About the Journal

Focus and Scope

“Opera in Linguistica Ukrainiana” is a specialized collection of scholarly articles that highlights findings in the most important areas of theoretical and practical research in the field of Ukrainian linguistics, achieved by the representatives of Odesa I. I. Mechnikov  National University and other universities and research institutions in Ukraine. The publication also informs about the events in academic life and philological education in Ukraine, provides a review of scientific papers and books on philological subjects. “Opera in Linguistica Ukrainiana” is published for DSc, PhD (CandSc), scientists, university lecturers, graduate and post-graduate students and all those who are interested in Ukrainian philological science achievements.

Peer Review Process

PEER-REVIEW PROVISIONS
for the manuscripts submitted to
the collection of scholarly papers
"Opera in Linguistica Ukrainiana"

  1. This provision regulates the procedure for peer-reviewing and passing the articles that are submitted to the editorial board of the “Opera in Linguistica Ukrainiana” scientific publication.
  2. The primary purpose of the peer review process is to enhance the scientific value of the articles published in the collection through objective selection procedures for author's manuscripts, and to provide sound recommendations (if necessary) for their improvement.
  3. The review procedure is anonymous for both reviewers and authors (double blind peer review); it is carried out by one reviewer or, if necessary, by two reviewers. Both the members of the publication editorial board (internal peer review) and third-party highly qualified specialists who have deep knowledge in a certain scientific field and / or have the necessary experience (external peer review) are entitled to review the manuscripts.
  4. All reviewers should critically and objectively evaluate the manuscripts being submitted for peer review, following the requirements of the Ethics Committee in Publications, which has developed Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers.
  5. The review shall cover the issues identified by the evaluation form set out in Annex 1.
  6. Scientific articles the design of which meets the requirements presented on the official website of the publication are allowed to enter the reviewing stage. In order to determine the degree of compliance with these requirements, all articles and related material of the authors are subject to primary control in the editorial board. If there are any comments during the initial review phase, the article and other materials are returned to the author to have the identified deficiencies corrected.
  7. Internal reviewing is carried out by an editorial board member, who determines the scientific value of the original author’s work, its correspondence to the material of the publication's subject matter, and appoints one or two reviewers – independent experts who have a scientific specialization relevant to the topic of the work.
  8. Domestic and foreign highly qualified specialists, who have scientific works on the subject of the article, are involved in the external peer-reviewing. An external reviewer is selected based on one’s current workload and with their consent.
  9. An editorial board member and / or an external reviewer who has received a coded article fills out a standard form (see Annex 1) and selects one of the recommended options: recommended for publication; revision is recommended; not recommended for publication.
  10. Reviewers are informed that the manuscripts they receive for reviewing are the respected authors’ intellectual property, and that the information contained in the manuscript is not disclosable. Reviewers are not allowed to use work data prior to its publication.
  11. In the event of a negative conclusion (lack of recommendation for publication or determination of the need for revision of an article), the external reviewer and / or the editorial board member should provide a written reasoned explanation of the reasons for such decision.
  12. The final decision on the possibility of publishing an article is made at a meeting of the working group of the publication editorial board.
  13. Further work on the article, which has been accepted for publication, is carried out by the editorial staff in accordance with the technological process of the collection preparation.
  14. The editorial board’s decision shall be communicated to the author (s) of the article. If the article has to be revised, the author (s) also receives a review text containing specific recommendations for correcting the deficiencies having been identified. The anonymity of the reviewers is guaranteed by the editorial board.
  15. At the request of the author, the editorial board may issue a review for familiarization.
  16. The revised version of the article is sent for re-review. In case of the reviewer’s second negative decision, the article is definitively rejected and is not subject to further review.

Publication Frequency

Publication frequency – once a year.

Open Access Policy

The publication supports open access policy based on the principle of free distribution of scientific information and global knowledge exchange for common social progress.

   All articles published in the journal are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

Publication languages

Ukrainian, Bulgarian, Polish, English etc.

Section titles

The history of the language. Phonetics. Lexicology. Word formation. Grammar. Dialectology. Cognitive linguistics and communicative. Suggestive and psycholinguistics. Text Linguistics. Translation.

