 (Yunnan Sourcing)

This is as close to unbiased as I can get, just don't ask me about the
"Cha Dao" article. ;-)





--
Mike Petro
http://www.pu-erh.net

Thanks for the general review, Mike! Guang of Houde told me that the
copies are in transit at the moment. I look forward to reading it as
soon as I can get my hands on one copy.

Phyll


Mike Petro wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> As many of you know, I have had my fair share of discontent with Aaron
> Fisher. But fair is fair, for some reason he chose to see to it that I
> got an early copy of the mag. Lo and behold I actually liked it, for
> the most part anyway, so I am putting my personal prejudice aside and
> presenting an open minded review.
>
> The Art of Tea #1
> Roughly 192 pages for list price of USD$12.99
>
> Only 14 pages of advertising, I hope this is a trend that continues as
> some of the publisher's Chinese language publications are dominated by
> advertising. While there are some articles written by Vendors, the
> articles are quite legitimate, they are not masqueraded advertising at
> all.
>
> Nice selection of articles, probably half were on puerh, the rest
> varied from Oolongs, Arts, Yixing, Gong Fu, Teaware, Cooking,
> spirituality (Fisher style), and more.
>
> Of the puerh articles, many of which appear to be ongoing columns,
> there are blind tea tastings narrated by a panel, an expose' on the
> Chang Tai 16 Mountain set, some pages about vintage puerh that appear
> to be translated from one of Chan Kam Pong's books, a Q&A section, a
> very interesting science article (that I think I originally saw on the
> now defunct 858tea.com site), plenty of puerh porn (pictures), as well
> as several ala carte articles by people in the business.
>
> The magazine is polished, the photos are very good, however much of
> the material is somewhat elementary, much of it assumes no prior
> knowledge whatsoever. I suppose this is to be expected in a first
> issue, I just hope the series gets progressively more in depth as time
> goes on. All in all the magazine is well worth a look,especially if
> you don't read Chinese. It is rather expensive though, considering a
> National Geographic magazine is half of it's price. I guess that's the
> trade off for low advertising.
>
> Copies will soon be available from:
> http://tinyurl.com/yg758j (Hou De Asian Arts)
> and
> http://tinyurl.com/rx9l9 (Yunnan Sourcing)
>
> This is as close to unbiased as I can get, just don't ask me about the
> "Cha Dao" article. ;-)
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Mike Petro
> http://www.pu-erh.net

Mike Petro wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> As many of you know, I have had my fair share of discontent with Aaron
> Fisher. But fair is fair, for some reason he chose to see to it that I
> got an early copy of the mag. Lo and behold I actually liked it, for
> the most part anyway, so I am putting my personal prejudice aside and
> presenting an open minded review.
>
> The Art of Tea #1
> Roughly 192 pages for list price of USD$12.99
>
> Only 14 pages of advertising, I hope this is a trend that continues as
> some of the publisher's Chinese language publications are dominated by
> advertising. While there are some articles written by Vendors, the
> articles are quite legitimate, they are not masqueraded advertising at
> all.
>
> Nice selection of articles, probably half were on puerh, the rest
> varied from Oolongs, Arts, Yixing, Gong Fu, Teaware, Cooking,
> spirituality (Fisher style), and more.
>
> Of the puerh articles, many of which appear to be ongoing columns,
> there are blind tea tastings narrated by a panel, an expose' on the
> Chang Tai 16 Mountain set, some pages about vintage puerh that appear
> to be translated from one of Chan Kam Pong's books, a Q&A section, a
> very interesting science article (that I think I originally saw on the
> now defunct 858tea.com site), plenty of puerh porn (pictures), as well
> as several ala carte articles by people in the business.
>
> The magazine is polished, the photos are very good, however much of
> the material is somewhat elementary, much of it assumes no prior
> knowledge whatsoever. I suppose this is to be expected in a first
> issue, I just hope the series gets progressively more in depth as time
> goes on. All in all the magazine is well worth a look,especially if
> you don't read Chinese. It is rather expensive though, considering a
> National Geographic magazine is half of it's price. I guess that's the
> trade off for low advertising.
>
> Copies will soon be available from:
> http://tinyurl.com/yg758j (Hou De Asian Arts)
> and
> http://tinyurl.com/rx9l9 (Yunnan Sourcing)
>
> This is as close to unbiased as I can get, just don't ask me about the
> "Cha Dao" article. ;-)
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Mike Petro
> http://www.pu-erh.net

The ads are, oddly enough, some of the most interesting bits of the
Chinese version. Since a lot of the Chinese version talks about trade
fairs and that kind of thing.... it doesn't really concern common tea
drinkers like myself very much. At least the ads are all concentrated
in the second half of the mag, so you don't have to keep flipping just
to get to the article you want to read. In that regard, it's very
unlike Western magazines where you have one page of text and four pages
of ads.

I always wondered how impartial the "blind tastings" really are. Since
these are usually teas that have already been floating around the
market for years, and since a lot of them tend to be on the more
famous/sought after side, most of the tasters would probably have had
them, and some, I'd imagine, are rather distinctive. Is there such a
concern for wine tastings?

MarshalN
http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN

MarshalN wrote:
>
> I always wondered how impartial the "blind tastings" really are. Since
> these are usually teas that have already been floating around the
> market for years, and since a lot of them tend to be on the more
> famous/sought after side, most of the tasters would probably have had
> them, and some, I'd imagine, are rather distinctive. Is there such a
> concern for wine tastings?
>
>
Not sure if there's such a concern for wine tasting, but looking at the
panel of judges and Fisher's own evaluation of the tasting, I don't much of
any of the reviews.

Danny

samarkand wrote:

> >
> Not sure if there's such a concern for wine tasting, but looking at the
> panel of judges and Fisher's own evaluation of the tasting, I don't much of
> any of the reviews.
>
> Danny

Danny:

I think you are missing a word here? A rather crucial one...

"I don't much of any of the reviews".... do you mean you don't think
much of them? Care much? Care to elaborate?

MarshalN
http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN

It is left out for you to insert... :"P

I would suggest

Think

Care

Like

Enjoy

Believe

Trust

....

Reviews are often subjective, in this case it is strongly steered by
personal tastes and perceptions. What is more daunting, is as what you have
mentioned ( I think) are cakes that are not easily available these days. So
what are consumers like us to make of them? It's like reading an english
review of a novel written in Japanese; not many of us are not able to visit
the nearest vendor or ebay and get the cakes to sample them on our own.

The reviewers also often provide conflicting views on the cakes, so what are
we to make of them, when we cannot see for ourselves if we agree or disagree
with any of them?

The straw that broke the camel's back is the translator's commentary at the
end of the review...technical errors, not fully understanding the language
one is translating and writing on a subject one is unclear on, are some of
the gravest mistakes a translator can make.

Technical error: is he translating from mandarin or cantonese?

Danny

> famous/sought after side, most of the tasters would probably have had
> them, and some, I'd imagine, are rather distinctive. Is there such a
> concern for wine tastings?

