Abnormalities and Return: An Exploration of the Concept Fan 反 in the Laozi
Round 1
Reviewer 1 Report
for reference：馬天笑：〈 老子哲學中「反」的意涵〉，Bachelor of Education (Honours) (Chinese Language) (Four-year Full-time), the Education University of Hong Kong, 2015. http://repository.lib.ied.edu.hk/jspui/handle/2260.2/17375
Author Response
Thank you to this reviewer for the reference.
Reviewer 2 Report
I think the paper would benefit from pointing out that its main focus is a comparative and critical analysis of some contemporary Chinese and Japanese readings of "fan" in the Laozi. Its major point that "fan: should be conceived of as "return" is not original for readers of the English language literature on the Laozi since "return" is a standard translation for this term into English. Thus, for readers with an English language background, the main thesis of the paper may seem redundant.
Author Response
This article does not discuss which English word is the precise translation of "fan" but rather how to understand and interpret correctly the characters fan反 and fan返 in the Laozi. The focus of this article offers a criticism towards previous interpretations of the Laozi that offer different interpretations of 反 and 返 in different passages, and especially when they offer different interpretations in the same passages under the same linguistic context. As a matter of fact, logically speaking, 反 or 返 cannot "simultaneously" have different meanings or several meanings within one passage or within one linguistic context; while the question is if they have different meanings in different passages. This problem is not merely problematic in Chinese or Japanese readings, but in English translations of the Laozi this problem also exists, as different translations render this character differently, below are three examples from well-known translators of the Laozi:
Hall and Ames: chapters 25, 40: returning, chapter 65: turn back, chapter 78 contradictory. Moeller, Hans-Georg: 25 "return" 40 "reversal" 65 "returns" 78 "reverse". Wagner: 25, "return", 40 "negative opposite," 65 "return" 78 "paradoxical."
This article includes the transmitted versions as well as information from excavated materials, according to the philosophical argumentation in the Laozi, it maintains that except for one case (chapter 78), all the fan characters hold one sole meaning which is "return." Cyclicality and transformation between opposites are not what the Laozi wishes to express through the character "fan."
Reviewer 3 Report
Comments on “Abnormalities and Return”
Overall the paper is well-written and deserves publication. There are a great many corrections to be made to its language however (see below), and the following revisions should be addressed by the author:
[1]. On p.2 line 48 the author uses the term “thick consciousness.” What does this mean and why is not mentioned again in the paper or its relevance to Daoism made explicit?
[2]. On p.2 lines 64-66 the author says that fan indicates the return of the myriad things to something (to what, exactly, is not made clear) but on p.3 line 70 the author says fan indicates the return of Dao. Since the Chinese character is the same, the author clarify why the objects of this return are different. The author should also indicate to what the myriad things and Dao return?
[3]. On p.4 line 124 the Hanfeizi is one word and italicized but later uses split the word and randomly italicizes it. The author should double check all instances and correct those referring to the book vs those referring to the person.
[4]. On p.5 line 177 the author writes “Dao urges them to return.” How does Dao do this? Is the author implying Dao has consciousness? Explain and/or revise
[5]. On p.9 the author has one paragraph on Plato that is completely out of place and should be removed.
[6]. Starting on p.10 to the end of the paper, the author includes multiple or very long single quotations. This is unnecessary. The quotations should be reduced in number and length by way of paraphrasing.
[7]. From p.11 through 15, the author gets off-topic with too much discussion of Hanfeizi and the arising of desires/errors. How is this related to Laozi’s concept of return? Laozi does not say humanity should eliminate desires but reduce our dependency on them. Knowing desires are temporary events, Laozi says we should let them go when their moment has passed. I don’t see how discussing the latter thought of Hanfeizi helps us understand the earlier thought of Laozi; the influence is not bidirectional! Better to rewrite these pages since they only serve as a transition to section 3 of the paper.