Financial policy

The publication of works in the periodical is carried out on a non-profit basis with the Article Processing Charge (APC) calculated based on the number of pages in the submitted manuscript.

Ethical standards

The publication's Editorial Board stablished a set of ethical standards that must be followed by persons (editors, authors and reviewers), taking part in publishing the results of research work satisfying the publication specificity. Editorial board, working out on these rules, followed recommendations of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and Ethical Code of Ukrainian Scientist. An experience of home and foreign scientific organizations and editorial boards of other editions have been also taken into account.

Ethical standards for the Editorial Board

  1. Editorial Board bears responsibility for every publication in the collection, that necessitates it to follow the rules:
  • every submitted material for publication passes careful selection as well as external and internal reviewing;
  • editorial board has a right to reject to publish an article or return it for correction;
  • an editor can’t permit publication of information if there are enough causes to consider it as a plagiarism (UNICHECK plagiarism text checking service is used);
  • an editor of the publication when making decision follows reliability of representation of facts and scientific value of work.
  1. Editorial board must decide fair and unprejudiced, be independent of commercial or other interests and guarantee honesty of the process of reviewing; must rate intellectual content of manuscriptes without reference to race, sex, sexual orientation, religious views, origin, citizenship, social status or political preferences of authors.
  2. In case of any violation of rights or common standards of scientific ethics editorial board has a right to withdraw even published article. Editorial board reports about withdrawing of article to an author and to organization, where the work had been done.
  3. According to international law in the part of compliance of author right to informational sources, materials of the publication can`t be reproduced completely or partially in any form (electronic or printed) without preliminary written consent of authors and editorial board. The using of published materials in the context of other documents it is possible under the condition of referring to original work.
  4. Unpublished data received from manuscripts submitted for editing can’t be used for personal purposes or passed to the third parties without written consent of an author. Information and ideas received in the course of editing and concerned with possible benefits must be kept confidentially and can`t be used with the purpose of personal gain.
  5. Editorial board can’t ignore claims concerning viewed manuscripts or published materials. In case of conflict situation it takes all necessary measures to restore violated rights.

Ethical standards for reviewers

  1. Reviewer must evaluate presenting results of researches objectively and well-reasoned. Personal critics of author are unacceptable. Reviewer must be impartial.
  2. Reviewer must immediately return a manuscript submitted to him without reviewing, if:
  • a chosen reviewer is not sure, that his qualification satisfies the level of research, represented in manuscript;
  • a manuscript is closely related to current or published work of reviewer taking into account the possibility of conflict of interests.
  1. Reviewer must consider manuscript submitted for review as a confidential document, which shouldn’t be given for examination or discussed with the third parties who have no authority from editorial board.
  2. He can’t show the manuscript to the third parties or discuss it with colleagues with the exception of special cases, when reviewer needs someone’s professional consultation. 
  3. Unpublished data received from submitted for reviewing manuscripts shouldn’t be used by reviewer in private purposes.
  4. Reviewers must explain and argue their opinion appropriately in order to editors and authors could understand the base of their criticism. Any assertion that an observation, conclusion or argument has been already published must be accompanied with conforming reference.
  5. Reviewer must notice any cases of insufficient citation by authors of the works other scientists, concerned to reviewing work, but it must be taken into consideration that remarks about insufficient citation look as prejudiced. Reviewer must make editor to pay attention to the similarity between reviewing work and any other manuscript, contemporaneously submitted to another journal.

Ethical standards for authors

  1. Authors bear responsibility for content of their articles and for the fact of their publishing, for novelty and reliability of the results of scientific research. Knowingly false or falsified assertions are unacceptable.
  2. Authors must follow requirements of editorial board about format of publications.
  3. Presentation of plagiarism as an original work and presentation for publishing of previously published article are unacceptable.
  4. Authors must indicate clearly the sources of all cited and presented information and set out references on literary sources in the proper way. (see Information for authors).
  5. If author finds substantial errors or inaccuracies in the article at the stage of its reviewing or after its publishing, he must inform the editorial board immediately.