In the cut-throat world of wine publishing, publications will [almost]
always evaluate newly released wines, and also very often evaluate
wines that are not yet released (sometimes still in the barrel, years
before being bottled...this is not possible with tea of course).
Wineries and wine wholesalers regularly organize blind tasting sessions
for known critics before the wines' release in order to gauge how they
should introduce them into the market. I inserted "almost" above to
allow room for some exceptions, in which there are. R. Parker, Wine
Spectators, etc. will sometime post re-tasting notes to follow some
wines' progress in the bottles, and this is usually only done to highly
regarded wines....like 1982 Ch. Margaux re-tasted in 2000, as an
example. I'm confining my comment to the tasting notes that are
usually placed at the end pages of wine magazines, much like the "blind
tastings" in this Art of Tea Magazine, I would presume (I haven't got a
copy yet).

Wine publications would never want to give the impression that their
evaluation have been influenced by other sources or by their own
previous unpublished tastings. That would seem too calculated or
tardy.

I'm not commenting to say that the Art of Tea mag should be more like
any wine publications in their tasting evaluations...I haven't formed a
comment on that yet. I am merely answering MarshalN's inquiry.

2 cents.

Phyll


MarshalN wrote:
> Mike Petro wrote:
> > Hi All,
> >
> > As many of you know, I have had my fair share of discontent with Aaron
> > Fisher. But fair is fair, for some reason he chose to see to it that I
> > got an early copy of the mag. Lo and behold I actually liked it, for
> > the most part anyway, so I am putting my personal prejudice aside and
> > presenting an open minded review.
> >
> > The Art of Tea #1
> > Roughly 192 pages for list price of USD$12.99
> >
> > Only 14 pages of advertising, I hope this is a trend that continues as
> > some of the publisher's Chinese language publications are dominated by
> > advertising. While there are some articles written by Vendors, the
> > articles are quite legitimate, they are not masqueraded advertising at
> > all.
> >
> > Nice selection of articles, probably half were on puerh, the rest
> > varied from Oolongs, Arts, Yixing, Gong Fu, Teaware, Cooking,
> > spirituality (Fisher style), and more.
> >
> > Of the puerh articles, many of which appear to be ongoing columns,
> > there are blind tea tastings narrated by a panel, an expose' on the
> > Chang Tai 16 Mountain set, some pages about vintage puerh that appear
> > to be translated from one of Chan Kam Pong's books, a Q&A section, a
> > very interesting science article (that I think I originally saw on the
> > now defunct 858tea.com site), plenty of puerh porn (pictures), as well
> > as several ala carte articles by people in the business.
> >
> > The magazine is polished, the photos are very good, however much of
> > the material is somewhat elementary, much of it assumes no prior
> > knowledge whatsoever. I suppose this is to be expected in a first
> > issue, I just hope the series gets progressively more in depth as time
> > goes on. All in all the magazine is well worth a look,especially if
> > you don't read Chinese. It is rather expensive though, considering a
> > National Geographic magazine is half of it's price. I guess that's the
> > trade off for low advertising.
> >
> > Copies will soon be available from:
> > http://tinyurl.com/yg758j (Hou De Asian Arts)
> > and
> > http://tinyurl.com/rx9l9 (Yunnan Sourcing)
> >
> > This is as close to unbiased as I can get, just don't ask me about the
> > "Cha Dao" article. ;-)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Mike Petro
> > http://www.pu-erh.net
>
> The ads are, oddly enough, some of the most interesting bits of the
> Chinese version. Since a lot of the Chinese version talks about trade
> fairs and that kind of thing.... it doesn't really concern common tea
> drinkers like myself very much. At least the ads are all concentrated
> in the second half of the mag, so you don't have to keep flipping just
> to get to the article you want to read. In that regard, it's very
> unlike Western magazines where you have one page of text and four pages
> of ads.
>
> I always wondered how impartial the "blind tastings" really are. Since
> these are usually teas that have already been floating around the
> market for years, and since a lot of them tend to be on the more
> famous/sought after side, most of the tasters would probably have had
> them, and some, I'd imagine, are rather distinctive. Is there such a
> concern for wine tastings?
>
> MarshalN
> http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN

samarkand wrote:
> It is left out for you to insert... :"P
>
> I would suggest
>
> Think
>
> Care
>
> Like
>
> Enjoy
>
> Believe
>
> Trust
>
> ...
>
> Reviews are often subjective, in this case it is strongly steered by
> personal tastes and perceptions. What is more daunting, is as what you have
> mentioned ( I think) are cakes that are not easily available these days. So
> what are consumers like us to make of them? It's like reading an english
> review of a novel written in Japanese; not many of us are not able to visit
> the nearest vendor or ebay and get the cakes to sample them on our own.
>
> The reviewers also often provide conflicting views on the cakes, so what are
> we to make of them, when we cannot see for ourselves if we agree or disagree
> with any of them?
>
> The straw that broke the camel's back is the translator's commentary at the
> end of the review...technical errors, not fully understanding the language
> one is translating and writing on a subject one is unclear on, are some of
> the gravest mistakes a translator can make.
>
> Technical error: is he translating from mandarin or cantonese?
>
> Danny

Wow, that bad?

I haven't had a chance to see the English mag yet, so I can't comment,
but if the translator wrote a commentary that didn't make sense or
raised alarm bells to you, then....

The Chinese reviews are strongly steered by personal taste, I agree --
you can tell who's going to like the wet stored cake, and who will hate
it, for example. Even the cakes that "win" the blind taste tests often
gets slammed by at least one person, if not more. That, and I hate to
say, there are always financial interests involved as well... suspicion
that can't be wiped out as some of the tasters (not all) are tea
merchants who might sell the same cake, or similar cakes, in question.

MarshalN
http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN

Mike Petro wrote:
> snip, snip...
> This is as close to unbiased as I can get, just don't ask me about
> the "Cha Dao" article. ;-)
> Mike Petro
> http://www.pu-erh.net

'Cha Dao', http://chadao.blogspot.com/ ,
has informative writings by respected people like Mike Petro, Michael
Plant, Lew Perin, Danny, and others. Thank you, Mike!
Best of all, it is FREE.

> Mike Petro wrote:
> > snip, snip...
> > This is as close to unbiased as I can get, just don't ask me about
> > the "Cha Dao" article. ;-)
> > Mike Petro
> > http://www.pu-erh.net
>
> 'Cha Dao', http://chadao.blogspot.com/ ,
> has informative writings by respected people like Mike Petro, Michael
> Plant, Lew Perin, Danny, and others. Thank you, Mike!
> Best of all, it is FREE.

Lest anybody think I was associating your blog with the article, they
are two entirely different things. The "Cha Dao" article documents the
spiritual beliefs of a group of people. This set of beliefs is one that
Mr Fisher subscribes to, and the article was written by him. It bears
NO resemblence to, or affiliation with, the 'Cha Dao',
http://chadao.blogspot.com/ site whatsoever.

Mike
http://www.pu-erh.net

samarkand wrote:
> The straw that broke the camel's back is the translator's commentary at the
> end of the review...technical errors, not fully understanding the language
> one is translating and writing on a subject one is unclear on, are some of
> the gravest mistakes a translator can make.

Danny, just to clarify, you are not speaking generally, right? That
is, you're actually saying that the translator who worked on the
magazine did a bad job?

> That, and I hate to
> say, there are always financial interests involved as well... suspicion
> that can't be wiped out as some of the tasters (not all) are tea
> merchants who might sell the same cake, or similar cakes, in question.

The appearance of independence is a key factor -- if the THE factor --
for any product opinions to be taken seriously. I think the market is
sophisticated enough to understand this.



