Abstract: Apropos the Chinese version of “ Transzendental” , “先验” , the biggest problem is that the translation is a meaning interpretation rather than a verbal translation of the concept. In the verbal meaning of Transzendental, there is neither “previous（先）” nor “ experience（验）”. It is merely a particular meaning given to Transzendental by a philosopher in a particular period and context. Notably, when the meaning giving and meaning variation of this concept have a long history and maybe a longer coming history, to seek the unity of its translations on the basis of the meaning interpretation at stake would be nothing but a one-sided expenditure. In the long run, most “Transzendental philosophers”, e.g., Schelling, Husserl, and others, and their relevant “Transzendental thoughts” would, alas, be consigned to oblivion under the shadow of Kant’s concept of “先验”, which is unfair to them. What’s more, due to the fact that Transcendental is by no means a concept passing by without any significance but “a fundamental philosophical concept the history of which made prominent once and again the ever-changing destinies of philosophy”, there must be more than one or two philosophers who are involved in here. On this account, the Chinese translation of Transcendental needs to get back on track which, I sincerely believe, will occur sooner or later.