Radical aims to promote studies with provocative, innovative and possibly non-conformist analyses providing new ways of conceptualizing our discipline. Papers submitted to our journal can be radically theoretical, radically descriptive, radically methodological, radically GP, radically OT, etc. In order to stimulate radicality in Phonology, Radical develops an original publication process based on two main principles:
- Papers can be prepublished and accessed by spontaneous reviewers
- Relevant reviews are published with the paper
We believe that evaluation is fundamentally a public and long-term process that cannot be reduced to the opinion of a limited number of experts in a limited period of time. For this reason, we want to open the scientific debate by broadening the pool of reviewers and by making public the debates that take place during the evaluation of a paper.
Is it something new?
E-print repositories already exist in several disciplines (physics, mathematics, biology, linguistics…). Most of them are simple archives gathering published and unpublished papers (e.g. ROA, linguzz, arXiv) or only published papers (e.g. Semantic Scholar). However, some platforms also propose a feedback system which goes from informal comments (e.g. BioRxiv) to real evaluation (e.g. F1000Research). These tend to clear the difference between e-print repositories and classical journals.
How to publish?
We specifically encourage short papers defending new and provoking ideas. However, all sizes are accepted. Submitted manuscripts are checked before being pre-published on the journal’s website. The author has two options: anonymous or non-anonymous pre-publication. In both cases, editors contact reviewers who are experts in the subject matter. Readers of the journal may also submit a review that will be taken into consideration by the editors. When a paper is considered acceptable, it falls into the publication category of the journal.
How to review?
A review can be submitted by a selected or spontaneous reviewer. After checking the content and degree of expertise, the reviews are sent to the author. The latter may choose to take into account the comments of his reviewers in his manuscript and/or reply to them separately. Depending on the discussions between the author and his reviewers, editors may or may not choose to publish the paper. If the paper is published, discussions revealing relevant debates on the substance of the author’s proposal are also published. Thus, reviewers’ work is respected and recognized as a true scientific and publishable work. Reviews can be anonymous or not, at the choice of the reviewers.
How to cite?
Three categories of texts can be cited from Radical: published papers, pre-published manuscripts and reviews. Only published papers and reviews may be labelled Radical: A Journal of Phonology. Manuscripts are only “available on the Radical website”. The citation of a review must include the name of the reviewer (if not anonymous), the name of the author, the title of the article and the journal Radical. We propose the following format:
Reviewer, A. (2018) “Comments”. In Author, A. (auth.) “Title of the paper”, Radical: A Journal of Phonology, 1(1), 1-5.