[8]. On p.15 lines 611 and 614 the author uses the phrase “standards set by Dao.” What does this mean? How is humanity able to recognize these standards as such?
[9]. Page 17 gives two quotations from Zhuangzi but one will suffice.
[10]. Page 18 contains a very long quotation from Mozi; it should be reduced by half or more.
[11]. Footnotes 24, 33, 34, 37 do not have proper citation information. Footnote 34 contains two quotations from the Zhuangzi, why? Better to simply refer the reader to the pages of Watson’s translation. Also, the author gives no references for all quotations from the Daodejing. Whose translation is used and what are the page numbers? If the author is translating these passages, they should state this.
Language Issues:
Footnote 1: second-to-last-line: “what does the concept mean exactly requires.” Poor English.
p.2 lines 28-29: Unnecessary repetition in these line. Revise.
p.2 lines 33-36: Unnecessary repetition in these lines. Revise.
p.2 line 50: “I ask to inquire.” Poor English.
p.3 line 92: “the myriad begins gain.” Should be “myriad beings”
p.4 line 111: “evidently sensed upon this.” Should be “evidently sensed this”
p.4 line 117: “the greatness of Dao the beginning of the cycle.” Poor English.
p.4 line 130: “Dao involves upon all.” Poor English.
p.4 line 151: “it defines that Dao.” Poor English.
p.5 line 158: “However,s there.” Should be “However, there”
p.6 line 206: need a question mark after “(da shun 大順)”
p.6 line 209: need a semi-colon after “compliance:
p.6 line 237: “one example in the Zhuangzi.” Should be “one example. In the Zhuangzi”
p.7 line 264: need a semi-colon after “return”
p.8 line 278: remove the word “for” after “besides”
p.8 line 301: insert the word “of” after “because”
p.8 line 302: insert the word “can” after “back”
p.8 line 310: change “one on hand” to “on the one hand”
p.9 line 361: change “difference” to “different”
p.11 line 406: “change “he should object” to “should he object”
p.13 line 497: “Laozi” should be italicized
p.13 line 498: remove “(encompassing)” since it was stated in previous line
p.20 line 785: change “out of the illness” to “escape the illness”
p.20 line 790: change “return, on surface” to “return, on the surface”
Author Response
I am very thankful to this reader for this sincere reading and comments, my response is as follows:
1. This is a direct and literal translation from my wording in Chinese and has no special significance for this article, i have requested my translator to change this word.
2. That is to return to the nature of things themselves. Since things are separated from Dao, their return is also their way back to Dao. What needs to return are things that deviate from their own nature. Things that do not deviate from their own nature do not have the issue of return. Dao itself does not have the issue of return, it is a constant and fundamental criterion for the myriad things.
3. A simple mistake of my translator, I have asked her to change this.
4. This is a complicated issue. Laozi's Dao does behold some sense of personifications. However, it can urge the things to return through the innate power of this formless Dao itself.
5. This is a comparison, through the comparison we can explain the uniqueness of Laozi.
6. I will treat this issue by eliminating some quotations.
7. Using Hanfeizi's explanation we can further prove that "desires" as it appears in "absence of desires" in the Laozi, refers to greed.
8. Dao was regarded by Laozi as a universal criterion and the highest value, expressed in terms such as "profound efficacy" "imparting and making them complete" and others. This is established by Laozi. By investigating the general meaning of Dao we can understand what there criterions and values refer to.
9. These two quotes can be omitted, but they do serve as textual evidence for this claim.
10. this paragraph has already been shortened. To express to the full what Mozi meant by the development of civilization, this is sufficient.
11. The translator used Ames and Hall's translation of the Daodejing in most places, I have asked her to clarify her choice and add references. (Translations of the excavated materials are her own).
The Chinese text relied on Chen Guying陈鼓应 Laozi jinzhu jinyi 老子今注今译.
As for the language issues, I have passed on these remarks to my translator who is doing her best to treat each and every one of them.
