Study Concerning the Nomenclature of Different Points of The Same Name

In 1989 the Japan Acupoints Committee decided upon standard locations for acupoints based upon a rational method of proportional distribution and points of the same names but different locations were expressed by attaching the location indicator before the name such as _??__??__??_. However as study of the naming of points of the same names and different locations is yet incomplete it remains as a topic for further investigation. As one aspect of this investigation I examined related literature from ancient China through the Edo Period in Japan to determine how points of the same names but different locations were expressed and named in an effort to consider how they should be called hereforth. An analysis of the modes of expression in the investigated literature showed that in Japan through the Edo Period for the most part the location of the point was read using the Japanese reading of the Chinese character and the helper article “NO” (meaning of or belonging to) was inserted between the location and the point name, however methods of expression in many cases were not unified. No tendency toward an effort for unified nomenclature was observed, rather points seemed to be named independently. Now that nomenclature is being unified, when we consider the expressions for points of the same names but different locations I propose that we should consider the reading of the special anatomical name, the reading adopted by WHO and the reading of the names of other acupoints compositely, and name the points according to the tonal reading of the Chinese character, for example “Shusanri” for what we have heretofore referred to as Te No Sanri (LI10).