About the Journal
History of the journal
Revista Galega de Filoloxía was created in 2000 by members of the Department of Galician-Portuguese in the Faculty of Philology, University of A Coruña. The journal has been published online only since 2017.
Focus and scope
Revista Galega de Filoloxía publishes original, unpublished research on topics of philological (especially linguistic) interest related to Galician-Portuguese language and culture. For the 2022 issue (number 23), the journal will also begin to publish papers on Galician-Portuguese literature.
As well as the main issue, Revista Galega de Filoloxía also publishes special Monographs, which are subject to the same conditions of selection as its article publications (original, unpublished, peer review, etc.) Monograph issues are published in both print and online versions.
Peer review process
In order to ensure the originality, quality and research value of the papers received, the journal uses an anonymous, external peer review process (double-blind peer review).
Frequency of publication
Revista Galega de Filoloxía is published at the end of each year.
Sponsors
ILLA (Research in Galician Language and Literature) research group, University of A Coruña.
Indexing
CARHUS Plus+
CIRC
Dialnet
DICE
DOAJ
Dulcinea
ERIH Plus
ISOC
Latindex
Linguistic Bibliography
MIAR
REDIB
REGESTA IMPERII
SCOPUS
ZBD
Open access policy
All of the journal’s content is available in open access, on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.
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.
Revista Galega de Filoloxía does not charge contributors any submission or publication fees (APCs), and does not charge readers for access to journal content.
In accordance with the principles of Open Science, Revista Galega de Filoloxía authors are permitted to deposit their final accepted manuscripts and copies of published manuscripts in open access institutional and thematic repositories. Revista Galega de Filoloxía also encourages authors to deposit supplementary material related to the research data underpinning their publications in EOSC-federated open access institutional and thematic repositories.
Digital archive policy
Revista Galega de Filoloxía guarantees permanent access to all of its content via the following processes: archiving of published issues in the University of A Coruña institutional repository, use of DOI, and permission for the archiving of full text articles in databases such as Dialnet and REDIB.
Funding policy
Authors should acknowledge explicitly all sources of funding received for the research presented in their manuscript. To this end, all public and private funding bodies and agencies should be cited in the first footnote of the text and in the submission metadata (‘Funding agencies’). The information cited should include: project title, funding code or reference, and name of funding body or agency.
Artificial intelligence policy
In keeping with COPE guidelines, Revista Galega de Filoloxía recognises the value of artificial intelligence (AI) and the benefits to research and science of these new technologies, provided they are not used fraudulently and their use is declared and detailed explicitly. Revista Galega de Filoloxía therefore supports responsible, ethical use of AI that respects the principles of data transparency and confidentiality, and permits its use in general terms as a tool for author-supervised correction of spelling and grammar but under no circumstances for unsupervised automatic generation of content. The journal also permits data analysis using specialised AI-assisted research tools provided results are then human-validated for accuracy and accompanied by a declaration by the authors disclosing the methods and techniques used and their contribution to the final manuscript.
Recommendations for inclusive, non-sexist language
Authors are recommended to use inclusive, non-sexist, non-discriminatory language. To this end, expressions that promote bias or preconceptions in terms of race, gender, sexual orientation, ideology or other characteristics should be avoided.
Inclusive gender forms should be prioritised in manuscripts. For guidelines and other resources in relation to non-sexist language use, see the provided by the University of A Coruña Equality Office website: https://www.udc.es/oficinaigualdade/Ligazons-e-Recursos-de-Interese/linguaxe_non_sexista/.
Sex/gender perspective
Authors are encouraged to include a sex/gender perspective in their research, as relevant, highlighting the influence of sex and/or gender on the research design, method, results, discussion, conclusions and limitations.
Publication ethics
Revista Galega de Filoloxía is believes in and is committed to ensuring good research publishing practice at all stages of the publication process, in accordance with the guidelines and Code of Conduct of the Committee on Publication Ethics (https://publicationethics.org/files/cope-publication-ethics-flowcharts-full-set.pdf).
1. Author responsibility
Submitting authors are required to be familiar with and act in accordance with good research practices.
Manuscripts submitted for publication should be the product of serious, original, unpublished research. The text should include sufficient information regarding the materials used for the study and the results obtained in order to allow the research to be repeated by someone else and the interpretations and arguments to be confirmed or disconfirmed.
