Lost in Translation: A First-Time (Non-Fiction) Author’s Guide to Translation Rights

The following is a guest post by Director of Rights & International Sales Therese Mausser on what non-fiction authors can expect for translation rights to their work.

For a first-time author, the translation process can be mystifying. How in the world does, say, a title like Delivering Knock Your Socks Off Service become Tippteenindaja raskused ja rõõmud? (Imagine trying to first explain the idiom, “knock your socks off,” to foreign publishers, and then having an Estonian publisher come up with an equally as colorful and lively a title for their translation!)

Some years back, an author new to publishing wondered how much it would cost to get a translation of his book in Spanish. He was downright giddy when advised that not only would we not have to shell out any money, we would be getting paid for it—by licensing the translation rights! Here, then, is the process.

Presentation: We bring your book to the attention of appropriate agents and publishers throughout the world. We have established good/long-term relationships with major foreign publishers, agents, and scouts. (To date, AMACOM books have been translated in almost 40 different languages.) We meet with them at the major book fairs, including BookExpo America (BEA) and the Frankfurt Book Fair, and in office meetings throughout the year, when they visit NYC. We continually update them on our books– forthcoming, current, and backlist—via email, hard/electronic copies of our catalogs, reviews, and encourage them to visit our social media sites.

What foreign publishers look for/consider: Of course, it’s understandable that books by well-known authors, on US bestseller lists, with a high ranking on Amazon, garnering outstanding reviews in major publications, or endorsements by prominent figures in the field, will get their attention immediately. But what else do foreign publishers/agents look for/consider?

1. A concept/topic that is not available locally—something “new”, cutting edge, a unique perspective. Translation costs are high, so they are very reluctant to pay for a translation of a book they could get a native author to do (and perhaps create a “brand name” of the local author, in the process.) A “hot topic” in one country, might not even be on the radar screen in another, so it’s vital to establish good lines of communication with publishers/agents to keep on top of what publishers may be looking for. Sometimes there are trends—like the fables that were very popular in Asia some years back.
2. A concept/topic that “travels”—it is relevant in their markets. Even if an idea is intriguing, if it’s based too much on US laws, customs, examples, they are likely to pass on it.

Option: After the pitch is made, interested publishers will ask for an “option.” This is a period of time during which they evaluate the book for their market. This can range from several weeks to several months, and can be exclusive (only one publisher/agent considers the title at one time), or nonexclusive.

Negotiation: If the publisher is interested in translating the book, we work out the financial terms—usually an advance against royalties, although in some languages, such as Arabic and Turkish, a flat payment, covering royalties on a specified first printing, is more common. These terms will vary from country to country, but we always take into account their first printing quantity and price. These payments are due shortly after the contracts are signed, and are shared with the author according to our original agreement with them, (subject to local tax and agent’s fee, where applicable.)

Unfortunately, there is not a one-to-one correlation between granting an option, and getting an offer for the rights. Often, options are canceled, but then we send the book (or PDF) out to another agent or publisher who may have expressed in it, or who we think might be a good match for it.

Contract: When the negotiation is completed, we issue an agreement reflecting the agreed-upon terms. These are for a volume edition (i.e., hardcover or paperback), and more and more often these days for ebook rights for the translation, as well. When the signed contract is returned, this is the point at which we notify our authors of the good news!

Foreign Translation: Our agreement with the publisher generally specifies they have 18 months from contract date within which to publish their translation. We look to work with publishers who can provide top-quality translations, and support their editions with a strong sales/marketing/distribution network. Upon their publication, we receive copies of the translation, which it is our pleasure to send to our authors. Hooray! You have a wonderful new addition to your bookshelf (and/or electronic reading device)!

Therese Mausser is Director, Rights & International Sales, AMACOM Books, New York. She is currently getting ready for another Frankfurt Book Fair (her 29th one!) this October 12-16. It is one of the things she loves best about her job–this opportunity to meet with so many of the wonderful publishers and agents we work with throughout the year. Visit our website for information on rights and permissions inquiries of AMACOM titles.

