Translating Western Concepts by Creating
New Characters: A Comparison of Japaneseand Chinese Attempts＊

SHEN Guowei

Abstract
Chinese characters are considered as an adaptable system, open to expansion
and revision. Throughout history, the creation of new characters was one of
the most important solutions to enlargements of the conceptual repertoire.
Both scholars of “Dutch Learning” in Japan and missionaries active in nineteenth-century China used Chinese characters in their translations of westernconcepts. From a methodological point of view, Japanese scholars mostly
coined compound words rendering the literal meanings of their terms ofdeparture while translators in China, invigorated by the success of the new
characters devised for chemical elements, believed that drafting new characters was more in line with the characteristics of the Chinese language.
However, notwithstanding the painstaking efforts with which they werecreated, the new characters proposed by missionaries were eventuallyreplaced by compound terms first used in Japanese adaptations. This paper
examines the different practices and attitudes of Chinese and Japanese
authors toward the creation of new characters as a method of translation.
Analyzing the influence of their divergent approaches on the lexical systemsof their respective languages, since Chinese has a very limited number ofphonetic patterns, I conclude that it is impossible to create viable technicalterminologies only by increasing new characters.
Key words: transtation, technical term, Chinese character, missionary,
W. Lobscheid, J. Fryer

Introduction
Chinese characters comprise an adaptable writing system, open to expansion and revision. Throughout history, the creation of new characters has been
one of the most important solutions to enlargements of the conceptual repertoire. Both scholars of “Dutch Learning” in Japan and missionaries active innineteenth-century China used Chinese characters in their translations of* Research Fellow, Institute for Cultural Interaction Shidies; Professor, Facultyof Foreign Language Studies, Kansai University.

52

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol.2 2011

Western concepts and thus had to face the problem of creating new words
from characters.
From a methodological point of view, Japanese scholars mostly coinedcompound words that rendered literal meanings. They created translations ofterms through loan translation when appropriate words from the classicallexicon could not be found, while translators in China preferred to draft new
characters. This paper examines the different practices and attitudes ofChinese and Japanese authors toward the creation of new characters as amethod of translation. Analyzing the influence of their divergent approaches
on the lexical systems of their respective languages, I conclude that it is
impossible to use a system of creating technical terminology based exclusively on increasing new characters since the Chinese language has a very
limited number of phonetic patterns.

1 From kiriru（機里爾）to sen（腺）Sugita Genpaku（杉田玄白）, a Japanese scholar of Dutch Learning andthe first Japanese to translate a work from a foreign language, translated a
medical text based on the Dutch translation, Ontleedkundige Tafelen, of J.
Kulmus’s German Anatomische Tabellen（New Text on Anatomy, 1759）. In
the preface of his Kaitai Shinsho（1774）, Sugita explains that he translated
one of the terms in the text, the Dutch word, Klier （gland）, as 機里爾（kiriru）, a phonetic transliteration. His rationale for the phonetic approach
was 無語可当、無義可解 （“no appropriate terms could be found for translating”）. In other words, there was no word that corresponded to the conceptof Klier in traditional Chinese medicine. The 義 in the rationale Sugita gave
can be interpreted in two ways: 理拠義（principles based on meaning; that is,
the intent of creation of the original word; and 概念義, （“conceptual meanings: dictionary explanations for the exact words for all bodily organs andtheir functions.”） In Chōtei kaitai shinsho（Revised New Text on Anatomy,completed in 1798 by Ōtsuki Gentaku 大槻玄沢, and published in 1826）, therationale becomes 無名可充。義可取, which means that there are no appropriate terms, but the meaning is understandable. The 義 here can only be
explained as 概念義, This implies that as time went on, scholars of Dutch
Learning in Japan gained a comprehensive knowledge of glands though they
had not yet found an exact translation for the term at the time.
In the revised text, Ōtsuki Gentaku was the first to use the literal translation, 滤胞（rohō, filtering sac）, for “gland.” Ōtsuki said, “I am afraid this term
may not be exact, so I will leave it to further research.” Perhaps this showsthat he was not satisfied with the term he had chosen. He was not simply
being self-deprecating, for in the same text Ōtsuki had also selected the rarecompound character 䐃 for the translation for gland.” In traditional ChineseTranslating Western Concepts by Creating New Characters: A Comparison of Japanese and Chinese Attempts 53

