To think translators shouldn't be paid royalties?

[Thisfeelslikearipoff]

I'm a published author and one of my books is about to go into another language. This book has been published in several languages already and I am familiar with the international translation process. To my astonishment, for the first time, this translator has tried to make her being paid royalties from book sales a part of her contractual agreement.

My immediate instinct is that no, she shouldn't be claiming royalties here. That is not to diminish her role in any way; I fully acknowledge the effort involved in translating thoughts and concepts from one language to another, and I fully acknowledge the obviously crucial nature of the translators role in a translation. A translation involves several individuals and entities doing their part in a professional manner. There is the author, the translator, the publisher, the distributor, the PR and media company etc etc. Everybody's role is crucial.

After I got this request I did some research and found that yes, for some people this actually is a thing, and I even came across a bizarre argument on a translators website where translators were forcefully asserting that they ought to be "fighting for our rights" to be paid royalties on book sales!

My take on it is this - the translator deserves to be properly compensated for their work, but only once. I really am feeling put out by this, and honestly the financial aspect is the least of what bothers me. I am annoyed that she feels she has a right to royalties on my work. She did not come up with these thoughts and concepts; her role is to bridge the gap between one language and another. AIBU to think she shouldn't be paid royalties on each copy sold?

PotholeParadise not necessarily the translator's fault, an editor may well have had a hand in it!

If that was the case, the French editorial team showed up the English editorial team! Someone was slacking over on the UK side, because the offending paragraphs should have been rewritten in the first place.

Personally I think a lower fee and royalties is the best arrangement - then it's in the translator's best interests to do the best job possible. I have done some literary translation, and I would definitely put more effort into something where there was the potential for royalties over something with a flat fee. I don't know how many works you've read in translation, but there are some truly dire ones out there (when I know the original is brilliant). The quality of the translation can make or break the book for a whole market.

If the translator has the opportunity to profit from the quality of their work then you'll probably get better quality translation. The better a translation is, the better the book will sell in the translated language which is surely better for you? The translator plays a significant part in the success of the novel being sold in a translated language country than in the original language publication. Why should they not share in those profits? Without them you wouldn't be able to sell your book in that country anyway. They are helping you increase your market and therefore increase your profit.

Nah I think YABU. Literary translation is as much a creative exercise as literary composition. Why wouldn’t you just stick it in google translate if you don’t agree!

Is there grant funding available to support the costs of your translation

For the sake of completeness OP what this means is, contrary to what you have understood, the translator can ask for a higher rate if there is grant money available because some countries make funding contingent on the translator being paid above a certain threshold.

Translating fiction is an artistic endeavour that absolutely merits royalties. I'm surprised you've not come across it before.

Oh and while I’m debunking nonsense, translators absolutely do do publicity for their books. Some Some even do international tours.

You didn’t write the book in French or whatever. The translator did...

The translator didn't write the book in French or any other language. S/he translated the book into French/Spanish/Italian etc. Not the same thing.

But feel free to carry on ignoring me and my twenty years of professional experience eh?

I'm not interested in your professional experience. I wouldn't think to consult Mumsnet for professional expertise. I asked for peoples personal opinions on whether they thought this situation was reasonable or fair.

Ok, it's simple. Translator gets: A) a larger flat fee: B) a smaller or no flat fee and royalties

In this case the translator wants it both ways.

The translator didn't write the book in French or any other language.

Think what you like. The law disagrees, as do most people on this thread. BTW loads of well known authors are very grateful to and supportive of their translators. Being so begrudging and dismissive really isn’t a good look.

Translation is a technical skill but for creative writing it is also a creative process. It isn’t a matter of providing a technically correct literal translation. Your book would read pretty badly if it was.

It is a matter of recreating nuance and style in the new language. Finding a way to make poetry work, find alternatives to places where rhythm or alliteration are important.
Understanding why the passive or active voice has been used in every sentence, where the form of language adds to meaning and narrative. Etc etc.

So yes, a degree of creativity and collaboration with your source language text. IP.

If you want it to read like an instruction manual, fine.get a piece work translator.

Every time a book is sold in the new language it is the translator’s work that is being bought, as well as yours.

Well, the personal opinions of a lot of people seem to be that YABU, OP. Hope that helps.

Next time, I would recommend asking your question in a writers' forum, not Mumsnet. Absolute Write is pretty good on industry questions.

I think it's fair for the translator to get royalties actually. Translation isn't a simple "this word means this other word" thing, there's far more of an art to it. I would say that a translator has a creative role and should be treated like that.

I'm inclined to say YABU, though perhaps to some extent it depends on the type of book.

A translation of a text book requires accuracy and may require subject matter expertise, but creativity might be best avoided. At the other end of the scale perhaps, translations of epic poems...

Anyone still interested in this rather arcane question should read the industry survey by CEATL at www.ceatl.eu/docs/surveyuk.pdf which makes it clear that royalties for translators are indeed a thing and not a bizarre, opportunistic demand.

Yes, also the thread shows how many mumsnetters practise copyright law too..... or know about it.

The law in the UK I think even back to the 1956 copyright act and before that has seen translation as a skill but of course you cannot use your translation without using the original language version so you cannot go off into the sunset exploiting the translation freely. I think English law has always had a reasonable compromise therefore on this issue.

Think what you like. The law disagrees, as do most people on this thread.

You can also think what you like, but I know who composes my books and I know who translates them, and I also know the difference between the two.

I've been a translator in the past. I'm afraid you don't realise what's involved. Google translate it ain't.
Congratulations on being a published writer.

Google translate it ain't.

The OP can always give that option a go if she’s so unhappy with the translators terms.

You can also think what you like, but I know who composes my books and I know who translates them, and I also know the difference between the two.

Nobel Prize winner Claudio Magris: "When I present the translation of one of my books in another country, I start by holding up my Italian text and saying “This one I wrote myself,” then I show the translated volume and say “This one we wrote."

You can also think what you like, but I know who composes my books and I know who translates them, and I also know the difference between the two.

Yes, I think we all have a fair suspicion of the difference between the two now, too.

Have you ever translated something into another language. So that the meaning and tone is not lost but it sounds natural in that language? No? Then you don't know what a skill it is.

Your work will sell in that country because of the skill of the translator