<p>have a look of this topic: <a href="https://chinese.stackexchange.com/questions/34074/word-count-in-classical-chinese-vs-english">Word count in Classical Chinese vs English</a></p>

<p>now, be calm; please. the quoted wikipedia entry is, imo, unacceptable, in classical / literary chinese. so, your translation and comparison is, invalid. remember:</p>

<p>"<strong>garbage in, garbage out</strong>"</p>

<p>i assumed your understand the difference between classical chinese and literary chinese. the internet archive have books printed in chinese and english; that you might do a empirical research.</p>

<p><a href="https://archive.org/details/fourbooksgreatle00confuoft/page/n6" rel="nofollow noreferrer">華英對照四書</a></p>

<p><a href="https://archive.org/details/zhushijiaozhengh00legg/page/n6" rel="nofollow noreferrer">註釋校正華英四書</a></p>

<p>james legge's english translation is quite good, you can depend on it. e.g.:</p>

<p>孟子　盡心上 chapter 6</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>孟子曰．人不可以無恥．無恥之恥．無恥矣</p>
</blockquote>

<p>mencius said, "a man may not be without shame. when one is ashamed of having been without shame, he will afterwards not have occasion for shame."</p>

<p><strong>16</strong> chinese words vs <strong>26</strong> english words.</p>

<p>孟子　盡心上 chapter 7</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>孟子曰．恥之於人大矣．為機變之巧者．無所用恥焉．不恥不若人．何若人有</p>
</blockquote>

<p>mencius said, "the sense of shame is to a man of great importance."</p>

<p>"those who form contrivances and versatile schemes distinguished for their artfulness, do not allow their sense of shame to come into action."</p>

<p>"when one differs from other men in not having this sense of shame, what will he have in common with them?"</p>

<p><strong>30</strong> chinese words vs <strong>56</strong> english words.</p>

<p><a href="https://i.sstatic.net/gFnUs.jpg" rel="nofollow noreferrer"><img src="https://i.sstatic.net/gFnUs.jpg" alt="enter image description here"></a></p>

<p>last,</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Is there a rule of thumb?</p>
</blockquote>

<p>no. i don't think so.</p>

<p>ps, just curious, where and why students need to learn classical chinese in english?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-05-26T16:17:01.697Z
Because students only know one language before they start, English. Somewhere in a college
炸鱼薯条德里克
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-05-27T09:07:45.640Z
This is helpful, many thanks. To your question: because classical and literary Chinese studies are part of any reputable university degree in Chinese Studies, in the West. It's like an abbreviated version of 国学.
Matt S.
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-05-27T09:09:17.357Z
Also, are you referring to James Legge? (Not "League").
Matt S.
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-05-27T10:11:07.767Z
omg, my apologies  an severe error, sorry 
水巷孑蠻
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-05-27T10:22:10.220Z
@matt s, part of a degree course? how many hours one spend for? may i say, “poor soul”
水巷孑蠻
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-05-26T08:52:54.577Z
2019-05-27T10:06:31.170Z
2019-05-27T10:06:31.170Z
水巷孑蠻
<p>Apologies if the title isn't clear, I'm not sure how to express this.</p>

<p>I'm trying to establish roughly how many words a Classical Chinese text results in, once translated into English. Classical Chinese being an extremely concise language, I imagine a translation into English should render at least twice as many words--but is there an approximation?</p>

<p>For example, if I take the first sentence of the classical Chinese-language Wikipedia entry for "<a href="https://zh-classical.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%96%87%E8%A8%80" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Classical Chinese</a>" ("文言"):</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>文言者，華夏、四裔所以書其言，而述志表情也。</p>
</blockquote>

<p>A fairly liberal English translation (my own) might render this:</p>

<blockquote>
  <p>Classical Chinese is how China and [its] frontier lands wrote their
  language, stated their ideals, and expressed their feelings.</p>
</blockquote>

<p>This yields a Classical Chinese to English word count ratio of nearly 1:1 (here, it's 18:19), which is suspect, in that the brevity of the former is underrepresented; I'd expect something closer to 1:2.</p>

<p>At a stretch, everything after the last comma in the original sentence could be translated simply as "and expressed themselves", giving a ratio of 6:5, which is absurd, because any beginning student of Classical Chinese knows that it isn't wordier than English!</p>

<p>Also, it doesn't strike me as meaningful to attempt to generate a heuristic from a sole example.</p>

<p>Is there a rule of thumb?</p>

CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-05-26T08:02:38.800Z
Roughly speaking, a character in 文言 is equivalent to a word in English. Due to the culture difference, English translation may use more words to fully convey its original meanings, or use other shorter but valid expressions. The brevity of Classical Chinese refers mainly to its "size" and less syllables. Printed in the same font size, a less-than-a-line Classical Chinese sentence is much shorter than its two-and-half-line English counterpart. And it has exactly 18 syllables, much fewer doesn't it?
Toosky Hierot
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-05-26T08:07:03.140Z
The actual things are much more complicated, however, since I am no linguist, I am not able to discuss further on it.
Toosky Hierot
CC BY-SA 4.0
2019-05-26T16:19:32.190Z
It's obvious that the ratio depends on translation and how you count the words. Word separation can't be precisely defined in human language.
炸鱼薯条德里克
<translation><classical-chinese><literary-chinese><old-chinese>
Word count in Classical Chinese vs English
# Word count in Classical Chinese vs English

(Asked by: username_0 on 2019-05-26)

Apologies if the title isn't clear, I'm not sure how to express this.

