I’d like to point out that 雷太赫 is a more common name for LaTeX. At least you will find a bunch of LaTeX results on a search engine with 雷太赫, but not 蘭氏聚珍.
1 Like
thx for explaining this to me
1 Like
Thx for pointing this out, but I think that 蘭氏聚珍 is a better translation for LaTeX
Good Chinese translations for these type of software should at least sound like the original name because many Chinese users will still use the English name even though a Chinese name exists, and I’m sure almost all people seeing 蘭氏聚珍 for the first time will have no idea that it refers to LaTeX.
Also, I don’t think Typst should have an official Chinese name, as long as we standardizes the name within the Chinese community.
I would suggest using 词 for the st part, something like 拓簿词, 题破词, 泰骈词
1 Like
I think it’s worth mentioning that the Chinese SE community does not translate names of popular projects. Github is Github, LaTeX is LaTeX. As a Chinese student who actually lives in China, actually does SE and mathematical modeling with Chinese classmates and Chinese devs, I’ve never heard anyone use 积盒 or 蘭氏聚珍, whether school faculties, fellow developers, or in any forums.
By keeping Typst as is will make life easier for devs both using or not Mandarin.
1 Like
Well 蘭氏聚珍 is nice, but it’s really hard to type out; from a practical point of view it’s not a good idea. Even 拉特克斯 might be more acceptable, even though semantically less meaningful.
This is like archiac Chinese 
We don’t use it everyday except for academic use in things like lit theory
Personally, I believe that Typst (for now) does not need a Chinese name, and here is my reasoning:
I. Uniformity is Key to the Dissemination of Emerging Technologies
For a typesetting language like Typst, which is still in a niche and rapidly developing stage, a globally unified name is crucial. A consistent name facilitates user memory, searching, and communication. Whether in official documentation, community tutorials, or technical discussions, maintaining the consistency of the original name, “Typst,” minimizes communication costs and prevents information barriers caused by translational confusion. In the field of technology, clarity and precision are always paramount.
II. The Dilemma of Transliteration: The Challenge of Achieving “Fidelity, Expressiveness, and Elegance”
Transliterating “Typst” into Chinese presents inherent difficulties. Its core syllable, /pst/, is a consonant cluster that does not exist in standard Mandarin Chinese. A forced translation would sound awkward and clumsy, such as “Tàipǔsītè” or “Típǔsītè,” which lacks the resonance and concise feel of the original name.
Compared to some successfully translated brand names, Typst’s structure makes it more difficult to handle. For example, “Coca-Cola” was translated into “可口可乐” (kěkǒu kělè), which cleverly combines phonetic approximation with a pleasant meaning (“tasty and fun”). “YouTube” was deconstructed into “you” and “tube” and translated as “油管” (yóuguǎn, lit. “oil pipe”), a vivid and memorable term. In contrast, Typst is a portmanteau of “Type” (typesetting) and “Rust” (the programming language). The term “Rust” itself is habitually used in its English form within the Chinese tech community, adding another layer of complexity to creating a meaningful translation. A poor translation would, in fact, harm its professional image.
III. The Modern Technical Context: Using English Directly Has Become the Norm
In the contemporary era, especially in programming and cutting-edge technology, using the original English term has become a common consensus and efficient practice within the Chinese-speaking community. We are accustomed to saying “Python” rather than “蟒蛇” (mángshé, python snake), “GitHub” rather than a transliterated name, and “ChatGPT” rather than its full Chinese translation. This practice preserves the precision of the terminology and avoids ambiguity that might arise from translation.
The playful nickname for the C++ language, “丙加加” (bǐng jiā jiā), is more of a community inside joke than a formal term. A more professional model is the combination of an English acronym and a Chinese full name, such as “LLM (大语言模型, dà yǔyán móxíng).” However, this is typically used for concepts that have already become popular and require explanation to the general public. For a highly specialized tool like Typst, its user base is already capable of using the English term directly, making a forced translation seem superfluous. The fact that LaTeX has been widely used by its original name in academia for many years serves as an excellent precedent.
The Time is Not Yet Ripe; Keep the Original Name
Translation, in essence, is for the purpose of explaining and popularizing a concept to a broader audience. Currently, Typst’s user base consists mainly of developers, designers, and academic researchers—a group that is perfectly capable of directly accepting and using English terminology. At this stage, the necessity of creating a Chinese name for Typst is not compelling.
Admittedly, the pronunciation of “Typst” is somewhat challenging for native Chinese speakers, but this is a minor issue that can be resolved through a few repetitions and by spelling it out. Compared to the benefits of uniformity, accuracy, and professionalism, this minor inconvenience in pronunciation is entirely acceptable.
Therefore, at this stage, we can and should continue to use “Typst” directly. When it truly becomes a mainstream, household tool in the future, it will not be too late to consider a catchy Chinese name.
(Polished by ChatGLM)
2 Likes