dictionaries the meaning of this character is given as “the mass of flesh underthe elbow or knee,” but Ōtsuki assigned it a new definition. He said that theleft part of this character means “flesh,” while the right part refers to a structure consisting of a mass of cells （rendered here as 菌）. After Ōtsuki,
Udagawa Genshin（宇田川玄真）was the first to use the character 腺（sen）in
his work, Ihan Teikō（医範提網, 1805）. This is the first time the character 腺
was used. As Udagawa explained, he had taken the right-side of the character
泉 not only for sound（sen）, but also for meaning, likening a gland to a fountain that gushes forth water from the ground.
When Ōtsuki Kentaku discussed his system for coining new terms, heexplained that new compound terms and new characters must be created totranslate a foreign language precisely. The Japanese scholars of Dutch
Learning, however, did not create many new characters. They mainly created
new compound terms. This was because scholars of Dutch Learning were allquite accomplished in Sinology and were thus well-versed in the study ofChinese characters. They believed that creating new characters was something
only uneducated peasants might do.

2 Wilhelm Lobscheid: Pioneer in Creating Chinese Characters
The first translator in China to try creating new characters was the German
missionary, Wilhelm Lobscheid （1822–1893）. He discussed the issue ofcoining names for the chemical elements in the preface of his English andChinese Dictionary, Part IV (1869). He apparently believed that the characterin Chinese that could best suggest the most basic notion of an element was
xing 行, and for this reason he thought that the vast majority of names ofchemical elements could easily be created by inserting a character between
the left and right components of xing. For example:
彳+水+亍（Shwui）= hydrogen（氢） 彳+ 光 + 亍（Kwang）= phosphorus（磷）彳+ 炭 + 亍 （Tan）= carbon（炭） 彳+ 绿 + 亍（Luh）= chlor（氯）Lobscheid hoped knowledge of chemistry could be popularized in China
with the help of such a simple nomenclature. He wrote in the preface that hebelieved his nomenclature was simpler and more convenient than the methods
employed by many other common chemistry books at the time. Chinese whowanted to learn chemistry to understand Western sciences could do so fasterand better through use and popularization by specialists of the nomenclature.
There are a total of 49 names of chemical elements listed in the English
and Chinese Dictionary (1822–1893), of which 21 were newly-created characters. Besides the four mentioned above, the following are 17 such chemicalterms.

54

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol.2 2011

BromineFluorine
IodineNitrogen
OxygenPotassium（ Kalium ）Selenium
SiliconSodium（ Natrium ）Strontium
Tellurium
Thorium
Titanium
Uranium
Vanadium
Yttrium
Zirconium彳 + 臭 + 亍 Chau（溴）彳 + 黄 + 亍 Hwang（氟）彳 + 蓝 + 亍 Lan（碘）彳 + 硝 + 亍 Siau（氮）彳 + 养 + 亍 Yang（氧）彳 + 榻 + 亍 Kien（钾）彳 + 红 + 亍 Hung（硒）彳 + 火 / 石 + 亍 Shih（硅）彳 + 莎 / 金 + 亍 so（钠）彳 + 白 + 亍 Peh（锶）彳 + 地 + 亍 ti（碲）彳 + 灰 + 亍 Hwui（钍）彳 + 红 + 亍 hung（钛）彳 + 天 + 亍 Tien（铀）彳 + 皓 + 亍 Hau（钒）彳 + 白 / 金 + 亍 Kin（钇）彳 + 黑 + 亍 Heh（鋯）The new characters created by Lobscheid were pronounced based on thecharacters that were inserted between the left and right components of xing.
Lobscheid did not provide any explanation for the principles upon which heselected the characters. Nevertheless, the principles can generally be divided
into two categories based on the examples given. The first category reflects
his selection of etymology of the original terms, such as the 水 shui（water）
of 彳 + 水 + 亍, and 天 tian（sky）of 彳 + 天 + 亍. The second category isbased on his selection of the forms of the chemical elements, properties, orcolors such as 养（form）of 彳 + 养 + 亍, or 绿（green）of 彳 + 绿 + 亍. It
should be pointed out that the percentage of the new characters in the former
category is very small.