I'm trying to establish roughly how many words a Classical Chinese text results in, once translated into English. Classical Chinese being an extremely concise language, I imagine a translation into English should render at least twice as many words--but is there an approximation?

For example, if I take the first sentence of the classical Chinese-language Wikipedia entry for "[Classical Chinese](https://zh-classical.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E6%96%87%E8%A8%80)" ("文言"):

> 文言者，華夏、四裔所以書其言，而述志表情也。

A fairly liberal English translation (my own) might render this:

> Classical Chinese is how China and [its] frontier lands wrote their
> language, stated their ideals, and expressed their feelings.

This yields a Classical Chinese to English word count ratio of nearly 1:1 (here, it's 18:19), which is suspect, in that the brevity of the former is underrepresented; I'd expect something closer to 1:2.

At a stretch, everything after the last comma in the original sentence could be translated simply as "and expressed themselves", giving a ratio of 6:5, which is absurd, because any beginning student of Classical Chinese knows that it isn't wordier than English!

Also, it doesn't strike me as meaningful to attempt to generate a heuristic from a sole example.

Is there a rule of thumb?

**Tags:** translation, classical-chinese, literary-chinese, old-chinese

> **Comments:**
> **username_1**: Roughly speaking, a character in 文言 is equivalent to a word in English. Due to the culture difference, English translation may use more words to fully convey its original meanings, or use other shorter but valid expressions. The brevity of Classical Chinese refers mainly to its "size" and less syllables. Printed in the same font size, a less-than-a-line Classical Chinese sentence is much shorter than its two-and-half-line English counterpart. And it has exactly 18 syllables, much fewer doesn't it?  
> **username_1**: The actual things are much more complicated, however, since I am no linguist, I am not able to discuss further on it.  
> **username_2**: It's obvious that the ratio depends on translation and how you count the words. Word separation can't be precisely defined in human language.  

---

## 1 answers

### Answer by username_3 on 2019-05-26. Score: 1 | Accepted answer

have a look of this topic: [Word count in Classical Chinese vs English](https://chinese.stackexchange.com/questions/34074/word-count-in-classical-chinese-vs-english)

now, be calm; please. the quoted wikipedia entry is, imo, unacceptable, in classical / literary chinese. so, your translation and comparison is, invalid. remember:

"**garbage in, garbage out**"

i assumed your understand the difference between classical chinese and literary chinese. the internet archive have books printed in chinese and english; that you might do a empirical research.

[華英對照四書](https://archive.org/details/fourbooksgreatle00confuoft/page/n6)

[註釋校正華英四書](https://archive.org/details/zhushijiaozhengh00legg/page/n6)

james legge's english translation is quite good, you can depend on it. e.g.:

孟子　盡心上 chapter 6

> 孟子曰．人不可以無恥．無恥之恥．無恥矣

mencius said, "a man may not be without shame. when one is ashamed of having been without shame, he will afterwards not have occasion for shame."

**16** chinese words vs **26** english words.

孟子　盡心上 chapter 7

> 孟子曰．恥之於人大矣．為機變之巧者．無所用恥焉．不恥不若人．何若人有

mencius said, "the sense of shame is to a man of great importance."

"those who form contrivances and versatile schemes distinguished for their artfulness, do not allow their sense of shame to come into action."

"when one differs from other men in not having this sense of shame, what will he have in common with them?"

**30** chinese words vs **56** english words.

[![enter image description here](https://i.sstatic.net/gFnUs.jpg)](https://i.sstatic.net/gFnUs.jpg)

last,

> Is there a rule of thumb?

no. i don't think so.

ps, just curious, where and why students need to learn classical chinese in english?

> **Comments:**
> **username_2**: Because students only know one language before they start, English. Somewhere in a college  
> **username_0**: This is helpful, many thanks. To your question: because classical and literary Chinese studies are part of any reputable university degree in Chinese Studies, in the West. It's like an abbreviated version of 国学.  
> **username_0**: Also, are you referring to James Legge? (Not "League").  
> **username_3**: omg, my apologies  an severe error, sorry   
> **username_3**: @matt s, part of a degree course? how many hours one spend for? may i say, “poor soul”  

---

