About the Journal
Focus and Scope
The scientific journal Acta Neophilologica is the journal of Slovenian experts and English-speaking, German-speaking and French- and Italian-speaking literary historians that publishes scientific studies in the field of Western-European, American and other literatures in English. The journal pays special attention to the problems from the history of cultural and especially literary and theatre contacts between Slovenia and Western-European literatures, as well as the problems of Slovenian emigrant literature. The articles are published in the world language (English, German, French, Italian) the literature of which the author analyzes, the abstracts are written in a foreign language and the summaries in the Slovenian language.
All articles are refereed before being accepted or rejected. Manuscripts will not be returned unless they are commissioned. Computed-printed copies must be double-spaced and new paragraphs should be printed with an indention. Articles must have an accompanying abstract and key-words. Literature used should be prepared in the alphabetical order of authors. The views expressed in articles should in no way be construed as reflecting the views of the publisher. Articles submitted for consideration should be sent only electronically via the journal platform, with a short abstract (in English). Articles should be of no more than 5,000 words long. For format and style authors should follow the MLA Handbook. Authors who wish to have their articles published in the next issue of AN should send their manuscripts to the editor no later than 1 May each year.
Peer Review Process
The journal accepts international articles and all the contributions will be subject to the double-blind system by the reviewers particularly qualified. In addition to the articles proposed for publication, the journal will be open to feature also one or more contributions that are deemed highly important by the editorial board.
Acta Neophilologica is published one issue per year.
Open Access Policy
This is a diamond open-access journal which means that all content is freely available online without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of open access. The journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public promotes a greater global exchange of knowledge.
Article Processing Charges
The journal Acta Neophilologica does not charge authors or any third party for publication. Both submission and processing of manuscripts, and publication of articles are free of charge. There are no fees for publishing materials. There are no: "article processing charges" (APCs), "article submission charges", "membership fees" or "language editing fees". We do not charge authors for having colour photos or extra pages in their articles. There are no hidden costs whatsoever.
Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement (Ethical code)
The publication of an article in the peer-reviewed journal Acta Neophilologica is an essential building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. It is therefore necessary to agree upon standards of expected ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the editor (and the editorial board), the peer reviewer and the publisher.
The University of Ljubljana Press (Založba Univerze v Ljubljani) as publisher of the journal Acta Neophilologica takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, the Ljubljana University Press, Faculty of Arts, and the editorial board of Acta Neophilologica will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful and necessary.
Our Ethics Statement is based on COPE’s Core Practices.
Acta Neophilologica does not publish plagiarized papers. The Editorial Board takes the position that plagiarism, i.e. passing off someone else's ideas, words, or other creative expression as one's own, is a clear violation of scientific ethics. Plagiarism may also constitute a violation of copyright law, which may be legally punishable.
Papers published in the journal are checked using iThenticate software.
Plagiarism includes the following: (1) Verbatim (word for word) or almost verbatim copying, or intentionally paraphrasing portions of another author's work without clearly indicating the source or identifying the copied fragment (e.g., by quotation marks) in the manner described under Duties of Authors; (2) copying equations, figures, or tables from someone else's work without properly acknowledging the source and/or without permission from the original author or copyright holder.
Any manuscript which shows obvious signs of plagiarism will be automatically rejected.
Legal restrictions imposed by the publisher, copyright holder, or author(s), violations of professional ethics, such as multiple submissions, false claims of authorship, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data, or any major misconduct will require retraction of an article.
Occasionally, a retraction may be used to correct numerous serious errors that cannot be covered by publishing corrections. A retraction may be published by the Editor in Chief/Editorial Board, the author(s), or by mutual agreement of both parties.
The retraction will take the form of a separate item listed in the table of contents and marked "retraction." The original article will remain unchanged, except for a watermark on the PDF indicating on each page that it has been "retracted".
Duties of authors
Reporting standards: authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
Data access and retention: authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
Originality and plagiarism: the authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication: an author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper. Publication of some kinds of articles (e.g. translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation as the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.
Acknowledgement of sources: proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.
Authorship of the paper: authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Hazards and human subjects: if the work involves the use of human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subject must always be observed.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest: all authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.
Fundamental errors in published works: when an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.
Duties of the editor and editorial board
Publication decisions: the editor of the journal Acta Neophilologica is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may consult with editorial board or reviewers in making this decision.
Fair play: the editor evaluates manuscripts solely for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
Confidentiality: the editor and any editorial staff do not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and conflicts of interest: unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript are not used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask another member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections in competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern.
Involvement and cooperation in investigations: an editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institution and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behaviour must be looked into, even if it discovered years after publication.
Duties of reviewers
Contribution to editorial decisions: peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
Promptness: any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Confidentiality: any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Standards of objectivity: reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Acknowledgment of sources: reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Disclosure and conflict of interest:unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask another member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers.
Abstracting and Indexing
The articles of Acta Neophilologica are indexed/reviewed in the following databases/resources:
- Emerging Sources Citation Index
- MLA International Bibliography
- ERIH PLUS
- Internationale Bibliographie der Zeitschriftenliteratur
- DOAJ - Directory of Open Access Journals
Journal Acta Neophilologica is supported by:
Sources of Support
Journal Acta Neophilologica is supported by:
Acta Neophilologica is primarily oriented in promoting scholarly articles on English and American literature, on other literatures written in English as well as on German and Romance literatures. Its first volume was published in 1968.