Which language uses up more trees, everything else being equal?
October 21, 2008 3:01 PM Subscribe
Slightly-random-but-interesting-filter: I've noticed that French books tend to be longer than English books, and German books tend to be longer than both. If given a normally written (so no really fancy words, just sort of... average) English book of 100 pages, which language of translation (using same font and size, as well as same sized pages) would make it the longest? the shortest? Bonus points for approximate page numbers! (thanks!)
Finnish, because of the way words are constructed, has some truly astonishingly long words. I've not actually studied the language but I know some Finns and we have talked about it.
Now, whether or not it causes a translation to take up more space on the page or not is difficult to judge. Maybe less because there are fewer spaces as a single Finnish word contains (potentially) several English words.
Frankly, I think there is no possible way to estimate translation length, even if you remove idioms from the equation and just go for literal translation, but I'm willing to be wrong.
posted by trinity8-director at 3:25 PM on October 21, 2008
Now, whether or not it causes a translation to take up more space on the page or not is difficult to judge. Maybe less because there are fewer spaces as a single Finnish word contains (potentially) several English words.
Frankly, I think there is no possible way to estimate translation length, even if you remove idioms from the equation and just go for literal translation, but I'm willing to be wrong.
posted by trinity8-director at 3:25 PM on October 21, 2008
I can't give you hard data, but in my experience localizing games and software languages other than English, the general rule is to leave about 20% extra space for German and Spanish in your user interface. I've heard a lot of English-speaking developers lament or make fun of German for having longer words, but in my experience, that's not exactly the case. To my understanding, it's just that when phrasing in German, lots of words are compounded, thus creating the need for more line breaks, which will make your paragraphs longer. Spanish, however, seems to use a lot more words than a similar phrase in English, and the words do seem to often be longer. The same goes for Italian, although not nearly as dramatically. The differences in French seem to me to be negligible, in terms of space.
So, based on this COMPLETELY ANECDOTAL and likely useless evidence, and accounting only for Romantic languages (when it comes to alternate alphabets, all bets are off) I would say your 100 page English book would probably be longest in German and/or Spanish.
posted by pazazygeek at 3:27 PM on October 21, 2008
So, based on this COMPLETELY ANECDOTAL and likely useless evidence, and accounting only for Romantic languages (when it comes to alternate alphabets, all bets are off) I would say your 100 page English book would probably be longest in German and/or Spanish.
posted by pazazygeek at 3:27 PM on October 21, 2008
I'm seconding pazazygeek from localization experience.
posted by Netzapper at 3:39 PM on October 21, 2008
posted by Netzapper at 3:39 PM on October 21, 2008
Whether German is a romantic language or not, I don't know. But I can tell you it's not a Romance language.
I'd compare lengths of Bibles. Pretty widely translated.
posted by sbutler at 4:06 PM on October 21, 2008
I'd compare lengths of Bibles. Pretty widely translated.
posted by sbutler at 4:06 PM on October 21, 2008
Many many years ago I was a volume editor on the creation of a new set of encyclopedias. The set was to be compiled in English as the core language and then translated out into other languages as and when necessary, though South American Spanish was already contracted. The calculation we worked on for translation was to allow up to 15% expansion through translation, though as the individual volumes had to have the same number of pages in each language the expansion (or contraction) was to be dealt with via font sizes and tracking. German – it was really a best guess at the time – was supposed to fit in the same expansion space.
It sometimes got a little tricky with small units of information (I guess this is why it seems more like 20% to pazazygeek), but mostly that was dealt with by top and bottom margins. Illustrations, also, got a little fiddly; since the idea was that nothing would be hard labelled, labelling was done on a different layer in DTP. What the fiddle meant was that you could use the same underlying artwork, but run out new plates for the labels in the individual languages. Again dealt with mostly in font sizes.
As to which individual language would translate out the longest, I don't know and once you get outside European languages I really wouldn't have a clue.
I did once work on an international dictionary of printing, which was printed in one volume containing translations in 9 different languages, and I seem to remember the space problem was mostly with Swedish, but that was possibly more to do with the subject.
</wibble>
posted by mandal at 4:19 PM on October 21, 2008
It sometimes got a little tricky with small units of information (I guess this is why it seems more like 20% to pazazygeek), but mostly that was dealt with by top and bottom margins. Illustrations, also, got a little fiddly; since the idea was that nothing would be hard labelled, labelling was done on a different layer in DTP. What the fiddle meant was that you could use the same underlying artwork, but run out new plates for the labels in the individual languages. Again dealt with mostly in font sizes.
As to which individual language would translate out the longest, I don't know and once you get outside European languages I really wouldn't have a clue.