3 The Translations and Coining of New Words by John Fryer
In January, 1880, John Fryer, an English translator and educator（1839–
1928）, wrote an article in the North China Herald introducing his work at theTranslation Department of the Jiangnan Arsenal. In the article, “An Accountof the Department for the Translation of Foreign Books at the Kiangnan
Arsenal, Shanghai,” he discussed the issue of translating from Western
languages into Chinese as well as the creation of new terms.
In the article, Fryer refuted the viewpoint that Chinese language andwriting are the most difficult for Westerners to understand.
It is generally received opinion that the Chinese language presents

Translating Western Concepts by Creating New Characters: A Comparison of Japanese and Chinese Attempts 55

extraordinary difficulties both in its acquisition by Europeans and in its
use for the expression of the more exalted ideas of Western learning….
this opinion is without formulation…from the time the early Jesuit
missionaries commenced their compilations up to the present day noserious difficulties have been experienced by foreign translators.（p.79）
Fryer believed that terminology was the most crucial aspect of translating
Western books. He pointed out that Chinese language and characters are
similar to those of other countries in that they also continue to develop andchange and to possess the potential to encounter new things from abroad.
Chinese, like other languages, is capable of growth. The increasing
intercourse of China with Western nations is undoubtedly making vast
additions to the number of words in current use.（p.79）
New Chinese terms had to be created to express new ideas or new items
arising from trade or negotiation activities. If translators were tied down by
the conventions concerning the old meanings of terms, they would not be able
to provide interpretations for terminology not already found in Chinese
dictionaries, and would never be able to translate new books. As to themethods of creating new translation terms, Fryer gave the following advice:
Coining of new terms: — Where it becomes necessary to invent a newterm there is a choice of three methods.
（a.）Make a new character, the sound of which can be easily known fromthe phonetic portion, or use an existing but uncommon character,giving it a new meaning.
（b.）Invent a descriptive term, using as few characters as possible.
（c.）Phoneticise the foreign term, using the sounds of the Mandarin
dialect, and always endeavouring to employ the same character forthe same sound as far as possible, giving preference to charactersmost used by previous translators or compilers.
All such invented terms are to be regarded merely as provisional,
and to be discarded if previously existing ones are discovered or
better ones can be obtained.（p.79）
Here Fryer discussed three problems. First he expounded on the creationof new terms by coining new characters and, specifically, the naming ofchemical elements. Fryer suggested two methods: the first was to take acertain common Chinese character as the phonetic element and join it with a56

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol.2 2011

semantic radical to create a new character. The principle he used was toselect characters with pronunciations similar to the first or second syllabic of
the terms from the source language as the phonetic component. The semantic
components were selected based on the description of the source terms. The
examples Fryer used were 镁, 鉮, 𥑢 , and 矽.
The second method suggested by Fryer was to reinterpret some seldom
used characters for coining new terms; that is, to give new meanings to obsolete ancient characters for reuse as translating terms. The examples Fryer gave
were 铂, 钾, 𥑢 , and 锌, all of which can be found in ancient Chinese dictionaries. 钾 originally meant “loricae,” while 锌 meant “firm and strong.” HereFryer explained the differences between creating and using characters. New
characters were made according to the pictographic-phonetic method.
Phonetic elements imitated the pronunciation of the source terms from theforeign language, while semantic components of the items to be translated
were arranged into certain scientific categories. For instance 金 represents
metals, and 石 represents nonmetals. Fryer’s principle for creating new
Chinese characters was formulated when in 1869 he began translating Well’sPrinciples and Applications of Chemistry（David A. Wells, 1858）. His key
principle was to “only use one character to name the chemical element.” This
one-character principle resolved the inconsistency between the unique characteristics of Chinese pictographs and the names of the chemical elements.
Names of chemical elements should be able to be used not only alone, butalso in chemical compounds. Chinese words are normally never longer thanfour syllables. If the names of chemical elements were di-syllables, it would
be very inconvenient to use them in chemical compounds. Fryer’s one-character principle for translating terms was far superior to the translation
methods of either William A. P. Martin or J. G. Kerr.
The second problem was that of coining compound words. There are up
to 1500 syllables in the Chinese language than can be differentiated semantically. The creation of new terminology necessarily depends on having polysyllabic compound words. The methods of creating compound words fortranslating terms can be divided into two categories: literal and free translation methods. Examples provided by Fryer were 養氣, 輕氣, 火輪船, and 風雨
表, which are mostly literal translations. Literal translations were common at
the time because the prevalent method of rendering translations involved
collaboration between a Westerner with a spoken knowledge of Chinese, anda Chinese scholar who recorded the oral translation with a brush. The
Chinese transcriber had no knowledge of the source language. Foreign oraltranslators had to dictate in a concrete and descriptive manner. For example,
the Chinese terms for the elements oxygen and hydrogen, 養氣, and 輕氣, arefree translations based on very situational, commonly understood norms,

