The translation of culture-specific Chinese terms has long been a challenge for experts, with culinary terms being among the most difficult.
On April 29, CNN published a feature titled “Husband-and-wife lung slices? Why translating Chinese food names into English is ‘an impossible task.’” The article explored the complexities of Chinese-to-English translation.
For more than two decades, the English translation of culture-specific Chinese terms has been a focus of my research, and I have published extensively on the topic. CNN’s report aligns with my long standing view: Transliteration should be the primary approach for Chinese dish names, supplemented by semantic translation. Among semantic strategies, literal translation — rendering the original verbatim — is the most commendable.
Borrowing has been the most common method of translation. It has two main forms: loanword and transliteration. If the source and target languages share the same script, loanword is used — for example, English “espresso” from Italian espresso. If the scripts differ, transliteration is used — such as English “jiaozi” from Chinese jiaozi (餃子).
Semantic translation conveys meaning rather than form. It prioritizes fluency and naturalness, often departing from the original wording — for example, translating shizitou (獅子頭) as “meatball.” However, a literal translation could also be used, even if the result seems puzzling — such as translating shizitou as “lion’s head.”
In the past, overly literal translations were criticized as linguistically inept. Today, such translations are increasingly valued for preserving the original cultural context and thought patterns. Their awkwardness can even carry charm, sparking curiosity and engagement. The English idiom “armed to the teeth” was translated into Chinese as wuzhuang dao yachi (武裝到牙齒) — a phrasing that gained popularity for its vivid imagery. Literal translations might seem unsophisticated, but they enrich the target language and culture, whereas overly polished translations risk erasing distinct flavors.
Translating fuqi feipian (夫妻肺片) as “husband-and-wife lung slices,” yuxiang qiezi (魚香茄子) as “fish-fragrant eggplant” and fotiaoqiang (佛跳牆) as “Buddha jumping over the wall” might initially baffle English speakers, but could ultimately foster appreciation. Through that, the cultural depth of Chinese cuisine might gradually enter the global consciousness, broadening linguistic and cultural horizons of the English language.
University of Hong Kong professor Isaac Yue (余文章) and British food writer Fuchsia Dunlop said that Chinese dishes are difficult, if not impossible, to translate due to China’s rich and layered culinary history imagery and ingredients or techniques with no English equivalents.
Dunlop suggested borrowing directly from Chinese through transliteration, or using the Latin alphabet for Chinese terms.
The correspondent echoed the experts’ view that translation is not merely a tool for surface-level communication. It also subtly shapes cultures and fosters mutual understanding. If we assume that transliteration or literal translation would confuse audiences, we underestimate the transformative power of translation. Opting only for idiomatic, instantly comprehensible translations might facilitate communication, but forfeits the chance to showcase cultural richness.
Rather than retreating into an information cocoon, we should embrace the chance to share our profound culinary heritage. With growing cultural confidence, why not leverage translation to project cultural influence, engage the English-speaking world and deepen cross-cultural understanding?
Hugo Tseng has a doctorate in linguistics, and is a lexicographer and former chair of Soochow University’s English Department.
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
RSS