I did once work on an international dictionary of printing, which was printed in one volume containing translations in 9 different languages, and I seem to remember the space problem was mostly with Swedish, but that was possibly more to do with the subject.
</wibble>
posted by mandal at 4:19 PM on October 21, 2008
(I had the semi-clever idea to compare the translations of the EU Treaty of Lisbon, but apparently they adjust the line spacing so that every page covers the same content. Stupid EU.)
Actually, that's a great idea. The Treaty is available in many languages as a PDF, so it would be relatively simple to copy and paste the text into Word or something and try it out.
posted by oulipian at 4:20 PM on October 21, 2008
Actually, that's a great idea. The Treaty is available in many languages as a PDF, so it would be relatively simple to copy and paste the text into Word or something and try it out.
posted by oulipian at 4:20 PM on October 21, 2008
In my youth, I do lots of work typesetting in French and English. There was never a significant difference in length.
posted by rokusan at 4:36 PM on October 21, 2008
posted by rokusan at 4:36 PM on October 21, 2008
I've worked on two books that have been translated (one into Spanish, the other into German). We estimated about an additional 15% for the Spanish and 20% for the German, but I have the sense that each of them turned out even a little longer than that (though that may be because they were art books that included a fair amount of specialized terms, etc.). The additional text was dealt with by adjusting the design specs and layout, so that the page count remained unchanged.
posted by scody at 5:32 PM on October 21, 2008
posted by scody at 5:32 PM on October 21, 2008
In my youth, I do lots of work typesetting in French...
And, apparently, proto-Hungarian. "Did" was the word I needed there. :)
posted by rokusan at 5:46 PM on October 21, 2008
And, apparently, proto-Hungarian. "Did" was the word I needed there. :)
posted by rokusan at 5:46 PM on October 21, 2008
Japanese is an interesting case for this. Regarding the spoken language, words are generally longer than at least and English equivalent (compare "Watashi wa tabemashita"--8 syllables vs. "I ate."--2 syllables) There are exceptions to this, in which an English expression is longer, but generally Japanese is very verbose. See that scene in Lost in Translation in which the director gives orders in Japanese to Bill Murray at the tv commercial shoot, but when Murray gets the English translation, it's much, much shorter. The movie exaggerates this, but it's got a kernel of truth there. There are cultural reasons for this, too.
But a typical Japanese book, say, a novel, is much slimmer (to my eye) than a Western version. Kanji, I suppose, can convey more information in a smaller space on the page.
posted by zardoz at 6:06 PM on October 21, 2008
But a typical Japanese book, say, a novel, is much slimmer (to my eye) than a Western version. Kanji, I suppose, can convey more information in a smaller space on the page.
posted by zardoz at 6:06 PM on October 21, 2008
I have translated a few books from English to French; publishers generally expect +10% to 15%. Although I prided myself to be able to do -10% sometimes. :-)
For more accurate data for English vs French, I suggest to use smackfu's idea with the Government of Canada's website: on almost any page, you can switch from English to French and vice versa.
posted by bru at 6:49 PM on October 21, 2008
For more accurate data for English vs French, I suggest to use smackfu's idea with the Government of Canada's website: on almost any page, you can switch from English to French and vice versa.
posted by bru at 6:49 PM on October 21, 2008
There was a Harper's article on this many years ago I think. It basically said that English was the most concise language. They compared translations of the bible I think and English was the shortest in words and syllables. It also mentioned that English has a lot of expressions that are very efficient, such as "First come, first served."
posted by Wayman Tisdale at 10:01 PM on October 21, 2008
posted by Wayman Tisdale at 10:01 PM on October 21, 2008
I believe that the more analytic a language's structure is, the more concise it tends to be. But this is a gross generalization. Agglutinative languages can sometimes express things very beautifully in just a few "words" (and that's in parentheses because one word in a language like Hungarian might be four or five words in English . . . today I used the word "with my female friends," which is only one word in Hungarian . . . "barátnőimmel.")
Assuming you're using the same alphabet, English would be on the low side of number of pages. To be fair, I've found (as a speaker of many languages, with English not as my native one) that written English tends to be a little more casual and less specific than other written languages . . . which makes comparison more difficult. For instance, where I am now, I've seen signs outside gates which say (in Romanian): Warning, bad dog! But the Hungarians who live here have signs which say (in Hungarian): Watch out, my vicious dog may attack! Romanian's a fairly analytic language, Hungarian a fairly agglutinative one, but the difference in length of the message has more to do with the sensibilities involved in how one expresses something than the language per se. (In Sarajevo, where I'm from, we would rarely even post a sign about a dog at all!)