Translating Western Concepts by Creating New Characters: A Comparison of Japanese and Chinese Attempts 57

while the Japanese translations of the same terms, 酸素 and 水素, are strictly
literal translations of those elements. That oral translators used several characters to explain an object, and then used that explanation for a newly-translated term, indicates that translation terms were produced during the course of
the explanation. Fryer pointed out, however, that new terms should contain“as few characters as possible.” Di-syllabic terms have the least number ofcharacters among compound words.
The third problem is transliteration. Fryer’s suggestions can be summed
up as follows: Use Mandarin pronunciation instead of dialects, and use thesame Chinese character to represent a certain common pronunciation from thesource language to ensure phonetic consistency.
In 1890, the Second General Conference of the Protestant Missionaries
of China was held in Shanghai. At the conference, Fryer read his long article
on technical terminology. In the second section of his article, “Some of the
Essential Features for a System of Scientific Nomenclature for China,” Fryer
discussed in detail the rules and methods of creating technical terminology.
Fryer claimed that new terms ought to be translations, where possible, and not
merely transliterations.
Fryer claimed that the Chinese language did not lend itself to the importation of new ideas through transliteration from the outside world, as manyother languages did. Practical usage showed that free translation was moresuitable to the Chinese language. As for translating techniques, Fryer pointed
out the errors in Lobscheid’s English and Chinese Dictionary, such as 半个上
帝 as the rendering of “demigod,”1 and 兄弟在律法 for “someone else’s
brother-in-law.” He emphasized that word-for-word translation should be
avoided. He claimed that of the eighty thousand or more characters in theK’ang Hsi Dictionary, only about eight thousand were ever used, except on
the most extraordinary occasions. Some authorized Chinese characters had
become obsolete or had only a vague meaning. Fryer believed that unearthing
and using such authorized, obsolete characters would be a good method fortranslating terms. Fryer said that the characters 鋅 and 鉀 are successful
examples of this method. At the same, using ancient Chinese characters was
problematic. For example, Fryer was concerned that if he used 檟 𣙿 for thephonetic translation of “coffee,” “some future Chinese philologist will look up
their original meaning in some antiquated volume and declare they are incorrectly used; or else that some conservative patriot of the future will write anelaborate essay to prove that coffee was known to the ancient Chinese andintroduced from China to Western countries in the same way that steam
1 The translations in Lobscheid’s dictionary of 半上帝 and 半神, however, do notseem questionable.

58

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol.2 2011engines and telegraphs were!”Fryer pointed out that the best translation method was perhaps to invent
an entirely new character that could not be found in any existing Chinese
dictionary by using an appropriate radical and phonetic. Such terms werebeing used to translate some of the chemical element names that were thencoming into general use. The biggest drawback of such invented characters
was that they were not authorized, and that the more fastidious among theliterati objected to them sometimes on that account.
In his two articles, Fryer wrote at length about how to make use of obsolete characters and how to invent new characters for making translation
terms. He paid little attention to compound words, however, especially terms
that came from direct loan translation. In this sense, his method of creatingtranslation terms was quite different from that of Japanese scholars of Dutch
Learning.

