Mediating Worlds: James Legge’s Comparative Apologetic Approach to Chinese Classics

Abstract This paper examines James Legge’s innovative use of comparative apologetics as a translation strategy in his rendition of Chinese classics during the Victorian era. While previous scholarship has often viewed Legge’s work through the lens of either colonial discourse or purely scholarly achievement, this study reveals how his comparative apologetic approach enabled a more nuanced cross-cultural dialogue between Chinese and Western thought systems. Through analysis of his translation choices, paratextual materials, and evolving interpretive frameworks, the paper demonstrates how Legge strategically negotiated between his missionary identity and scholarly commitments. His approach to key concepts like “Shangdi” (上帝), “Dao” (道), and Mencius’ theory of human nature reveals sophisticated comparative frameworks that acknowledge both similarities and differences between traditions. Though constrained by Victorian theological assumptions, Legge’s comparative apologetics created intellectual spaces where genuine cross-cultural understanding could emerge. His translation methodology – combining philological rigor with comparative religious frameworks – established new standards for scholarly translation while facilitating meaningful dialogue across profound philosophical differences. This research contributes to our understanding of how translation functions as cultural mediation in contexts of religious and philosophical difference, with implications for contemporary cross-cultural communication.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Neue Zeitschrift für Systematische Theologie und Religionsphilosophie
Published
2026-03-27
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1515/nzsth-2025-0057
Primary Topic
Chinese history and philosophy
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Mediating Worlds: James Legge’s Comparative Apologetic Approach to Chinese Classics

Song Liu, Zhengbin Feng
Neue Zeitschrift für Systematische Theologie und Religionsphilosophie
Chinese history and philosophy
article

Mediating Worlds: James Legge’s Comparative Apologetic Approach to Chinese Classics

Song Liu, Zhengbin Feng
article en

Abstract

Abstract This paper examines James Legge’s innovative use of comparative apologetics as a translation strategy in his rendition of Chinese classics during the Victorian era. While previous scholarship has often viewed Legge’s work through the lens of either colonial discourse or purely scholarly achievement, this study reveals how his comparative apologetic approach enabled a more nuanced cross-cultural dialogue between Chinese and Western thought systems. Through analysis of his translation choices, paratextual materials, and evolving interpretive frameworks, the paper demonstrates how Legge strategically negotiated between his missionary identity and scholarly commitments. His approach to key concepts like “Shangdi” (上帝), “Dao” (道), and Mencius’ theory of human nature reveals sophisticated comparative frameworks that acknowledge both similarities and differences between traditions. Though constrained by Victorian theological assumptions, Legge’s comparative apologetics created intellectual spaces where genuine cross-cultural understanding could emerge. His translation methodology – combining philological rigor with comparative religious frameworks – established new standards for scholarly translation while facilitating meaningful dialogue across profound philosophical differences. This research contributes to our understanding of how translation functions as cultural mediation in contexts of religious and philosophical difference, with implications for contemporary cross-cultural communication.

Neue Zeitschrift für Systematische Theologie und Religionsphilosophie
Northwestern Polytechnical University (CN), Xi'an International Studies University (CN)
Openalex Percentile: Top 8%
Chinese history and philosophy
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.