As a Book Doctor I Will Not Harm Your Book, I Will Only Make It Better

Unintelligible chapters, random ideas, acronyms without explanation. Your book needs a doctor STAT!

The following is a guest post by Senior Development Editor Barry Richardson on how he edits books to improve the content and readability of the work.

Writing a book is an accomplishment to be proud of; it’s not an easy thing to do. But authors (especially first-time ones) should be aware that their manuscript will be read by someone—the development editor or “book doctor”—who is going to take a close, hard look at what is wrong with it. Many authors can’t believe I would find fault with their precious book. “But all my friends loved it!” I have heard this countless times. (That’s great! Maybe they’ll publish your book, but we can’t!) I’ve had authors accuse me of ruining their book, which is the opposite of my intention. I want to make each manuscript better. If a manuscript is good, I can make it very good; if it’s bad, I can probably make it okay.

What is involved in development editing and what will I do to a manuscript to turn it into a good book? First off, development editing is not copyediting. Authors sometimes confuse the two and are stunned when they get back their manuscript with tracked changes in red all through it showing rewriting, reorganization, and deletions. When your manuscript goes into Production, it will be sent to a copyeditor who will check things like grammar, punctuation, consistency, etc.

I recently wrote about 12 Things I Look at in a Manuscript. Here is a closer look at how I will improve your book.

Writing: Some manuscripts are very well-written; they’re interesting and carry the reader right along. This isn’t always the case, but usually simple editing will fix up the problems. Unfortunately, there are times when the writing is awkward, confusing, or convoluted and would be embarrassing to have in a published book. I then have to smooth out the writing. I assume the author cannot do this on his or her own, since this is the manuscript submitted for publication.

Accessibility: I start with the idea that authors know what they’re talking about, but I want to make sure their writing is reader-friendly. They may be experts, but they can’t always write clearly and coherently. I should be able to understand what the author is saying, even if I don’t know anything about the subject matter. Again, I assume the authors can’t make their writing more clear, so I do it for them. Authors don’t always understand this concept—sometimes they accuse me of “dumbing down” their book.

Flow: It seems obvious that thoughts, sentences, paragraphs, and sections should follow one another, and that order of the chapters should make sense. But sometimes authors just start throwing ideas out one after another in no particular order, just to make sure that everything is covered. I once worked with an author from Romania. He was a genius in global financial trading, but he didn’t see why material had to flow in a logical progression. “Isn’t it enough that the ideas are sound?” he asked. I gave him the benefit of the doubt because English was not his native language, but I had to rewrite his entire manuscript.

Introductions/connecting material: This is often a key to making a book more accessible. A short introduction to a new chapter or section or a few words connecting one section to another can work wonders in helping readers follow your thoughts. I will add these where I feel the author has jumped too suddenly from one thought to another. Sometimes I need the author’s input in doing this, but usually I can do it on my own.

Repetition: Some authors feel that if something is worth saying once, it’s even better to say it several times, even in the same paragraph. I once had an attorney/author who explained to me that from a legal standpoint, it was critical to leave no room for misunderstanding, so he had to use the same word five times in a single sentence. I had to explain that his book was not a legal document; he was supposed to make the concepts understandable to the layperson.

Putting too much in: Sometimes authors who know a lot about a subject want to put everything they know into their book. This can become repetitious, overwhelm readers, and eventually cause them to lose track of what’s being said. There is a delicate art to knowing what to leave in and what to take out. Deleting material—in some cases, lots of material—is an area where the book doctor’s hand definitely can cause the author pain, but it is often necessary.

Leaving too much out: Then there are the authors who feel that if you’re reading their book you must already know A, B, and C, so there’s no need to include it because they want to discuss X, Y, and Z. This can be tricky, since with certain high-level books, it is expected that the reader has a general knowledge of the subject. But for the standard non-fiction book, I want to understand what I’m reading. Again, I assume that if I don’t know what a GRP is, then it should be explained. This is an area where I usually have to ask the author to add new material because I can’t just make it up.