To put it another way, I'm always amazed to see three languages expressing the same thing side-by-side and realize that one says (in the first language) "It is kindly requested that you please fasten your seatbelt for increased safety," and one in a second language will simply say "Fasten your seatbelt." So to really make a comparison, you have to examine whether the same thing is being said.
Yesterday while in Hungary, I was buying a ticket to Cluj, Romania (Kolozsvár in Hungarian), and the way you do that is to go to the clerk and say:
"Jó napot kivánok! Kolozsvárra szeretnek menni."
Which is to say, somewhat literally:
"Good day, I bid you! To Kolozsvár I would like to go."
The English looks slightly longer than the Hungarian. But in reality, in English you wouldn't say it like that. I'd probably say:
"One ticket for Kolozsvár, please."
And in that case the English is more concise than the Hungarian.
You could say it more concisely in Hungarian than what I wrote above, but few people really would, and when translating something, it seems more important (at least to me) to accurately convey the natural "sense" of the language than a word for word precise equivalent. (Which is impossible most of the time anyway, words and language don't have mirror equivalents often enough.) To say it more concisely in Hungarian would tack on a certain amount of rudeness missing in the English way of asking.
So for those reasons, it's a difficult question to answer. Hungarian would be pretty long, Estonian and Finnish long too, but shorter than Hungarian. German seems the longest of the Germanic languages. Spanish seems the longest of the Romance languages. Serbo-Croatian seems (to me, a native speaker) more concise than English. English is very concise, but it's very unlikely it's the most concise, I think that's just a sort of wishful bit of linguistic nationalism on the part of Harper's! (For example, "First come, first served" is an idiom I don't know in other languages, but the sentiment could be expressed in four words or less in most of the languages I know, and people would get it.)
posted by Dee Xtrovert at 1:32 AM on October 22, 2008 [2 favorites]
Assuming you're using the same alphabet, English would be on the low side of number of pages. To be fair, I've found (as a speaker of many languages, with English not as my native one) that written English tends to be a little more casual and less specific than other written languages . . . which makes comparison more difficult. For instance, where I am now, I've seen signs outside gates which say (in Romanian): Warning, bad dog! But the Hungarians who live here have signs which say (in Hungarian): Watch out, my vicious dog may attack! Romanian's a fairly analytic language, Hungarian a fairly agglutinative one, but the difference in length of the message has more to do with the sensibilities involved in how one expresses something than the language per se. (In Sarajevo, where I'm from, we would rarely even post a sign about a dog at all!)
To put it another way, I'm always amazed to see three languages expressing the same thing side-by-side and realize that one says (in the first language) "It is kindly requested that you please fasten your seatbelt for increased safety," and one in a second language will simply say "Fasten your seatbelt." So to really make a comparison, you have to examine whether the same thing is being said.
Yesterday while in Hungary, I was buying a ticket to Cluj, Romania (Kolozsvár in Hungarian), and the way you do that is to go to the clerk and say:
"Jó napot kivánok! Kolozsvárra szeretnek menni."
Which is to say, somewhat literally:
"Good day, I bid you! To Kolozsvár I would like to go."
The English looks slightly longer than the Hungarian. But in reality, in English you wouldn't say it like that. I'd probably say:
"One ticket for Kolozsvár, please."
And in that case the English is more concise than the Hungarian.
You could say it more concisely in Hungarian than what I wrote above, but few people really would, and when translating something, it seems more important (at least to me) to accurately convey the natural "sense" of the language than a word for word precise equivalent. (Which is impossible most of the time anyway, words and language don't have mirror equivalents often enough.) To say it more concisely in Hungarian would tack on a certain amount of rudeness missing in the English way of asking.
So for those reasons, it's a difficult question to answer. Hungarian would be pretty long, Estonian and Finnish long too, but shorter than Hungarian. German seems the longest of the Germanic languages. Spanish seems the longest of the Romance languages. Serbo-Croatian seems (to me, a native speaker) more concise than English. English is very concise, but it's very unlikely it's the most concise, I think that's just a sort of wishful bit of linguistic nationalism on the part of Harper's! (For example, "First come, first served" is an idiom I don't know in other languages, but the sentiment could be expressed in four words or less in most of the languages I know, and people would get it.)
posted by Dee Xtrovert at 1:32 AM on October 22, 2008 [2 favorites]
Then again, most Japanese books are not written in polite, zero-context sentences either. Often, subjects and particles are omitted as obvious from context, or as the level of politeness changes.