MarshalN wrote:
> samarkand wrote:
> > It is left out for you to insert... :"P
> >
> > I would suggest
> >
> > Think
> >
> > Care
> >
> > Like
> >
> > Enjoy
> >
> > Believe
> >
> > Trust
> >
> > ...
> >
> > Reviews are often subjective, in this case it is strongly steered by
> > personal tastes and perceptions. What is more daunting, is as what you have
> > mentioned ( I think) are cakes that are not easily available these days. So
> > what are consumers like us to make of them? It's like reading an english
> > review of a novel written in Japanese; not many of us are not able to visit
> > the nearest vendor or ebay and get the cakes to sample them on our own.
> >
> > The reviewers also often provide conflicting views on the cakes, so what are
> > we to make of them, when we cannot see for ourselves if we agree or disagree
> > with any of them?
> >
> > The straw that broke the camel's back is the translator's commentary at the
> > end of the review...technical errors, not fully understanding the language
> > one is translating and writing on a subject one is unclear on, are some of
> > the gravest mistakes a translator can make.
> >
> > Technical error: is he translating from mandarin or cantonese?
> >
> > Danny
>
> Wow, that bad?
>
> I haven't had a chance to see the English mag yet, so I can't comment,
> but if the translator wrote a commentary that didn't make sense or
> raised alarm bells to you, then....
>
> The Chinese reviews are strongly steered by personal taste, I agree --
> you can tell who's going to like the wet stored cake, and who will hate
> it, for example. Even the cakes that "win" the blind taste tests often
> gets slammed by at least one person, if not more. That, and I hate to
> say, there are always financial interests involved as well... suspicion
> that can't be wiped out as some of the tasters (not all) are tea
> merchants who might sell the same cake, or similar cakes, in question.
>
> MarshalN
> http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN

Hi Alex,

To be fair, I should have specified that it is specifically on that review..
The thing is that the same article appeared in chinese in the chinese
edition, so I had a chance to compare both the original and the translated
copy...for example, what is one to make of the term "comfortable aroma"?
The inconsistency of pinyin used throughout the magazine only show us how
poorly the translating team has performed on the magazine. A magazine such
as this, which is a groundbreaking first in the world of tea for the english
speaking market, should be well thought and thorough in its execution, as
most english speaking tea lovers could rely on only on pinyin to identify
teas, any muddleness in this would only serve to confuse them.

The downside is that this magazine is written by Taiwanese and its team of
english editors who seriously need to attend a pinyin class - be it in the
standard pinyin or the Taiwanese pinyin, and standardize the magazine for us
readers.

Danny



"Alex" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> samarkand wrote:
>> The straw that broke the camel's back is the translator's commentary at
>> the
>> end of the review...technical errors, not fully understanding the
>> language
>> one is translating and writing on a subject one is unclear on, are some
>> of
>> the gravest mistakes a translator can make.
>
> Danny, just to clarify, you are not speaking generally, right? That
> is, you're actually saying that the translator who worked on the
> magazine did a bad job?
>

samarkand wrote:
> Hi Alex,
>
> To be fair, I should have specified that it is specifically on that review..
> The thing is that the same article appeared in chinese in the chinese
> edition, so I had a chance to compare both the original and the translated
> copy...for example, what is one to make of the term "comfortable aroma"?
> The inconsistency of pinyin used throughout the magazine only show us how
> poorly the translating team has performed on the magazine. A magazine such
> as this, which is a groundbreaking first in the world of tea for the english
> speaking market, should be well thought and thorough in its execution, as
> most english speaking tea lovers could rely on only on pinyin to identify
> teas, any muddleness in this would only serve to confuse them.
>
> The downside is that this magazine is written by Taiwanese and its team of
> english editors who seriously need to attend a pinyin class - be it in the
> standard pinyin or the Taiwanese pinyin, and standardize the magazine for us
> readers.
>
> Danny

Thanks for the review, Danny. That was very helpful.

One of the things that they taught us in college, that is virtually
never heeded by Chinese people, is that translators should really only
ever translate into their native languages. Something that has been
translated into a imperfectly-learned second language is just too hard
to process. Obviously there are many non-native speakers of English
that are exceptions to this rule, but they are far fewer than the
number of people who *think* they are exceptions, but aren't. I was on
a journal in law school that got a lot of submissions from
second-language English speakers, and I did a fair amount of editing
when I lived in China, and I can tell you that there is nothing on this
earth that I find less enjoyable than reading a full-length article
that has been badly translated by someone who has a less-than-fluent
command of English.

Also, as many of you know, bad pinyin makes me froth at the mouth.

I think I'm going to give this magazine a temporary pass, and see what
they come up with for Issue Two.

Alex
trying to spot the camphor in the aged pu'er

> I think I'm going to give this magazine a temporary pass, and see what
> they come up with for Issue Two.

Is there really no room for substance over form???


Alex wrote:
> samarkand wrote:
> > Hi Alex,
> >
> > To be fair, I should have specified that it is specifically on that review..
> > The thing is that the same article appeared in chinese in the chinese
> > edition, so I had a chance to compare both the original and the translated
> > copy...for example, what is one to make of the term "comfortable aroma"?
> > The inconsistency of pinyin used throughout the magazine only show us how
> > poorly the translating team has performed on the magazine. A magazine such
> > as this, which is a groundbreaking first in the world of tea for the english
> > speaking market, should be well thought and thorough in its execution, as
> > most english speaking tea lovers could rely on only on pinyin to identify
> > teas, any muddleness in this would only serve to confuse them.
> >
> > The downside is that this magazine is written by Taiwanese and its team of
> > english editors who seriously need to attend a pinyin class - be it in the
> > standard pinyin or the Taiwanese pinyin, and standardize the magazine for us
> > readers.
> >
> > Danny
>
> Thanks for the review, Danny. That was very helpful.
>
> One of the things that they taught us in college, that is virtually
> never heeded by Chinese people, is that translators should really only
> ever translate into their native languages. Something that has been
> translated into a imperfectly-learned second language is just too hard
> to process. Obviously there are many non-native speakers of English
> that are exceptions to this rule, but they are far fewer than the
> number of people who *think* they are exceptions, but aren't. I was on
> a journal in law school that got a lot of submissions from
> second-language English speakers, and I did a fair amount of editing
> when I lived in China, and I can tell you that there is nothing on this
> earth that I find less enjoyable than reading a full-length article
> that has been badly translated by someone who has a less-than-fluent
> command of English.
>
> Also, as many of you know, bad pinyin makes me froth at the mouth.
>
> I think I'm going to give this magazine a temporary pass, and see what
> they come up with for Issue Two.
>
> Alex
> trying to spot the camphor in the aged pu'er

samarkand wrote:
> Hi Alex,
>
> To be fair, I should have specified that it is specifically on that review..
> The thing is that the same article appeared in chinese in the chinese
> edition, so I had a chance to compare both the original and the translated
> copy...for example, what is one to make of the term "comfortable aroma"?
> The inconsistency of pinyin used throughout the magazine only show us how
> poorly the translating team has performed on the magazine. A magazine such
> as this, which is a groundbreaking first in the world of tea for the english
> speaking market, should be well thought and thorough in its execution, as
> most english speaking tea lovers could rely on only on pinyin to identify
> teas, any muddleness in this would only serve to confuse them.
>
> The downside is that this magazine is written by Taiwanese and its team of
> english editors who seriously need to attend a pinyin class - be it in the
> standard pinyin or the Taiwanese pinyin, and standardize the magazine for us
> readers.
>
> Danny
>
I haven't had a chance to read the mag yet, but from the few pages that
Guang posted on his blog, I have to say I agree with your assessment --
there are lots of places where the English seems awkward, and it is
sometimes obvious that the translators simply weren't up to the task of
writing in English that native speakers find easy to read (without
thinking... "um.. ok... I think they meant THIS"). The substance and
the ideas are still there, but it could've been much better.