Subheads: It’s amazing how the simple act of adding subheads can make all the difference in the world. Subheads provide signposts for readers as they go through the book. But they are also extremely helpful for improving the flow, accessibility, and organization of a manuscript as I am editing. Subheads impose a structure on the material. I can see where the material has gone off track or where certain material actually belongs in a different section or chapter with similar material. I once had the writer who was working on a book with a well-known person say to me, “Everything makes so much more sense with the subheads you’ve added.” I wondered how a professional writer would not know the value of subheads, but I was glad to be of help. In the end that’s what I’m really here for—to make the final book better, not to destroy it.

Barry Richardson is a Senior Development Editor at AMACOM. Our in-house “book doctor,” he helps improve manuscripts while keeping the author’s voice and expertise–whether it’s heavy-duty editing, reorganization, rewriting, or coaching authors. Prior to joining AMACOM, he worked for 25 years at Prentice Hall (P-H). Visit our website for freelance development inquiries.

Author Tips: The 12 Step Business Author’s Twitter Cheat Sheet

Trying to figure out how to get with the Twitter program? Check out our 12 steps to tweet success.

(1) Sign up for a Twitter account, upload a photo, write a short bio that includes you’re an author, and link to your website. Make your bio intriguing.

(2) Upload a custom background, preferably with written-out links to your other web presences (links will not be live) or pictures of your books. Something that doesn’t make you look like another cookie-cutter business author.

(3) Take five minutes to learn the Twitter lingo and bookmark this page for future reference. Everyone has to look things up occasionally.

(4) Follow 20 Twitter handles: five people you know personally, five gurus or leaders in your field, five media outlets or journalists you follow regularly, and five brands you respect. This variety is important to understand the Twitter eco-system.

(5) Sign up for a Hootsuite account to schedule five tweets throughout the day: one tweet promoting you or your book, two retweets, and two articles to share with your followers. Remember to schedule each tweet at least one hour apart.

(6) Install the Hootlet plug-in for your browser (Firefox, Internet Explorer, Safari, Chrome) and use the Hootlet button to schedule the articles.

(7) Check for @ replies at the end of every day and respond to people as appropriate.

(8) Every Friday, recommend one Twitter handle to follow and why for #followfriday, and say what book you’re reading and how you feel about it for #fridayreads.

(9) Find one Twitter chat in your field and use Tweetchat to participate every week.

(10) Install a Twitter app on your smart phone (iPhone, Android, Blackberry, Windows) so you can check Twitter and tweet when you’re waiting in line or have a little free time.

(11) After two weeks, follow 10 more Twitter handles.

(12) Build on what you know.

Note: I’ve stayed away from technical things, such as never include your location and always use HTTPS, but be sure to read through your settings.

A Day in the Life of a Production Editor, Part 2

And now the exciting conclusion to Associate Editor Jim Bessent‘s account of the responsibilities of a production editor from manuscript to finished codex. Find Part 1 here.

1:33 pm A co-worker pulls me aside and asks, in confidence, “In the phrase ‘More than 50,000 sold…’, is more than a preposition or a conjunction?” I blather confidently and incoherently that it is a preposition, one of those two-word varieties, the object being the implied “books” or “units.” I add, increasing her skepticism, that if you remove either more or than, it ceases to make sense, ergo it must be a preposition. But that would also be true if it were a conjunction. I am loath to fire any more synapses in quest of this grammatical chalice. Why not just change the construction and eliminate the question entirely? You see, the real issue is whether or not than should be capitalized. If a preposition, the answer would be no; if a conjunction, yes. The phrase is appearing on the cover of one of our books, so it is also partly a design issue. The final decision? All caps. The whole phrase. Problem solved. Except I still don’t know whether it’s a preposition or conjunction, and what if I encounter it in a situation where all caps is not an option? This has to be addressed. Mañana.

You Can Call Me Et Al.

