Jon Kabat-Zinn's estimable (2013) Full Catastrophe Living (Revised edition): Using the Wisdom of Your Body and Mind to Face Stress, Pain, and Illness has an odd "Chinese character for X" blooper: "Maybe there is something to be learned from the fact that the Chinese character for 'breakthrough' is written as 'turning'" (e-book loc 8495, last sentence in chap 12).
I can't find this claim made elsewhere, and none of the usual suspects for "breakthrough" means "turn": tūpò 突破, tūwéi 突圍, dǎtōng 打通, dǎpò 打破, kāitong 開通, dǎchuān 打穿, chuāntòu 穿透, tūwéi 突圍, kuìwéi 潰圍, etc.
Perhaps Kabat-Zinn was thinking of zhuǎnzhé 转折 (lit., "turn-break / twist / bend / snap / turn back", etc., etc.). If so, there are two main problems with his claim that "the Chinese character for 'breakthrough' is written as 'turning'", viz.:
1. zhuǎnzhé 转折 is not a character; it is a word consisting of two characters / syllables
2. zhuǎnzhé 转折 does not mean "breakthrough"; it means "transition" or "turn in the course of events"
Kabat-Zinn's claim that "the Chinese character for 'breakthrough' is written as 'turning'" reminds me of the oft-repeated assertion the "the Chinese character for crisis = danger + opportunity", which is false on two similar grounds:
1. wēijī 危 机 is not a character; it is a word consisting of two characters / syllables
2. wēijī 危机 does not mean "danger + opportunity"; it means "crisis"
See "danger + opportunity ≠ crisis: How a misunderstanding about Chinese characters has led many astray".
Failing to distinguish between character and word has bedeviled many a reader of Chinese, both native and foreign.
[Thanks to Michael Carr]