Daoism or Taoism:
Why Are There Two Spellings?

If you have started reading about Daoism, you may have already run into a confusing question.

Is it Daoism or Taoism?

You may see the Dao De Ching in one book and the Tao Te Ching in another. One author writes Laozi, while another writes Lao-tzu. You may even wonder whether they are talking about different traditions.

They are not.

Daoism and Taoism refer to the same Chinese tradition. The difference comes primarily from two different systems for writing Chinese words with the Roman alphabet.

At Dragon Phoenix, I normally use Daoism, Dao, Dao De Ching, and Laozi, because these follow the Pinyin spellings most commonly used in modern scholarship. But if you pick up an older book and find Taoism, Tao Te Ching, or Lao-tzu, you have not wandered into a different philosophy.

You are simply seeing another way of representing the same Chinese words.

Daoism and Taoism Are Different Romanizations

The first thing to understand is that Dao and Tao are not two different translations of the Chinese word.

They are two romanizations.

Romanization means using the Roman alphabet—the letters used in English and many other languages—to represent words originally written in another writing system.

The Chinese character in question is:

道

Whether an English-language book writes this word as Dao or Tao, the Chinese character has not changed.

For much of the twentieth century, English-language scholarship commonly used a romanization system known as Wade-Giles. More recent scholarship generally uses Hanyu Pinyin, usually shortened simply to Pinyin. Oxford's overview of Daoist scholarship notes that older English-language studies commonly use Wade-Giles, while more recent works tend to use Pinyin.

In Wade-Giles:

Tao

In Pinyin:

Dao

Same word.

Different system.

What Is Wade-Giles?

The Wade-Giles system developed from the work of nineteenth-century British diplomat and scholar Thomas Francis Wade and was later modified and developed by Herbert A. Giles.

Wade published an early version of the system in 1859, and Giles incorporated its later form into his influential Chinese-English dictionary. It eventually became the dominant method of writing Chinese names and terms in much English-language scholarship.

That is why so many older books use spellings such as:

Wade-GilesPinyinTaoDaoTaoismDaoismLao-tzuLaoziChuang-tzuZhuangziTao Te ChingDaodejingI ChingYijing

If you spend much time reading older books on Chinese philosophy, history, or martial arts, it is helpful to become comfortable recognizing both systems.

You will encounter both.

What Is Pinyin?

Hanyu Pinyin is the romanization system now most commonly used for Mandarin Chinese internationally and in modern academic writing.

The People's Republic of China approved Pinyin in 1958, and it gradually replaced Wade-Giles in much international scholarship, publishing, education, mapping, and other uses. Cambridge linguistic sources describe Pinyin as the standard transcription system that eventually replaced Wade-Giles as the dominant method of romanizing Mandarin.

This change explains something you may already have noticed outside Daoism.

Older English-language sources often wrote:

Peking

Modern sources normally write:

Beijing

Similarly:

Mao Tse-tung became Mao Zedong.

Chuang-tzu became Zhuangzi.

And Tao became Dao.

The places, people, texts, and ideas did not suddenly change.

The spelling system did.

Why Does a “T” Become a “D”?

This part can seem strange.

If the word was once written Tao, why would modern scholars suddenly decide that the first letter should be a D?

The answer has to do with how the two systems represent Chinese sounds.

Mandarin distinguishes certain consonants partly by aspiration—whether there is a noticeable puff of air accompanying the sound. Wade-Giles and Pinyin chose different ways of showing that distinction.

In Wade-Giles, a sound represented in Pinyin with d was written with t, while the corresponding aspirated sound was written t', using an apostrophe.

Pinyin instead uses d and t.

The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy specifically notes that this difference in romanization is the reason Taoism and Daoism coexist in English.

There is another important point here.

Pinyin letters do not always represent sounds exactly as an English speaker expects them to.

The Pinyin d in Dao is not identical to a strongly voiced English d. Likewise, the older spelling Tao should not necessarily be pronounced exactly as an English speaker might pronounce a word beginning with t.

Romanization is an attempt to represent one language using the writing system of another.

Something is always lost along the way.

So How Do You Pronounce Dao?

For an English-speaking beginner, Dao is often approximated as something like “dow,” rhyming roughly with how.

That is more useful than looking at the old spelling Tao and assuming it should sound like the English word towel without the final l, or giving it a strongly aspirated English t.

But English approximations are still approximations.

If you continue studying Chinese philosophy, martial arts, or Chinese language, you will gradually discover that Pinyin is a pronunciation system of its own. Learning how its letters work is more useful than assuming every letter corresponds precisely to its English pronunciation.