2:00 pm What’s that speck after et al.? I brush the page vigorously, trying to dislodge it, but without success. I take out my microscope to observe more closely. It’s a period. What’s that doing there? And it hits me: I have been committing, or allowing, this punctuational transgression for months, perhaps years. Al is not Latin for all. All is English for alia. Therefore, al. is an abbrev. Don’t tell anyone.

A Consistentness Conundrum

3:21 pm Here’s one for you. One of us is working on a book, and the author has spelled extraversion also as extroversion, or vice versa. I never realized it could go both ways, but a dictionary check shows extroversion to be the preferred spelling, although extraversion is not incorrect. One of the little buggers eluded detection and had to be apprehended and sentenced to correction in reprint. So if that’s the case with extro and extra, you’d think it would be the case with introversion and intraversion. Anh, anhhh. It’s always introversion. It’s hard to imagine a setup more tailor-made for confusion than this one.

Concerning a Common Authorial Predilection

That same proofreader with the between/among disorder is also constantly changing continually to continuously, continuously to constantly, and constantly to continually. These three words pop up… continuously. There is something about ongoingness that has special appeal for authors of business books: “General Electric is constantly improving its manufacturing processes.” “The human resources department is continuously conducting training sessions.”

3:42 pm I’m checking the corrections on some galley pages and have just green-flagged the four-hundredth change of one of these “c” words to another. I want to support my proofreader, but what’s going on here? Okay, constant connotes faithfulness, and yes, continuous suggests that something is occurring without interruption. But if it’s happening again and again, he uses continually. Methinks we might be carrying persnicketicity to new and unnecessary heights. TO THE DICTIONARY! And what do we find? Sure, a strong case can be made for the distinctions noted above, but in every definition, each is given as a synonym for the other. So what are we in danger of here? . . . a strained idiom. Hahahahahahahahahahaha!!!

4:13 pm Time is running short, but let’s do one more. All of us associate editors spend a good bit of energy ferreting out and changing that to who. “I am looking for the person that ate my brownie.” Horrors. The person who ate my brownie. Inversely, inanimate objects, as opposed to human objects, usually call for that or which. You wouldn’t say, “It is more costly to run a car who takes premium gasoline.” You’d say that. But here’s a nice little option for you: You can, sometimes, if you feel like it, use whose with an inanimate object: “She stood beneath the old oak tree, whose bark reminded her of he.” (Poetic license.) You could also say “the bark of which.” Your call. Of which can sometimes sound too formal. It’s nice to have an alternative. You’re welcome.

4:59:59 pm We’ve reached the end of another fun-filled, rough-and-tumble editorial day. We log out, align the edges of our reference books, don our fedoras, line up in ascending order of height, and march out to the elevator. Downstairs, we take our leave and head home, where for dinner we will have alphabet soup before falling into peaceful slumber and dreams of synonyms, antonyms, and sentence diagrams.

Jim Bessent is an Associate Editor at AMACOM. He works in the production department and sees finished manuscripts through the various stages of production: copyediting, proofing, indexing, all correction cycles, etc. Prior to joining AMACOM, Jim worked as an editorial freelancer and had a small collectibles business. Visit our website for freelance editorial opportunities.

A Day in the Life of a Production Editor, Part 1

The following is a guest post by Associate Editor Jim Bessent is the responsibilities of a production editor in sherpherding books from manuscript to finished codex.

I could do several entries on the issues and decisions production editors face in their jobs, but I’m going to compress a bunch of them into just a couple entries so it will make us seem more important and exciting. First, an insight: Among production editors, there are few pleasures in life more satisfying than detecting an inconsistency in another editor’s project, and if it’s an outright error, I cannot describe the euphoria without embarrassing myself. Persnickety, nitpicky, hairsplitting, picayunish are all words we equate with correctness, quality, a job well done—rightness even. By the way, nit-picking, as opposed to nitpicky, is hyphenated.