4 Medical Terminology Developed by the China Medical Missionary
Association
The nomenclature for chemical elements was based for the most part on
the method of inventing new characters. This method later became the standard in China for creating nomenclature for chemical substances, indicatingthat Fryer had succeeded in his approach. But such success at the same timeallowed for dissemination of the mistaken notion that coining new terms isequivalent to inventing new characters. This method of creating new characters was advocated by the China Medical Missionary Association, which
considered it the best method for developing medical terminology. The terminology committee of the China Medical Missionary Association held its firstmeeting in 1901, when it also published its first compilation of medical
terminology: First Report of the Committee on Medical Terminology. The
committee’s rules for coining terminology were explained in the preface of thereport.
It may be of interest to the members of the Association to give someidea of the principles which guided the Committee in its work, especially in regard to fundamental terms. The first subject which claimed
attention was the names of the bones. It was thought most desirable thatin the case of such a fundamental matter there should be, if possible,
only one character for each bone, in order to facilitate the naming ofarteries, veins, and nerves as well as muscles. After a long and exhaustive search through Williams, Giles, and Kang Hsi, for suitable characters, the following list was finally agreed upon on the principle thatevery long or otherwise important, bone should have the bone radical atTranslating Western Concepts by Creating New Characters: A Comparison of Japanese and Chinese Attempts 59

the side（except those of the head）; the bones of the hand, should havethe hand radical; and the bones of the foot, the foot radical. The bonesof the head it was not thought necessary to specially indicate by theradical, though as a matter of fact most of the cranial bones have theradical.
It would be observed that in following out this system it has beennecessary in some cases to take old obsolete characters and affix to themthe meaning intended, without much regard to the meaning given in
Kang Hsi, while in other instances liberties have been taken in the wayof adding a radical to a common character in order to make it conformto the rule. It is hoped that this system will greatly aid the memory of
the student and teacher in remembering the position of the bones. Littlechange was made in the old names of the bones of the head and face.
In naming the parts of the blood circulatory system it was decided
that every character used should have the blood radical, and that eachpart should be represented by single character.
For instance:
Source words Chinese characters pronunciation motivation
Today’s translation
Auricle
Hsüeh
a
blood
cave
䆝
心房
VentriclePenblood spurter
心室衂報
Artery
Mo
衇
动脉
𧖬
Vein
Huang
blood going to the heart 静脉薇CapillaryWeiminute blood vessels
毛细管

In addition, the report concluded that anatomic passages and channels
such as canals and ducts should be represented by 𦜐 , and cells by 䏭 chu. The
terminology committee thought that the translation term used in Japan for“gland,” 腺, pronounced chuan in Chinese, could denote a “flesh spring,” andthus the committee considered it an appropriate translation term. The
committee also suggested that the term for glands without vessels could be
represented by the character 𣝗 hu, meaning 核（nucleus）.
The preface also explains the rationale for the following terms:
pancreas 𦚟 I（胰 [ 腺 ] ）Lymph 𧗊 Chin（淋巴）globulin 腈 Ching（球蛋白）albumin 胉（白蛋白）proteins 脭 Cheng（蛋白质）Serum 盟 Ming（血清）Tissue 網
胴 Wang（组织）Uterus 孫Ỏ Kung（子宫）The China Medical Missionary Association followed the rules stipulated by the terminology committee in the First Report for creating new