Fortunately, you do not have to master Mandarin pronunciation before you can begin studying Dao philosophy.

Is “Taoism” Wrong?

No.

Taoism is not simply a misspelling of Daoism.

It is an established English spelling produced by the Wade-Giles romanization system, and it has been used in English for generations.

Thousands of important books, translations, and scholarly works use Taoism. Many remain well worth reading.

There is therefore no reason to dismiss a book simply because it says Tao instead of Dao.

At the same time, Daoism is generally the more useful spelling for contemporary study because Pinyin is now the standard system used in most recent academic publications.

That is why I generally use Daoism at Dragon Phoenix.

It also makes it easier for students to move between modern books and recognize related Pinyin terms such as Laozi, Zhuangzi, Daodejing, and Yijing.

Is It Dao De Ching, Daodejing, or Tao Te Ching?

This creates another layer of confusion.

You may encounter all three:

Tao Te Ching

Dao Te Ching

Dao De Ching

And in academic publications:

Daodejing

Again, these normally refer to the same text.

Tao Te Ching reflects older Wade-Giles conventions.

Daodejing follows standard Pinyin and writes the title as one word.

Dao De Ching is a mixed form that has become familiar in English-language usage. It retains the recognizable three-part title while using Dao rather than Tao.

At Dragon Phoenix, I generally use Dao De Ching because it is familiar and readable for English-speaking students. If you encounter Daodejing in scholarly writing or Tao Te Ching in an older translation, however, all three are directing you toward the same classic text.

The spelling should not become more important than the teaching.

Older Spellings Can Help You Find Valuable Books

There is actually a practical benefit to knowing both systems.

Suppose you are researching Zhuangzi.

If you search only for that spelling, you may overlook older translations, articles, and books catalogued under Chuang-tzu.

The same applies to:

Laozi / Lao-tzu

Dao / Tao

Daoism / Taoism

Daodejing / Tao Te Ching

Yijing / I Ching

Learning a few of these equivalents opens a much larger library.

Oxford's bibliography of Daoist scholarship explicitly warns readers of this issue because so much important twentieth-century research used Wade-Giles spellings.

So when you encounter an unfamiliar spelling in an older book, do not immediately assume that you have discovered an entirely different person or text.

Sometimes you have simply changed romanization systems.

Which Spelling Should You Use?

For most people beginning their study today, I recommend becoming familiar with Daoism while recognizing Taoism when you encounter it.

The same principle works with other names:

Learn Laozi, but recognize Lao-tzu.

Learn Zhuangzi, but recognize Chuang-tzu.

Learn Dao De Ching or Daodejing, but recognize Tao Te Ching.

There is little value in turning the spelling into an argument over who is studying Daoism correctly.

Language changes.

Academic conventions change.

The interesting question is what the texts are asking us to consider.

A person can spell Dao perfectly and still miss the point of the Dao De Ching.

Someone else can own a fifty-year-old copy of the Tao Te Ching and spend a lifetime thoughtfully considering what it has to say.

Which of those matters more?

Continuing Your Study of Dao Philosophy

If questions like this arise as you begin reading Daoist texts, they are worth exploring. Understanding some of the language, history, and cultural background can help us approach an old teaching more carefully rather than assuming that an English word tells us everything.

The Dragon Phoenix Dao Philosophy Membership, part of the Dragon Phoenix Online Academy, is designed for people who would like to explore Dao philosophy in this way without needing to practice martial arts.

Members receive immediate access to approximately 100 short video lectures, generally 4–15 minutes each, exploring the Dao De Ching, Lieh Tzu, I-Ching, Internal Alchemy, and related ideas. New lectures are added regularly, typically around two each week. There is no prerequisite knowledge, required viewing order, quiz, assessment, or martial arts training.

Optional discussions give members a place to share interpretations and questions, although participation is not required. I contribute to those discussions from time to time, and students are equally welcome simply to watch, read, and reflect quietly. The membership is currently $15 per month or $150 per year; Online Academy members whose existing membership includes Dao Philosophy already have access.

Whether the cover of your book says Daoism or Taoism, the more interesting journey begins after you open it.

Scholarly Sources and Further Reading

Chan, Alan K. L. “Daoism.” Oxford Bibliographies in Chinese Studies. Oxford University Press, 2013.

Duanmu, San. The Phonology of Standard Chinese. Cambridge University Press. Discussion of Chinese pronunciation and romanization conventions.

Kaske, Elisabeth. The Politics of Language in Chinese Education, 1895–1919. Brill. For broader historical context on Chinese language reform and transcription.

Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. “Taoism: Notes.” Discussion of the Wade-Giles and Pinyin spellings Taoism and Daoism.