Any significant errors detected by the author should be brought to the attention of the Editors as soon as possible.
Authorship should be acknowledged for all authors who make a significant intellectual and scientific contribution to the conception and design of the study, analysis and interpretation of the data, and/or composition and critical review of the manuscript. The order in which authors appear should be in direct relation to their level of contribution to the work, with the lead author named first.
Contributors who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be named in the acknowledgements section at the end of the manuscript.
In order to ensure the correct functioning of the blind peer review process, authors should anonymise manuscripts to avoid their identification by the reviewers. These anonymising measures include: removal of authors’ names from manuscript; substitution of identifying information in the bibliography using the formula ‘Author, Year’ in its place; and removal of all personal identifiers from any electronic files submitted.
2. Responsibilities of Editors and Editorial Board
The Editors of the journal are responsible for ensuring that manuscripts are assessed on the basis of their research quality. Authors will be informed of the decision to accept or reject a paper based on the result of an initial plagiarism check using the Turnitin plagiarism detection programme and the subsequent recommendation of the two anonymous peer reviewers. Substandard peer reviews or reviews not returned within the stipulated time frame will not be considered. Papers may also be rejected on the grounds that they do not fit the focus or scope of the journal. The Editors and Editorial Board undertake to give impartial consideration to all manuscripts submitted for publication and to respect the intellectual independence of the authors.
The Editors, Editorial Board and peer reviewers will ensure the confidentiality of all manuscripts received and of their content until they have been accepted for publication. The Editors, members of the Editorial Board and peer reviewers may not use material from manuscripts submitted for publication for their own research without the express consent of the author.
2.1. Decision to publish
All manuscripts are initially assessed in-house by the Editors and/or Editorial Board to determine whether they fit the journal’s profile. All articles deemed suitable for publication are checked for plagiarism using the Turnitin plagiarism detection programme and then sent to two independent experts to assess the quality of the text. The Editors are responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the manuscript. The decision to publish is based on the paper’s contribution to knowledge and its interest to the target audience.
2.2. Identification of misconduct
The Editors are responsible for dealing with all allegations of research misconduct in accordance with the guidelines established by COPE and may seek the assistance of the Editorial and Scientific Boards to do so. The investigation and resolution of research misconduct allegations should be properly documented. The author will be contacted by the Editors and informed of their opinion regarding the alleged misconduct. Should the misconduct continue, the Editors will be entitled to take whatever action they deem appropriate.
2.3. Responsibilities of peer reviewers
The Editors will ensure that the two anonymous reviewers possess sufficient expertise in the area covered by the article. Experts invited to peer review a text are required to decline the invitation if they do not feel they have the time or knowledge necessary to assess the manuscript, they do not believe their report would be objective, or a conflict of interest arises with a member of the editorial team or boards of the journal.
Peer reviewers are requested to identify any manuscripts suspected of research misconduct and report them to the Editors.
3. Conflict of interest
Authors must inform the Editors of any direct or indirect conflict of interest with members of the Editorial Board or Scientific Board. Peer reviewers, likewise, must withdraw from the review process in the event of a conflict of interest with the author or the manuscript. Conflicts of interest with the author include: i) a close personal relationship; ii) a significant professional relationship, and iii) any personal, academic or professional circumstance which may impair the reviewer’s ability to remain objective.
4. Corrections and retractions
Any errors detected by the author after publication should be notified to the editors as soon as possible. Any errors detected by the editors will be notified to the author, assessed and amended as soon as possible. Minor errors will be corrected in the text, glossed in an endnote, and accompanied by a separate, linked corrigendum or erratum.
Articles containing major errors which cannot be covered by a correction notice may be retracted by the editors. The retraction process is as follows: addition of the phrase ‘Article retracted’ before the title on the contents page; addition of an ‘Article retracted’ watermark on all pages of the article; and inclusion of a retraction notice from the editors explaining the reasons for the retraction.
Editorial activity
Editorial activity 2024
Interoperability protocol
Revista Galega de Filoloxía uses an Open Archives Initiative Protocol for Metadata Harvesting (OAI-PMH) interface, allowing other portals and information services to access metadata from published content.
Details:
OAI-PMH Protocol Version 2.0
Dublin Core Metadata