As I've said before... Wu Shing's copy-editing skills is also a bit on
the low side. In those same few pages there were some typos... I can
only imagine there were more in the rest of the magazine. Why it is so
hard to eliminate typos, I do not understand. A magazine that is the
inaugural issue should be perfect, not full of these silly technical
errors. While they are obvious and thus not a big deal, it does imply
a sort of sloppy attitude to their work.

MarshalN
http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN

Phyll wrote:
> In the cut-throat world of wine publishing, publications will [almost]
> always evaluate newly released wines, and also very often evaluate
> wines that are not yet released (sometimes still in the barrel, years
> before being bottled...this is not possible with tea of course).
> Wineries and wine wholesalers regularly organize blind tasting sessions
> for known critics before the wines' release in order to gauge how they
> should introduce them into the market. I inserted "almost" above to
> allow room for some exceptions, in which there are. R. Parker, Wine
> Spectators, etc. will sometime post re-tasting notes to follow some
> wines' progress in the bottles, and this is usually only done to highly
> regarded wines....like 1982 Ch. Margaux re-tasted in 2000, as an
> example. I'm confining my comment to the tasting notes that are
> usually placed at the end pages of wine magazines, much like the "blind
> tastings" in this Art of Tea Magazine, I would presume (I haven't got a
> copy yet).
>
> Wine publications would never want to give the impression that their
> evaluation have been influenced by other sources or by their own
> previous unpublished tastings. That would seem too calculated or
> tardy.
>
> I'm not commenting to say that the Art of Tea mag should be more like
> any wine publications in their tasting evaluations...I haven't formed a
> comment on that yet. I am merely answering MarshalN's inquiry.
>
> 2 cents.
>
> Phyll
>

You're right... it's not possible to evaluate teas like you evaluate
wines. Since we can't do it "in the barrel".... tasting the cakes
blind is the best we can do.

I asked because on Sanzui.com there have been some people who basically
charge that puerh-teapot has turned into a loudspeaker for certain
vendors in Taiwan, and that the selection of cakes for tasting, which
sometimes include a bunch of wet-stored tea, is meant to give certain
cakes an easier time to claim #1, etc.

For the States this is almost a non-concern, since almost all the cakes
being tasted aren't going to be easily available anyway.

MarshalN
http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN

Alex wrote:
> Also, as many of you know, bad pinyin makes me froth at the mouth.
>
> I think I'm going to give this magazine a temporary pass, and see what
> they come up with for Issue Two.
>
>

Hi Alex,

The mag despite its flaws, has its credits and I think we should give
credit where it is due.

For one, this is a groundbreaking mag on chinese tea in english and we
should applaud its efforts. While its typo errors are something I can
overlook, what I'm seriously displeased with it is that they have
churned out a mag that's rather thoughtlessly produced - irresponsible
translation with poor grasp of the subject matter, abridgement (why? I
have no idea), poor sentence constructions, etc; all seem to tell the
reader that they are more eager in producing a glossy mag in english to
fill the gap instead of seriously wanting to produce a mag that would
benefit the reader.

For example is this review on cake F:

Jou Yu: This tea had no real distinct flavor. It was very watery
without any hui gan. The only strength of this tea would be its
sensation (yun), which spread out across the surface of the tongue.
Otherwise it was an altogether unremarkable tea.

Here it is in chinese, for those who understands chinese, I'll let you
decide for yourself how poor the translation is:

周�: 这茶刚泡下去甘味�显, 好似这茶一点都�起眼,
而且�有水味. 唯一的优点是有韵,韵比较长,
在舌�有扩散的感觉.

1. The hui gan is not apparent, not "without any hui gan".
2. No where in the original does it mention that this tea has no real
distinct flavor
3. No where in the original does it mention that "it was an altogether
unremarkable tea"

I'm sure the original articles in english written would be more
interesting to read than these translated articles posing to be
informative, but in truth, misleading.

Danny

Alex wrote:
> Also, as many of you know, bad pinyin makes me froth at the mouth.
>
> I think I'm going to give this magazine a temporary pass, and see what
> they come up with for Issue Two.
>
>

Hi Alex,

The mag despite its flaws, has its credits and I think we should give
credit where it is due.

For one, this is a groundbreaking mag on chinese tea in english and we
should applaud its efforts. While its typo errors are something I can
overlook, what I'm seriously displeased with it is that they have
churned out a mag that's rather thoughtlessly produced - irresponsible
translation with poor grasp of the subject matter, abridgement (why? I
have no idea), poor sentence constructions, etc; all seem to tell the
reader that they are more eager in producing a glossy mag in english to
fill the gap instead of seriously wanting to produce a mag that would
benefit the reader.

For example is this review on cake F:

Jou Yu: This tea had no real distinct flavor. It was very watery
without any hui gan. The only strength of this tea would be its
sensation (yun), which spread out across the surface of the tongue.
Otherwise it was an altogether unremarkable tea.

Here it is in chinese, for those who understands chinese, I'll let you
decide for yourself how poor the translation is:

周�: 这茶刚泡下去甘味�显, 好似这茶一点都�起眼,
而且�有水味. 唯一的优点是有韵,韵比较长,
在舌�有扩散的感觉.

1. The hui gan is not apparent, not "without any hui gan".
2. No where in the original does it mention that this tea has no real
distinct flavor
3. No where in the original does it mention that "it was an altogether
unremarkable tea"

I'm sure the original articles in english written would be more
interesting to read than these translated articles posing to be
informative, but in truth, misleading.

Danny

Hey Danny,

I'm not sure what you mean. Does the English version contain PinYin
and the corresponding Chinese characters for tea
names,terms,concepts,etc for us who find that interesting? I
understand translating grammar to English but name,places,things,etc in
PinYin and the character. For example Chi Tse Beeng Cha should be left
alone.

xiexie,
Jim

samarkand wrote:
> The inconsistency of pinyin used throughout the magazine only show us how
> poorly the translating team has performed on the magazine. A magazine such
> as this, which is a groundbreaking first in the world of tea for the english
> speaking market, should be well thought and thorough in its execution, as
> most english speaking tea lovers could rely on only on pinyin to identify
> teas, any muddleness in this would only serve to confuse them.

I hope Mr. Fisher is reading this forum because everybody is giving
constructive comments about their 1st magazine. We have to give them
credit for taking the first step and I hope Mr. Fisher and Wu-shing can
understand that all we want to do here is to show them where they err
and what need to improve.

For one thing, a few of us who are harsher towards the magazine are
mainly those who can understand chinese and english. We saw the chinese
version and we tried to compare it with the english version. It wasn't
pretty. We are worry that certain articles in the magazine might be
misleading and for those of you who are new in tea drinking and those
who don't understand chinese, you might be misinformed.

I myself involve in the publishing line for many years already and I
personally got quite agitated when I saw typos popping up everywhere in
a publication. No matter how glossy a book look, a badly proofread
article IS a bad article. It makes me wonder about the quality. I was
pretty much done with the magazine after I saw these two typos:
The Executive Editor's name is written as "Liang Chun Chin" on page 1
(page 1!). The chinese name below it says: �俊智。 I just need to
flip to the next page and lo and behold, his name is written as "Liang
Chun Chih"!

