Information for contributors

Études romanes de Brno is a peer-reviewed scholarly journal and the papers published must therefore meet both professional and formal criteria resulting from this condition. When deciding about publication of a manuscript, the editorial board bases itself on evaluations by the reviewing board or by independent experts, in cases of highly specialized papers but still in the thematic line of the journal. At the same time also takes into consideration the formal aspect of the manuscript (or recommends formal editing to the author respectively). The editorial board also decides on suitable dates for publication of individual texts. Submissions can be made at any time. Authors are informed about the results of peer review process as soon as possible, no later than in three months. Unsolicited manuscripts will not be returned, no honoraria will be paid. The final decision on publication of all texts falls within the authority of the editorial board of the journal Études romanes de Brno. All scientific papers in sections “Dossier thématique” and “Études” of the journal are peer-reviewed (non-reviewed are the other contributions in the section “Comptes rendus”; the editorial board assumes the right to refuse to publish reviews on books older than three years since their publishing date).

Peer-review process

Études romanes de Brno is committed to upholding the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all possible measures against any publication malpractices. In submitting their papers to the journal for possible publication all authors are thereby confirming that the papers represent their own original contributions and have not been copied or plagiarised in whole or in part from others.

Each paper submitted to the editorial office is subsequently sent to two reviewers. The peer review procedure is double-blind. Evaluated are: authenticity and quality of the paper, up-to-dateness in its respective field of activity, the argumentative structure of the paper, its linguistic aspect, bibliography and accuracy of the abstract and key words. The author is asked to revise his or her manuscript in response to the suggestions of the peer reviewers. In cases of contradictory or ambiguous reviews, the paper is sent to a third peer reviewer. If two reviewers do not recommend to accept the paper, it is rejected from further evaluation. See review forms (in Spanish, French, Italian and Portuguese) here.

Guidelines for authors

  • All submissions (papers and book reviews) are to be sent electronically to erb@phil.muni.cz in common formats (doc, docx, rtf, odt).
  • Length: original research articles of about 6000 to 10000 words; reviews up to 3000 words.
  • Papers must include: title in English; key words and two abstracts (100-150 words each) in the language of the paper and in English; full contact information.
  • Formatting: Times New Roman, font size 12 throughout, margins 2.5 cm, spacing 1.5.
  • All references in text and in footnotes must be cited as follows: (Lara 1997: 56)
  • Works cited (References) must be listed alphabetically at the end of the paper according the following examples:
    • Books:
      • Lara, L. F. (1997). Teoría del diccionario monolingüe. México: El Colegio de México.
    • Articles:
      • Sánchez Lobato, J. (2007). Procedimientos lingüísticos en la obra literaria de Alonso Zamora Vicente. Revista de filología románica, 24, 53–77.
    • Chapters in books and conference proceedings:
      • Ridruejo, E. (1999). Modo y modalidad. El modo en las subordinadas sustantivas. In I. Bosque, & V. Demonte (Eds.), Gramática Descriptiva de la Lengua Española (vol. 2) (pp. 3209–3252). Madrid: Espasa Calpe.