Abstract

]e essay explores, on the basis of experiences conducted in China, the écart that languages and their stories determine among the keywords of the restoration. ]e essay – starting also from the some books by François Jullien, books dedicated to the gap between Chinese and European languages – highlights difficulties (as in the translation of the word “actionµ) or complexity (as in the case of the translation of the word “identityµ) in prefiguring a common glossary. Instead, it emerges that languages are fundamental resources in questioning theories and practices as resources and the restoration as mixed knowledge.