They can't even standardize their own name. On the cover, it is written
Wu-shing Books. On the Table of Contents page, it is written Wushing
Books.

??????????

Whose fault is this? Editor's? Proofreader's? or DTP artist's? For me,
mistakes as simple as these should have caught the attention of even
the first person who is in contact with the article, namely the DTP
artist. Surely their own employee knows the name of their own company
and of their own boss!

Mr. Fisher, when we publish a book. The book is passed back and forth
between the editors/writers and proofreaders at least 3 times before it
is being finalized. This is an industry standard. Surely Wu-shing (or
is it Wushing?) must have known about this.

I would suggest most of you to give their second issue another chance.
After all, now that we have told them what they need to do with their
next issue, I hope they have learnt something from all of us.

I will wait for the second issue before I pass my final judgement.

On Dec 12, 9:05 pm, "Phyll" > wrote:
> > Is there really no room for substance over form???

Absolutely none.

On Dec 13, 4:30Â*am, "Danny" > wrote:
> Alex wrote:
> > Also, as many of you know, bad pinyin makes me froth at the mouth.
>
> > I think I'm going to give this magazine a temporary pass, and see what
> > they come up with for Issue Two.Hi Alex,
>
> The mag despite its flaws, has its credits and I think we should give
> credit where it is due.
>
> For one, this is a groundbreaking mag on chinese tea in english and we
> should applaud its efforts. Â*While its typo errors are something I can
> overlook, what I'm seriously displeased with it is that they have
> churned out a mag that's rather thoughtlessly produced - irresponsible
> translation with poor grasp of the subject matter, abridgement (why? I
> have no idea), poor sentence constructions, etc; all seem to tell the
> reader that they are more eager in producing a glossy mag in english to
> fill the gap instead of seriously wanting to produce a mag that would
> benefit the reader.
>
> For example is this review on cake F:
>
> Jou Yu: Â*This tea had no real distinct flavor. Â*It was very watery
> without any hui gan. Â*The only strength of this tea would be its
> sensation (yun), which spread out across the surface of the tongue.
> Otherwise it was an altogether unremarkable tea.
>
> Here it is in chinese, for those who understands chinese, I'll let you
> decide for yourself how poor the translation is:
>
> 周�: 这茶刚泡下去甘味�显, 好似这茶一点都�起眼,
> 而且�有水味. 唯一的优点是有韵,韵比较长,
> 在舌�有扩散的感觉.
>
> 1. Â*The hui gan is not apparent, not "without any hui gan".
> 2. Â*No where in the original does it mention that this tea has no real
> distinct flavor
> 3. Â*No where in the original does it mention that "it was an altogether
> unremarkable tea"
>
> I'm sure the original articles in english written would be more
> interesting to read than these translated articles posing to be
> informative, but in truth, misleading.
>
> Danny

Hi Danny. I will give limited credit, in that the world needs an
English-language tea magazine, and that translating the less blatantly
commercial or irrelevant articles in Pu-Erh Teapot is a great place to
start.

That translation, however, is as bad as you claimed, and last I checked
the correct transcription of 周� is Zhou Yu. Ugh. It makes my skin
crawl.

Alex

No Jim, what Danny was saying is that the translation is off,
inaccurate, misleading. Instead of translating the article, it would be
more interesting to just write with English in the first place.

Hee


Space Cowboy wrote:
> Hey Danny,
>
> I'm not sure what you mean. Does the English version contain PinYin
> and the corresponding Chinese characters for tea
> names,terms,concepts,etc for us who find that interesting? I
> understand translating grammar to English but name,places,things,etc in
> PinYin and the character. For example Chi Tse Beeng Cha should be left
> alone.
>
> xiexie,
> Jim
>
> samarkand wrote:
> > The inconsistency of pinyin used throughout the magazine only show us how
> > poorly the translating team has performed on the magazine. A magazine such
> > as this, which is a groundbreaking first in the world of tea for the english
> > speaking market, should be well thought and thorough in its execution, as
> > most english speaking tea lovers could rely on only on pinyin to identify
> > teas, any muddleness in this would only serve to confuse them.

> Jou Yu: This tea had no real distinct flavor. It was very watery
> without any hui gan. The only strength of this tea would be its
> sensation (yun), which spread out across the surface of the tongue.
> Otherwise it was an altogether unremarkable tea.
>
> 周�: 这茶刚泡下去甘味�显, 好似这茶一点都�起眼,
> 而且�有水味. 唯一的优点是有韵,韵比较长,
> 在舌�有扩散的感觉.
>
> 1. The hui gan is not apparent, not "without any hui gan".
> 2. No where in the original does it mention that this tea has no real
> distinct flavor
> 3. No where in the original does it mention that "it was an altogether
> unremarkable tea"
>
Just for fun, let me try translating this to show what should probably
be a better translation, for the benefit of those who don't read
Chinese. Those of you who do read it, please confirm/edit my
translation as you see fit.

Zhou Yu (or Chou Yu in Wade-Giles, the standard romanization scheme
used in Taiwan. Jou Yu is pronounced "Rou Yu" under Wade-Giles...):
This tea, when first brewed, does not have an obvious "gan" taste, as
if the tea doesn't attract any attention at all. There's also a watery
flavour. The only upside to the tea is that there is "yun", and the
"yun" is relatively long [as in long lasting]. This feeling spreads
itself on the tongue

So as you can see.... it's quite different from what actually made it
into the mag.

MarshalN
http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN

Hee wrote:
> I hope Mr. Fisher is reading this forum because everybody is giving
> constructive comments about their 1st magazine. We have to give them
> credit for taking the first step and I hope Mr. Fisher and Wu-shing can
> understand that all we want to do here is to show them where they err
> and what need to improve.
>
> For one thing, a few of us who are harsher towards the magazine are
> mainly those who can understand chinese and english. We saw the chinese
> version and we tried to compare it with the english version. It wasn't
> pretty. We are worry that certain articles in the magazine might be
> misleading and for those of you who are new in tea drinking and those
> who don't understand chinese, you might be misinformed.
>
> I myself involve in the publishing line for many years already and I
> personally got quite agitated when I saw typos popping up everywhere in
> a publication. No matter how glossy a book look, a badly proofread
> article IS a bad article. It makes me wonder about the quality. I was
> pretty much done with the magazine after I saw these two typos:
> The Executive Editor's name is written as "Liang Chun Chin" on page 1
> (page 1!). The chinese name below it says: �俊智。 I just need to
> flip to the next page and lo and behold, his name is written as "Liang
> Chun Chih"!
>
> They can't even standardize their own name. On the cover, it is written
> Wu-shing Books. On the Table of Contents page, it is written Wushing
> Books.
>
> ??????????
>
> Whose fault is this? Editor's? Proofreader's? or DTP artist's? For me,
> mistakes as simple as these should have caught the attention of even
> the first person who is in contact with the article, namely the DTP
> artist. Surely their own employee knows the name of their own company
> and of their own boss!
>
> Mr. Fisher, when we publish a book. The book is passed back and forth
> between the editors/writers and proofreaders at least 3 times before it
> is being finalized. This is an industry standard. Surely Wu-shing (or
> is it Wushing?) must have known about this.
>
> I would suggest most of you to give their second issue another chance.
> After all, now that we have told them what they need to do with their
> next issue, I hope they have learnt something from all of us.
>
> I will wait for the second issue before I pass my final judgement.

