Abstract: The primary motivation in this essay stems from the problem consciousness derived from the reality. In the last decades, the relationship has tended to be ambiguous and confusing between landscape design and its theory in the field of landscape architecture. To a certain degree, this condition has disturbed both design practice and academic research. My assumption is that there are three different kinds of relationships between the two: interpretation, self-reference and mutation, on base of which relating function, value, producing mechanism and so on would be introduced in respective categories. Firstly, avoid the confusing situation caused by the misplacement of landscape design and theory as much as possible. Secondly, the definition of the three relationships can not only stimulate the creativity of specific design practices through specific theoretical forms, but also potentially promote the intellectual exploration of landscape architecture. Last but not least, the promotion and development of more elaborated, concrete and oriented design criticism could even be expected in the critical framework of design and theory.