There are several areas in which our penchant for precision gets called into play. Like lawyers, whose profession is often described as adversarial by nature, production editors could be said to be looking for trouble, and where do we find it? Our marketing colleagues, who disdain to speak or write in complete sentences. Sacrilege! Our designer colleagues, who are “visual”; their attention to and allegiance to the meaning of words is secondary to how they look. (I see that Microsoft’s grammar check has its little squiggly green line under the word is in the preceding sentence. Are you talkin’ to me? ARE YOU TALKIN’ TO ME?!!!)

Authors? Well, authors are our bread and butter, so we extend to them a little more benefit of the doubt. Some are meek and deferential, and those we obligingly patronize as we repair their prosaic misdemeanors. Authors can also be strident in their insistence on a given usage, in which case we try to trick, cajole, or bludgeon them into propriety, or failing that, “give them their voice.” We do make a good-faith effort to protect and enhance their credibility, but in the end, there are things authors know best.

Now let’s look at a sampling of items that have come up for discussion today.

10:00 am I’m double-checking the fourth pass of one of my colleague’s book cover mechanicals. Looks pretty clean. Wait, what’s this? Harley-Davison? OH, MY GOD! Am I working with illiterates? It’s Davidson. I wonder: What would Captain Bligh do?

Style Peeves and Preferences

We work with outside copyeditors and proofreaders a lot, many of whom have their pet peeves and preferences when it comes to style. One in particular stands out for his uncompromising position on between and among. To him, between always has two objects; and it has to be among if there are more than two. So he would change, “Between you and me and the deep blue sea…” to “Among you and me, etc., …” We bowed to this strict constructionism for a while, until…

10:30 am One of us grows suspicious and curious and finally looks it up. Lo, Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, 11th edition, devotes a lengthy paragraph to explaining more precisely when one or the other is most appropriate, the last sentence of which reads, “When among is automatically chosen for more than two, English idiom may be strained.” This prim display of grammatical ankle brings forth a maelstrom of departmental mirth: “I’m sorry, I would help you move this weekend, but I strained my idiom.” We are laughing, rolling on the floor. Of course, this kind of merrymaking (one word) is not the norm.

The Not-So-Humble Hyphen

11:00 am Decorum is restored. Let’s talk about hyphens for a moment. Hands down (no hyphen), hyphenation gives rise to more dictionary grabs than any other lexicographical crisis. Determining whether a compound should be two words, hyphenated, or closed up can lead to some very emotionally charged discussions. I mean, we haven’t had any assassinations or dismissals over it, but hey, day ain’t over. So here’s a little interactive, audience-participation exercise. In the following list, which of the three choices do you think is correct?

Open versus Hyphenated versus Closed

1. blind sided (v.) versus blind-sided versus blindsided
2. feet first (adv.) versus feet-first versus feetfirst
3. clear headed (adj.) versus clear-headed versus clearheaded
4. trouble maker (n.) versus trouble-maker versus troublemaker
5. flim flam (n.) versus flim-flam versus flimflam

Mmmm-hmmm. Not so obvious is it. And you may get different answers depending on which dictionary you consult, even which edition of the same dictionary, so to avert chaos it’s important for all the editors at a given publisher to use the same dictionary. One of the most action-packed couple of hours in my editing career came when one of our typesetters inadvertently turned on the German dictionary feature of his software when setting one of our books, which resulted in a host of perplexing end-of-line hyphenation breaks.

And then there’s the oddity of all editorial oddities, hyphen strings, which are stacks of three or more hyphens at the ends of consecutive lines on a page. Can you say “consternation?” We insist on resetting when this occurs. One of my co-workers found a string of eight once. Imagine the odds against that. I printed out the page and push-pinned it to my wall.

It’s lunchtime.

Jim returns with part two of a Day in the Life of a Production Editor tomorrow. Stay tuned!

Jim Bessent is an Associate Editor at AMACOM. He works in the production department and sees finished manuscripts through the various stages of production: copyediting, proofing, indexing, all correction cycles, etc. Prior to joining AMACOM, Jim worked as an editorial freelancer and had a small collectibles business. Visit our website for freelance editorial opportunities.