I echo your sentiments entirely.

Unfortunately, the typo mistakes also pervade, to a slightly lesser
extent, in their Chinese version. For a quarterly magazine, the level
of copy-editing is horrendous. It's not as if they're under a deadline
to print their paper before 2am (and you almost never see typos in
newspapers). I have heard that publishers in China or Taiwan usually
require a typo rate of less than one world in 100,000 words, and Wu
Shing, unfortunately, fails miserably in that regard.

MarshalN
http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN

MarshalN wrote:
> > Jou Yu: This tea had no real distinct flavor. It was very watery
> > without any hui gan. The only strength of this tea would be its
> > sensation (yun), which spread out across the surface of the tongue.
> > Otherwise it was an altogether unremarkable tea.
> >
> > 周�: 这茶刚泡下去甘味�显, 好似这茶一点都�起眼,
> > 而且�有水味. 唯一的优点是有韵,韵比较长,
> > 在舌�有扩散的感觉.
> >
> > 1. The hui gan is not apparent, not "without any hui gan".
> > 2. No where in the original does it mention that this tea has no real
> > distinct flavor
> > 3. No where in the original does it mention that "it was an altogether
> > unremarkable tea"
> >
> Just for fun, let me try translating this to show what should probably
> be a better translation, for the benefit of those who don't read
> Chinese. Those of you who do read it, please confirm/edit my
> translation as you see fit.
>
> Zhou Yu (or Chou Yu in Wade-Giles, the standard romanization scheme
> used in Taiwan. Jou Yu is pronounced "Rou Yu" under Wade-Giles...):
> This tea, when first brewed, does not have an obvious "gan" taste, as
> if the tea doesn't attract any attention at all. There's also a watery
> flavour. The only upside to the tea is that there is "yun", and the
> "yun" is relatively long [as in long lasting]. This feeling spreads
> itself on the tongue
>
> So as you can see.... it's quite different from what actually made it
> into the mag.
>
> MarshalN
> http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN

I should've read my translation one more time before sending....

Now that I read it again... "yun" should best be translated as
"aftertaste", instead of "sensation" or just left as "yun". That would
make it most clear to novices, as "yun" is closest to what an
aftertaste should be.

MarshalN
http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN

"Alex" > writes:
> [...]
> Also, as many of you know, bad pinyin makes me froth at the mouth.

I know what you mean. I've suffered a lot from bad Pinyin trying to
find the actual Chinese behind bad Pinyin phrases for Babelcarp. But
now that I'm starting to study Chinese for real, I realize that Pinyin
as a guide to pronouncing an actual dialect of Chinese leaves a lot to
be desired. When trying to figure out how a string of Pinyin should
actually sound, you have to run through a mental process involving
rules within exceptions within rules.[1] Whether Pinyin could have been
designed better is an interesting question, but at this point in
history it's probably pointless. But I'm starting to develop some
sympathy for native speakers of Chinese who have trouble navigating
the rules in reverse, that is to say, from sounds to Pinyin.

/Lew
---
Lew Perin /
http://www.panix.com/~perin/babelcarp.html
recently updated: Jin Xuan
[1]See the part of Foreign Service Institute Mandarin course covering
pronunciation and romanization: http://fsi-language-courses.com/Cour...ent%20Text.pdf

On Dec 13, 10:12Â*am, "MarshalN" > wrote:
> > Jou Yu: Â*This tea had no real distinct flavor. Â*It was very watery
> > without any hui gan. Â*The only strength of this tea would be its
> > sensation (yun), which spread out across the surface of the tongue.
> > Otherwise it was an altogether unremarkable tea.
>
> > 周�: 这茶刚泡下去甘味�显, 好似这茶一点都�起眼,
> > 而且�有水味. 唯一的优点是有韵,韵比较长,
> > 在舌�有扩散的感觉.
>
> > 1. Â*The hui gan is not apparent, not "without any hui gan".
> > 2. Â*No where in the original does it mention that this tea has no real
> > distinct flavor
> > 3. Â*No where in the original does it mention that "it was an altogether
> > unremarkable tea"Just for fun, let me try translating this to show what should probably
> be a better translation, for the benefit of those who don't read
> Chinese. Â*Those of you who do read it, please confirm/edit my
> translation as you see fit.
>
> Zhou Yu (or Chou Yu in Wade-Giles, the standard romanization scheme
> used in Taiwan. Â*Jou Yu is pronounced "Rou Yu" under Wade-Giles...):
> This tea, when first brewed, does not have an obvious "gan" taste, as
> if the tea doesn't attract any attention at all. Â*There's also a watery
> flavour. Â*The only upside to the tea is that there is "yun", and the
> "yun" is relatively long [as in long lasting]. Â*This feeling spreads
> itself on the tongue
>
> So as you can see.... it's quite different from what actually made it
> into the mag. Â*
>
> MarshalNhttp://www.xanga.com/MarshalN

That is pretty much exactly right. I don't think in this case you are
going to get out of using huigan and yun in Chinese.

On Dec 13, 10:25 am, Lewis Perin > wrote:
> "Alex" > writes:
> > [...]
> > Also, as many of you know, bad pinyin makes me froth at the mouth.I know what you mean. I've suffered a lot from bad Pinyin trying to
> find the actual Chinese behind bad Pinyin phrases for Babelcarp. But
> now that I'm starting to study Chinese for real, I realize that Pinyin
> as a guide to pronouncing an actual dialect of Chinese leaves a lot to
> be desired. When trying to figure out how a string of Pinyin should
> actually sound, you have to run through a mental process involving
> rules within exceptions within rules.[1] Whether Pinyin could have been
> designed better is an interesting question, but at this point in
> history it's probably pointless. But I'm starting to develop some
> sympathy for native speakers of Chinese who have trouble navigating
> the rules in reverse, that is to say, from sounds to Pinyin.

Hi Lew. Pinyin was actually designed, I am told, for Russians, so some
of the conventions seem bizarre, like zhi and ri for instance. It's
not great as a writing system, and the attempts made in the 1950s to
force its use in Chinese society failed completely. The real value of
pinyin is that, once you've learned it, it's an unequalled tool for
moving between Chinese and an alphabet-based language, and for
organizing Chinese, for example in a dictionary. I don't have any
sympathy for people who don't bother to use it, because it takes a
matter of minutes for a native Chinese speaker to learn, and requires
only occaisional reference to a dictionary, just like spelling for us.
I'm not trying to be overly critical of Chinese people who make
isolated mistakes in it, but I think people who don't make the effort
in the first place have no excuse.

Lewis Perin wrote:
> "Alex" > writes:
> > [...]
> > Also, as many of you know, bad pinyin makes me froth at the mouth.
>
> I know what you mean. I've suffered a lot from bad Pinyin trying to
> find the actual Chinese behind bad Pinyin phrases for Babelcarp. But
> now that I'm starting to study Chinese for real, I realize that Pinyin
> as a guide to pronouncing an actual dialect of Chinese leaves a lot to
> be desired. When trying to figure out how a string of Pinyin should
> actually sound, you have to run through a mental process involving
> rules within exceptions within rules.[1] Whether Pinyin could have been
> designed better is an interesting question, but at this point in
> history it's probably pointless. But I'm starting to develop some
> sympathy for native speakers of Chinese who have trouble navigating
> the rules in reverse, that is to say, from sounds to Pinyin.
>
> /Lew

It is not forgivable for a publication trying to sell a magazine
claiming, among other things, to help educate the tea drinking public,
and do not stick to EITHER pinyin OR Wade-Giles (the two standards) and
use something that they seem to make up on the fly.

