Framework
Dil Dergisi endorses the principles and flowcharts of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Questions and reports on ethical matters may be addressed to the Editor in Chief: makaroglu@ankara.edu.tr
Peer review
The stages of review, the criteria for selecting reviewers, the decision categories and the timescales are set out in full on the journal’s Peer Review Process page. All submissions are confidential and reviewers and editors may not share or make use of unpublished content. Reviewers must inform the editor and decline the assignment where any conflict of interest could affect their assessment. Reviewers may recommend relevant work that the manuscript has not cited.
Editorial independence
Manuscripts authored by the Editor in Chief, associate editors or editorial board members are handled by an independent editor and the author concerned has no access to any stage of the process. The proportion of research articles with at least one author who is an editor, board member or reviewer does not exceed 25 per cent in either of the two most recent issues. Publication decisions rest solely on scholarly merit and the authors’ institution, nationality, gender, ethnicity, religion, political views or sexual orientation are never a criterion.
Responsibilities of authors
Authors must ensure that the work has not been published elsewhere and has not been submitted simultaneously to another journal. Authorship is limited to those making a substantive intellectual contribution and all co-authors approve the final text. No change to the author list or its order may be made without the written consent of all authors and a decision by the editor.
All information, data and images drawn from other sources must be properly cited. Authors must own the data or hold permission to use it, and permissions must be secured for all images. Financial support, funding and conflicts of interest must be declared. Authors participate in the review process and respond within the deadlines set. Where an error is identified before or after publication, the editor must be notified without delay.
Responsibilities of reviewers
Reviewers maintain confidentiality, assess manuscripts impartially and with reasoned judgement, declare conflicts of interest and refrain from personal criticism.
Responsibilities of editors
Editors safeguard the confidentiality and impartiality of the process, keep authors and reviewers properly informed and record and respond to complaints. Where fabrication, plagiarism or ethical breach is identified they prevent publication, and where the work has already appeared they issue a correction or retraction notice.
Similarity screening and plagiarism
All submissions are screened with Turnitin by the editorial team and the resulting report is shared with the authors. Screening excludes the reference list and direct quotations and disregards matches shorter than five words. Calculated on these settings, total similarity is expected to remain below 20 per cent, and similarity from any single source below 5 per cent.
These figures are a screening threshold rather than a decision rule. Exceeding them is not in itself evidence of plagiarism; the editors examine the nature of the overlapping material and request revision where necessary. A manuscript falling below the threshold may still be sent back for revision, or rejected, where citation practice or originality gives cause for concern.
Where work is derived from a thesis, the similarity report is generated with the author’s own thesis excluded as a source, and the exclusion is recorded by the editor. The thresholds are applied to similarity arising from sources other than the thesis. Where high overlap with a thesis is found in a manuscript whose derivation was not declared, the editors request an explanation from the author and handle the matter in accordance with COPE guidance.
Plagiarism, self plagiarism and salami publication are unacceptable and COPE flowcharts are applied where they are identified.
Ethics approval, consent and personal data
Ethics committee approval is required for all research involving human participants, including grammaticality judgement surveys, psycholinguistic experiments, fieldwork and corpus construction. The name of the committee and the date and number of the decision must be stated in the article. Where approval is not required, this must be declared explicitly.
Informed consent must be obtained from participants and speaker identities and personal data must be anonymised. Sharing audio or video recordings requires separate consent.
Artificial intelligence
The use of generative AI tools by authors, reviewers and editors is governed by the journal’s Artificial Intelligence Policy.
Research data
The sharing, citation and licensing of research data are governed by the journal’s Research Data and Open Science Policy.
Corrections, expressions of concern and retractions
Where error, fabrication, plagiarism, unauthorised republication or ethical breach is identified in published work, a correction, expression of concern or retraction notice is issued in accordance with COPE guidance. Notices are linked to the original article, which is not removed from the record.
Complaints and appeals
Appeals against editorial decisions should be submitted to the Editor in Chief with reasons and supporting evidence and are answered within four weeks. Where an appeal concerns the Editor in Chief, it is handled by an independent member of the editorial board.