60

Journal of Cultural Interaction in East Asia Vol.2 2011

characters after the Association later studied and approved the terminology. An English-Chinese Lexicon of Medical Terms, published in
1908, contained many of the newly-invented characters, and in generalfollowed the above-mentioned rules. By 1937, however, when the eighth
edition of Cousland’s English-Chinese Medical Lexicon was published,most of the terms that were comprised of newly-invented characters had
been discarded and replaced by medical terminology from Japan. The
efforts of the China Medical Missionary Association thus could beconsidered a failure. There are two reasons that could be given for thisshift in methodology. First, Fryer’s new characters were mostly pictographic-phonetic characters; that is, he took the first syllable of the Latin
or Greek term for the chemical element for the first Chinese character,and if that syllable seemed unsuitable, he would try using the secondsyllable. He would then add a radical. Although he divided the terms into
separate categories, he retained the original readings. The new charactersinvented by the China Medical Missionary Association, however, weremainly composed of pictographs with little or no emphasis on pronunciation. This approach necessitated a continual search for new characters.
Secondly, and most importantly, the one-character rule of the China
Medical Missionary Association was unnecessary and had ignored the
direction of the development of the Chinese language. For example,
when terms such as 子宫, 蛋白, and 血清 were replaced with just one new
character containing forms like 宫 or 明, many homonyms were created.
Dependence solely on the pronunciation of the characters（that is, oral
expression）, rendered it impossible to differentiate between them.

5 Conclusion
C. W. Mateer（1836–1908）, the Chairman of the Educational Associationof China, published a terminology dictionary in 1904 entitled TechnicalTerms. This dictionary could be considered the culmination of the missionaries’ century-long effort to coin new terminology. C. W. Mateer wrote thefollowing in the book’s preface:
It will be observed that the list contains a considerable number of
new characters not found in Chinese dictionaries. All such characters arecomposed of a radical and a phonetic, and are to be pronounced inaccordance with the phonetic part. All the rarer elementary substances, aswell as some of the common ones, are so named, also a number of technical terms, for which a single character has been urgently needed, havebeen so rendered. This method avoids confusion while it enriches thelanguage, and will, we venture to predict, be more resorted to in theTranslating Western Concepts by Creating New Characters: A Comparison of Japanese and Chinese Attempts 61

future than it has been in the past.
Terms created from newly-invented characters in this dictionary are mainlyin the medical or chemical fields. In retrospect, C. W. Mateer’s bold prediction was not realized. Mateer said in the preface that his wife had done themajority of the editing of Technical Terms. Ten years later, in 1913, however,Mrs. Mateer wrote in the preface of the New Terms for New Ideas:
They have invented new characters for the new ideas, and one ispuzzled to know how to pronounce them. Only one is given in this book
秒/生 for microbe. This is given by way of contrast. But such will
scarcely become popular. Their own new terms have a distinctly oriental
air about them.
Chinese intellectuals and translators were divided in their opinions on
using newly- invented characters or obsolete, ancient characters to createtranslation terms. Liang Qichao, Huang Zunxian, and Zhang Zhidong wererepresentative of those in favor of the method, while the linguists, Yan fu andHu Yilu, were in the opposing camp.
From the perspective of lexicology, only compound words could increase
the number of new vocabulary terms. The method of inventing new phonetic
forms has gone the way of history. As phonetic forms are limited, it is impossible to succeed in formulating technological terminology simply by relying
on coining more characters. These are the lessons that the missionaries havebequeathed to us.
References:
杉田玄白：《解体新书》，1874年。[SUGITA Genpaku, New Text on Anatomy, 1874.]大槻玄泽：《重订解体新书》，
1826年。 [ŌTSUKI Gentaku, Revised New Text on

Anatomy, 1826.]
沈国威：《近代日中语汇交流史》，
东京：笠间书院，1994年。[SHEN Guowei, A History of

the Exchange of Modern Japanese and Chinese Terms: The Formation andAcceptation of New Words by Chinese Character, Tokyo: Kasama Shoin, 1994.]
王扬宗：《傅兰雅与近代中国的科学启蒙》，
科学出版社，
2000年。 [WANG Yangzong, J.
Fryer and the Science of Enlightenment in Modern China, Beijing: Science
Press, 2000.]王栻主编：《严复集》第5册，中华书局，1986年。[Wang Shi（ed）, Collected Works of YanFu, Beijing: Zhonghua Book Company, 1986.]
J. Fryer, “Scientific Terminology: Present Discrepancies and Means of Securing
Uniformity”, Records of the General Conference of the Protestant Missionaries
of China, American Presbyterian Mission Press, 1890, pp.531–549.