It's fine if they use either -- at least we know what it is. Now that
they just make it up, you have no hope of figuring out what it is if it
happens to be wrong. It only serves to confuse people more than
anything. If you see Yiwu as "Yeewoo" (just an off the cuff example),
do you assume it is the same as Yiwu, or, do you think it is actually a
new place that they're talking about?

You can't tell, and therein lies the problem with typographical errors
and inconsistent romanization.

MarshalN
http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN

Thanks to Danny, Alex, and MarshalN, now I understand that the
translation problem is more severe than I first guessed. If it's
misleading, then it affects substance. I personally echo the sentiment
that for THE FIRST publication in English, every effort should be made
to make it perfect. This is like having a blind date who dresses and
speaks inappropriately. I hope the editors and Wushing publication are
not playing "pass the buck" at the moment, because they should realize
that, ultimately, the buck stops at the editor(s) for not making needed
corrections to the draft copy, or even at the magazine's main principal
for not hiring qualified editor(s).

Heck, it's a shame they can't even spell the Executive Editor's name
right! It reminds me of the A&W rootbeer commercial where a job
applicant is interviewing with the partner of a firm called Dumass &
Dumass...and the guy kept calling the partner Mr. Dumb-ass.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMe3WDmxBEI

Phyll


Alex wrote:
> On Dec 13, 10:25 am, Lewis Perin > wrote:
> > "Alex" > writes:
> > > [...]
> > > Also, as many of you know, bad pinyin makes me froth at the mouth.I know what you mean. I've suffered a lot from bad Pinyin trying to
> > find the actual Chinese behind bad Pinyin phrases for Babelcarp. But
> > now that I'm starting to study Chinese for real, I realize that Pinyin
> > as a guide to pronouncing an actual dialect of Chinese leaves a lot to
> > be desired. When trying to figure out how a string of Pinyin should
> > actually sound, you have to run through a mental process involving
> > rules within exceptions within rules.[1] Whether Pinyin could have been
> > designed better is an interesting question, but at this point in
> > history it's probably pointless. But I'm starting to develop some
> > sympathy for native speakers of Chinese who have trouble navigating
> > the rules in reverse, that is to say, from sounds to Pinyin.
>
> Hi Lew. Pinyin was actually designed, I am told, for Russians, so some
> of the conventions seem bizarre, like zhi and ri for instance. It's
> not great as a writing system, and the attempts made in the 1950s to
> force its use in Chinese society failed completely. The real value of
> pinyin is that, once you've learned it, it's an unequalled tool for
> moving between Chinese and an alphabet-based language, and for
> organizing Chinese, for example in a dictionary. I don't have any
> sympathy for people who don't bother to use it, because it takes a
> matter of minutes for a native Chinese speaker to learn, and requires
> only occaisional reference to a dictionary, just like spelling for us.
> I'm not trying to be overly critical of Chinese people who make
> isolated mistakes in it, but I think people who don't make the effort
> in the first place have no excuse.

I forgot to include Hee in my "thanks" line above.

Phyll wrote:
> Thanks to Danny, Alex, and MarshalN, now I understand that the
> translation problem is more severe than I first guessed. If it's
> misleading, then it affects substance. I personally echo the sentiment
> that for THE FIRST publication in English, every effort should be made
> to make it perfect. This is like having a blind date who dresses and
> speaks inappropriately. I hope the editors and Wushing publication are
> not playing "pass the buck" at the moment, because they should realize
> that, ultimately, the buck stops at the editor(s) for not making needed
> corrections to the draft copy, or even at the magazine's main principal
> for not hiring qualified editor(s).
>
> Heck, it's a shame they can't even spell the Executive Editor's name
> right! It reminds me of the A&W rootbeer commercial where a job
> applicant is interviewing with the partner of a firm called Dumass &
> Dumass...and the guy kept calling the partner Mr. Dumb-ass.
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMe3WDmxBEI
>
> Phyll
>
>
> Alex wrote:
> > On Dec 13, 10:25 am, Lewis Perin > wrote:
> > > "Alex" > writes:
> > > > [...]
> > > > Also, as many of you know, bad pinyin makes me froth at the mouth.I know what you mean. I've suffered a lot from bad Pinyin trying to
> > > find the actual Chinese behind bad Pinyin phrases for Babelcarp. But
> > > now that I'm starting to study Chinese for real, I realize that Pinyin
> > > as a guide to pronouncing an actual dialect of Chinese leaves a lot to
> > > be desired. When trying to figure out how a string of Pinyin should
> > > actually sound, you have to run through a mental process involving
> > > rules within exceptions within rules.[1] Whether Pinyin could have been
> > > designed better is an interesting question, but at this point in
> > > history it's probably pointless. But I'm starting to develop some
> > > sympathy for native speakers of Chinese who have trouble navigating
> > > the rules in reverse, that is to say, from sounds to Pinyin.
> >
> > Hi Lew. Pinyin was actually designed, I am told, for Russians, so some
> > of the conventions seem bizarre, like zhi and ri for instance. It's
> > not great as a writing system, and the attempts made in the 1950s to
> > force its use in Chinese society failed completely. The real value of
> > pinyin is that, once you've learned it, it's an unequalled tool for
> > moving between Chinese and an alphabet-based language, and for
> > organizing Chinese, for example in a dictionary. I don't have any
> > sympathy for people who don't bother to use it, because it takes a
> > matter of minutes for a native Chinese speaker to learn, and requires
> > only occaisional reference to a dictionary, just like spelling for us.
> > I'm not trying to be overly critical of Chinese people who make
> > isolated mistakes in it, but I think people who don't make the effort
> > in the first place have no excuse.

"MarshalN" > writes:

> [...]
> I should've read my translation one more time before sending....
>
> Now that I read it again... "yun" should best be translated as
> "aftertaste", instead of "sensation" or just left as "yun". That would
> make it most clear to novices, as "yun" is closest to what an
> aftertaste should be.

So, in a tea context, "yun" in the sense of "rhyme" means
"aftertaste". That's a poem in a syllable! But in the original, it
says "yun yun". Does this add meaning?

/Lew
---
Lew Perin /
http://www.panix.com/~perin/babelcarp.html

[mike petro]
> > > This is as close to unbiased as I can get, just don't ask me about
> > > the "Cha Dao" article. ;-)
> > > Mike Petro
> > > http://www.pu-erh.net

[elona]
> > 'Cha Dao', http://chadao.blogspot.com/ ,
> > has informative writings by respected people like Mike Petro,
> > Michael Plant, Lew Perin, Danny, and others. Thank you, Mike!
> > Best of all, it is FREE.

[mike petro]
> Lest anybody think I was associating your blog with the article, they
> are two entirely different things. The "Cha Dao" article documents the
> spiritual beliefs of a group of people. This set of beliefs is one that
> Mr Fisher subscribes to, and the article was written by him. It bears
> NO resemblence to, or affiliation with, the 'Cha Dao',
> http://chadao.blogspot.com/ site whatsoever.