Compare "I ate" to the much more common "ta-be-ta" (食べた). Of course, both of these have some sort of implicit context (what was eaten in english, and in addition the subject in japanese). It's never an apples-to-apples comparison because the contexts and levels of discourse rarely coincide (between Japanese and English, at least).
posted by mezamashii at 5:47 AM on October 22, 2008
Compare "I ate" to the much more common "ta-be-ta" (食べた). Of course, both of these have some sort of implicit context (what was eaten in english, and in addition the subject in japanese). It's never an apples-to-apples comparison because the contexts and levels of discourse rarely coincide (between Japanese and English, at least).
posted by mezamashii at 5:47 AM on October 22, 2008
As far as 'shorter', I'd think Chinese would be up there. Or down there, as the case may be. It's a very compact language because even compounded words max out at 2 or 3 characters.
posted by Lady Li at 9:00 AM on October 22, 2008
posted by Lady Li at 9:00 AM on October 22, 2008
Someone commented in German about one of my pictures on flickr and then translated it into English. The German took thirty words, the English two.
posted by brujita at 11:28 AM on October 22, 2008
posted by brujita at 11:28 AM on October 22, 2008
There are many variables affcting the expansion or contraction of a translation. In pragmatic (non-literary) translation, it is often possible to produce a shorter (and more clear) translation when the original texts "takes the long way" unnecessarily. For instance, moving from passive voice to active often allow significant economies.
A dramatic expansion of the translated text is often the sign of a poor translator who doesn't understand the context very well, who will be unable to establish the synonymy of two expressions or change the point of view of a sentence.
A good comparison would probably involve the Canadian Hansard (the debates of the Canadian Parliement): the translation is very good, and it goes both ways (so you can see if the translators who target English are able to contract the text).
(Si vous pouvez lire le français, chercher le mot-clé "foisonnement" dans les revues Meta et TTR devrait vous permettre de consulter des articles à ce sujet.)
posted by Monday, stony Monday at 2:11 PM on October 22, 2008
A dramatic expansion of the translated text is often the sign of a poor translator who doesn't understand the context very well, who will be unable to establish the synonymy of two expressions or change the point of view of a sentence.
A good comparison would probably involve the Canadian Hansard (the debates of the Canadian Parliement): the translation is very good, and it goes both ways (so you can see if the translators who target English are able to contract the text).
(Si vous pouvez lire le français, chercher le mot-clé "foisonnement" dans les revues Meta et TTR devrait vous permettre de consulter des articles à ce sujet.)
posted by Monday, stony Monday at 2:11 PM on October 22, 2008
Response by poster: Dee Xtrovert: that's something I totally hadn't thought about, although I definitely should've.
Brujita: sorry to break it, but the German comment on your picture doesn't just say "nice picture" but more along the lines of "I came accross your picture while browsing through others, and I find it very nice"... not the best translation, and stoll shorter in English, but not quite the same impact! (sorry again...)
Monday, stony Monday: Je ne connait pas le mot "foisonnement" du tout! Et (excuser l'ignorance, s'il vous plait), mais c'est quoi les revues Meta et TTR? Je suis maintenant tres interesse! Aussi, mon clavier n'a pas d'accent francais, donc excuser le manque d'accents.
To everyone: Thanks, Merci und Danke schon!
posted by Planet F at 11:41 AM on October 23, 2008 [1 favorite]
Brujita: sorry to break it, but the German comment on your picture doesn't just say "nice picture" but more along the lines of "I came accross your picture while browsing through others, and I find it very nice"... not the best translation, and stoll shorter in English, but not quite the same impact! (sorry again...)
Monday, stony Monday: Je ne connait pas le mot "foisonnement" du tout! Et (excuser l'ignorance, s'il vous plait), mais c'est quoi les revues Meta et TTR? Je suis maintenant tres interesse! Aussi, mon clavier n'a pas d'accent francais, donc excuser le manque d'accents.
To everyone: Thanks, Merci und Danke schon!
posted by Planet F at 11:41 AM on October 23, 2008 [1 favorite]
Meta and TTR are academic journals on Translation. You can search Meta here. There are other translation journals, too. If someone has done a study of translation contraction and expansion (my terms -- I don't have a translation lexicon with me), it will have been published in an academic journal like that. Jean Delisle's La traduction raisonnée has a chapter on it, too.
All of this should be available at a nearby academic library (most likely if you're in Canada).
posted by Monday, stony Monday at 7:57 AM on October 26, 2008
All of this should be available at a nearby academic library (most likely if you're in Canada).
posted by Monday, stony Monday at 7:57 AM on October 26, 2008
According to page 26 of "The Miracle of Language", English is the shortest and "Indo-Iranian" languages are the longest.
posted by nekton at 12:09 PM on October 28, 2008
posted by nekton at 12:09 PM on October 28, 2008
This thread is closed to new comments.
posted by smackfu at 3:22 PM on October 21, 2008