From PhilPapers forum Metaphilosophy:

2011-09-14
"philosophy"/"dorshon"/? ...
[I can see in the preview that Sanjaya Talapatra has had a second posting -- where he mentioned Kant. But for some reason, unknown to me, I cannot get the full view of the posting. Is it same at the other ends too? Thanks to M. Goldman for translating M. Schwab's post into English. Thanks to M. Schwab and all others for their sincerity and seriousness. And my apology -- if I misread or misinterpret anyone's view. I face some trouble for writing (French) e with accent aigu; the technique is still secret to me -- M. Manjali and M. Schwab seem to have no trouble with that. ]

Let us focus on M. Schwab's beautiful posting. What strikes me at the outset is regarding the methodology he is alluding to. In fact he wrote
je partage son point de vue [ de M. Manjali] quant la methode pour traiter notre question
 -- that he shares M. Manjali's point of view regarding the methodology for addressing our question. What is the question? I guess it must be the one I posed in the beginning: What philosophy is called in Chinese or other cultures? Or,  what are the corresponding etymologies/connotations in those cultures? M. Manjali's response was
It would be useful to see the different values of different related terms that suggest the meaning of the word, philosophy, without it being exactly the same thing. ... How do the terms of pensee, philosophie and theorie differ in French, for example? In Malayalam, there are words like tattwachinta, chinta (pensee), darhanam (vision; a rather recent introduction). In Hindi, one even uses the term, darshanshastra (literally, 'vision science')?
So the methodology seems to be at least this much:

1) be careful about context-sensitivity:
We should be very careful that the meanings of "philosophy" or its equivalents/cognates are highly context-sensitive -- in the sense that each word or expression acquire very different meanings depending on its context (of origin?) (To me a classic example of this is M. Goldman's facing problem with translating  French <<considerer>> into English "to consider")
2) go for intra-language comparison:
Even in a same language we may have a number of parallel expressions; we can compare/contrast the meanings of them too.  
But we need more flesh for this methodology. Maybe M. Manjali or M.Schwab can give us more guidance.