Post-Publication Discussion

The Journal of English Language Teaching and Linguistics welcomes constructive discussion of its published articles. Scholarly dialogue after publication provides opportunities to clarify findings, examine alternative interpretations, address methodological questions, and advance knowledge in English as a Foreign Language and linguistics.

Scope of Discussion

The journal considers substantive comments, scholarly critiques, and letters to the editor concerning articles published in the journal. Contributions may address theoretical perspectives, research methods, data analysis, interpretations, or implications for language teaching and linguistic research.

Discussion should focus on the scholarly content of the article and be supported by clear reasoning and relevant evidence. Respectful disagreement is welcome. Personal attacks, discriminatory language, unsupported accusations, and disclosure of confidential information are unacceptable.

Submitting Comments and Critiques

Readers may submit comments or critiques to the Editor-in-Chief through the editorial contact details provided on the journal’s website. Submissions should be written in English and include the title, author names, and DOI or URL of the article being discussed.

Contributors should clearly explain the issues raised, provide supporting references or evidence where appropriate, and disclose any relevant competing interests. Their names, affiliations, and contact details should accompany submissions intended for publication.

Concerns about possible research or publication misconduct may be reported confidentially. Substantiated concerns will be assessed even when the person reporting them requests that their identity be withheld from the authors or the public.

Editorial Assessment

The editorial team will assess submissions for relevance, accuracy, clarity, originality, and scholarly significance. Where appropriate, independent experts may be consulted or external peer review may be arranged.

Contributors may be asked to revise their submissions before a publication decision is made. Editors with a relevant conflict of interest will not participate in the assessment. Publication decisions will be based on the merits of the contribution, including when it challenges an article previously accepted by the journal.

Authors’ Right of Response

Authors of the article under discussion will normally be invited to respond to substantive critiques. Responses should address the specific issues raised, provide evidence where necessary, and maintain a professional tone.

The editorial team will communicate a reasonable response deadline and any necessary revisions. An author’s decision not to respond will not, by itself, prevent publication of a well-supported critique.

Publication and Accessibility

Accepted comments, critiques, and author responses will be clearly identified and linked to the relevant article. They will be accessible through the journal’s website so that readers can follow the discussion.

The editorial team may close an exchange when the substantive issues have been adequately addressed or further submissions repeat arguments without adding meaningful evidence or insight.

Discussions on External Platforms

The journal recognises that scholarly discussion may also take place on external platforms, including moderated post-publication review services. Participants are encouraged to bring substantive concerns to the editorial team’s attention and provide links or supporting documentation.

External commentary may prompt editorial assessment, but decisions will be based on an evaluation of the evidence.

Corrections and Research Integrity Concerns

When post-publication discussion identifies a significant error or a potential ethical problem, the journal will assess whether further action is necessary under its Correction and Retraction policy. Depending on the evidence, this may include a correction, an expression of concern, or a retraction.

Differences in theoretical perspective or interpretation do not, by themselves, establish grounds for correcting or retracting an article. Such differences will normally be addressed through scholarly discussion.