Page 64 - JCAU-7-2

Journal of Chinese

Architecture and Urbanism

ORIGINAL ARTICLE
Ting or Chinese pavilion: The history of a

Chinese architectural type and its translation in
transcultural scholarship

Dustin B. Chen 1 and Lala Zuo *
2
1 Department of Art & Archaeology, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey, United States of
America
2 Department of Global China Studies, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, New York University Shanghai,
Shanghai, China
(This article belongs to Special Issue: Troublesome Terms in the History of Traditional Chinese
Architecture)

Abstract

The translation of Chinese architectural types in transcultural scholarship faces two
primary challenges: The ambiguous meaning of the term within its original cultural
context and the broad connotations and usages of the corresponding English term,
which often exceed those of the original. The Chinese architectural type ting, in
*Corresponding author: particular, has been variously translated as “kiosk,” “gazebo,” and “pavilion” in previous
Lala Zuo scholarship. These translations, however, influenced by European architectural
(lz2488@nyu.edu) history, have led to inaccuracies, compounded by inconsistent references to other
Citation: Chen, D.B. & Zuo, L. building types such as ge and xie. A chronological review of ting’s architectural reveals
(2025). Ting or Chinese pavilion: significant changes in its historical forms and functions. In the Han dynasty (206 BCE –
The history of a Chinese 220 CE), ting was primarily a military facility of considerable height, later transitioning
architectural type and its translation
in transcultural scholarship. Journal during the Wei-Jin dynasties (220 – 420) into a geographical landmark and a venue for
of Chinese Architecture and literati activities. By the Tang dynasty (618 – 907), its elevated structure diminished,
Urbanism, 7(2): 4107. and its role in literati culture became more versatile. During the Song dynasty (960
https://doi.org/10.36922/jcau.4107
– 1279), ting evolved into a roofed open structure, closely associated with xie in the
Received: September 9, 2024 Yingzao Fashi. By the Ming (1368 – 1644) and Qing (1644 – 1912) dynasties, ting had
Revised: September 9, 2024 stabilized as “an architecture with a roof but without enclosing walls,” characterized
by its great flexibility in construction. This historical complexity makes coining a
Accepted: September 23, 2024
singular equivalent term for ting inadequate. Instead, this article advocates for thick
Published online: December 13, translations that situate ting within its spatial-temporal context through illustrations,
2024
annotations, and detailed explanations, addressing its intricate historical and cultural
Copyright: © 2024 Author(s). nuances alongside related building types.
This is an open-access article
distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution-
Non-Commercial 4.0 International Keywords: Chinese architectural type; Ting; Chinese pavilion; Kiosk; Gazebo; Chronology
(CC BY-NC 4.0), which permits all of architectural types; Translation studies; Transcultural scholarship
non-commercial use, distribution,
and reproduction in any medium,
provided the original work is
properly cited. 1. Introduction
Publisher’s Note: AccScience
Publishing remains neutral with In the Oxford Dictionary of Architecture (3 . ed.), the Chinese architectural term ting (亭)
rd
regard to jurisdictional claims in
published maps and institutional is defined as a “Chinese pavilion, roofed, but with no walls” (Curl & Wilson, 2021, https://
affiliations. www.oxfordreference.com/display/10.1093/acref/9780199674985.001.0001/acref-

Volume 7 Issue 2 (2025) 1 https://doi.org/10.36922/jcau.4107