[corax]
hi mike and all,

just a clarification -- the comment about our blog CHA DAO was posted
by 'elona,' not by me. i am not elona and don't know who s/he is.

you know, i saw mike's review of the first issue of THE ART OF TEA
yesterday, with its reference to 'the "cha dao" article,' and it
crossed my mind right then that this might be confusing to some. i
suppose i ought to have posted right away, to point out [esp to readers
who don't remember the aaron fisher/aromaserene scuffle of several
months ago] that the phrase 'cha dao' is not an uncommon one. it is
likely to show up in a variety of places and contexts where china tea
is concerned, including even vendor sites, where it will be associated
with the implements used in gongfu cha -- tongs, scoop, pick, etc]. the
word 'dao' [or 'tao' in wade-giles transliteration] means -- literally
or metaphorically -- 'road' or 'path,' so that 'cha dao' might mean
'tea road' or 'the way of/to tea.'

i haven't yet read mr fisher's article that mike refers to, so i'll
have to speak very generally here, but in more spiritual contexts, the
term 'dao' [in the phrase 'cha dao'] might be used to connect the more
metaphysical aspects of tea-drinking with various philosophical or
religious systems, such as daoism [taoism] or its avatar, zen buddhism.
[the japanese term that tranlates 'cha dao,' namely 'chado' or 'sado,'
is used to refer to the study of the 'cha no yu' or tea ceremony; here
its zen connections are made perhaps as clear as anywhere. see e.g.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chado for a handy summary.]

all that said, the term 'cha dao' can have a simpler, secular
application as well: our abiding interests in tea, pursued over time.
[come to think of it, i wonder if the vendors who run
'inpursuitoftea.com' -- no professional affiliation here, n.b. --
intended their company name as a loose translation of 'cha dao.'
sebastian, frank, are you guys reading this?] since the words are
putonghua [i.e. 'mandarin chinese'], i thought they would encapsulate
the subject-matter of the then-fledgling blog in a brief and elegant
way.

in any case, because of this propensity to obfuscation, i some time ago
adopted the convention [on the blog itself] of writing 'cha dao' [in
lower case] to represent the latter meaning, and CHA DAO, all capital
letters, to refer specifically to the blog itself. i recommend this
convention to others as well, if only to save time and confusion.

what prompted me to write this now is that mike [above] refers to CHA
DAO as 'your blog' -- working, i assume, very quickly, and inferring
that 'elona' was an alias for corax. i figured that if mike, a longtime
brother-in-arms here, could make this slip, other more casual readers
well might do the same. hence this disambiguation.

as for CHA DAO being 'mine' -- well, i founded it, and i edit and post
a fair number of the articles. but truly i think of it as 'our' blog --
the collaborative effort of a number of perceptive tea lovers who care
as i do about china teas -- care deeply enough about them that these
teas could be said to influence our way [dao] of life. i'd like to take
this opportunity to acknowledge and applaud all of our contributors;
and to thank our readers for, well, reading us.

corax
http://chadao.blogspot.com

> For one thing, a few of us who are harsher towards the magazine are
> mainly those who can understand chinese and english. We saw the chinese
> version and we tried to compare it with the english version. It wasn't
> pretty. We are worry that certain articles in the magazine might be
> misleading and for those of you who are new in tea drinking and those
> who don't understand chinese, you might be misinformed.

I think you have hit the nail on the head. I suspect that most of us
non-Chinese speaking folks are willing to tolerate some translation
errors just to get something, anything, in English. This is like new
fruit for us since there has never been any other publication English
prior to this.

I agree that we could easily be misled by mistranslations, hopefully
this will improve with time. However, I suspect that there will be far
less misunderstanding reading this magazine than trying to run some
Chinese website through a translator, which until now was our only
choice.

Those of you who understand Chinese can easily be more critical because
you can see the errors, but also because you have other choices. If you
dont like the English mag you buy the Chinese one. The English audience
is not as critical yet as we are not as knowledgable for one, and have
no other choice anyway.

This first mag was very elementry in many ways. I suspect that most
Asian businessmen probably see the American market as a very immature
and elementry market. I suspect the magazine mathces that perception. I
have no problem with them starting out at the lowest common demoniator
as long as they progressively get more sophisticated with time.

Mike
http://www.pu-erh.net

> what prompted me to write this now is that mike [above] refers to CHA
> DAO as 'your blog' -- working, i assume, very quickly, and inferring
> that 'elona' was an alias for corax. i figured that if mike, a longtime
> brother-in-arms here, could make this slip, other more casual readers
> well might do the same. hence this disambiguation.

I am so sorry, I was confused and mistook that for an alias. In any
event I wanted to be clear that my slight negative slant on the Cha Dao
article was in no way a reflection upon your blog as the two are in no
way related.

Mike
http://www.pu-erh.net

> This first mag was very elementry in many ways. I suspect that most
> Asian businessmen probably see the American market as a very immature
> and elementry market. I suspect the magazine mathces that perception.

They can aim their articles for the "immature and elementary" readers
if that's their intended target market. However, there is a good point
or two to be made about appearing professional AND independent,
especially for an international-level publication. Appearing sloppy is
a liability to their end goal if they want to lend the perception of
art to the Chinese tea culture. It's also a liability against their
bottom lines.


Mike Petro wrote:
> > For one thing, a few of us who are harsher towards the magazine are
> > mainly those who can understand chinese and english. We saw the chinese
> > version and we tried to compare it with the english version. It wasn't
> > pretty. We are worry that certain articles in the magazine might be
> > misleading and for those of you who are new in tea drinking and those
> > who don't understand chinese, you might be misinformed.
>
> I think you have hit the nail on the head. I suspect that most of us
> non-Chinese speaking folks are willing to tolerate some translation
> errors just to get something, anything, in English. This is like new
> fruit for us since there has never been any other publication English
> prior to this.
>
> I agree that we could easily be misled by mistranslations, hopefully
> this will improve with time. However, I suspect that there will be far
> less misunderstanding reading this magazine than trying to run some
> Chinese website through a translator, which until now was our only
> choice.
>
> Those of you who understand Chinese can easily be more critical because
> you can see the errors, but also because you have other choices. If you
> dont like the English mag you buy the Chinese one. The English audience
> is not as critical yet as we are not as knowledgable for one, and have
> no other choice anyway.
>
> This first mag was very elementry in many ways. I suspect that most
> Asian businessmen probably see the American market as a very immature
> and elementry market. I suspect the magazine mathces that perception. I
> have no problem with them starting out at the lowest common demoniator
> as long as they progressively get more sophisticated with time.
>
> Mike
> http://www.pu-erh.net

Lewis Perin wrote:

>
> So, in a tea context, "yun" in the sense of "rhyme" means
> "aftertaste". That's a poem in a syllable! But in the original, it
> says "yun yun". Does this add meaning?
>
> /Lew
> ---
> Lew Perin /
> http://www.panix.com/~perin/babelcarp.html

There was a comma between the two yun.

MarshalN
http://www.xanga.com/MarshalN

Are terms like fen, xiang, yun, huigan specifically used for tea taste
or can they be applied in general to any other beverage taste? It's
not important but in the case of YUN it is preceded by another
character for the TGY aftertaste and another one for the WUYI
aftertaste. Is there one for puer?

Jim

Alex wrote:
> > MarshalNhttp://www.xanga.com/MarshalN
....
> That is pretty much exactly right. I don't think in this case you are
> going to get out of using huigan and yun in Chinese.