You are here Home  > Journals >  Neophilologus

Close Comments

Comments (9)

  1. This journal has a great turn around time. I submitted an article (both electronically and via FedEx). The decision came back in about a month. They have a phenomenal electronic pipeline so editorial revisions were done on-line and quite efficiently. The open access version was uploaded on the Springer site within a month after the revisions were submitted, but the hard copy has not been published yet.
    A great place to publish with a very good reputation.

  2. My experience. From submission to publication it must have taken about two years, which is excessive considering that the article was accepted without revisions. That was in 1998-2000. Maybe they had a considerable backlog then, or they’ve improved their turnaround time.

    It’s one of the most reputed general literature journals in continental Europe, though largely unknown in the US.

  3. They accepted my submission about a year ago and hasn’t been published yet. They have however put it up online, which is a bit obnoxious — you’re article is “out” but it is not because you don’t have all bibliographic details.
    This is supposed to be a good journal, but I have recently read pretty bad stuff published here.
    I will not submit anything to them again

  4. I’ve had one of my best publication experiences with this journal. They took 2 months to peer-review my article and in another month, my article was already published on line. After that, from acceptance it only took 6 months to have my article printed. So the timing is much faster than many or most of the other journals. I recommend this journal to everybody.

  5. Hi everyone! One of my colleagues recommended this journal, he has published in good journals too. But reading some of the comments here, it makes me wonder if it is a bad thing to have it online before is printed. What do you guys think of this policy? any input is greatly appreciated.

  6. I personally don’t have a problem with articles first appearing online. As long as they have page numbers and are available for citation, I don’t see the need for print. Such a concern may be a layover from the age of print and the sanctity given to the physical page – an age that most of us know is bygone.

  7. My publishing experience with this journal was great.
    Very fast turnaround. Generally publishes well researched articles. Recently I have noticed a big increase in well known
    US hispanists publishing in this journal.

  8. I published with them and it was a great experience. Useful feedback and fast publication. However, I didn’t understood why they had that policy on publishing articles “first online” and then placing them into the corresponding issue.

  9. I submitted a manuscript in February 2017 and got a response within 3.5 months. It was rejected, but what bothered me was the lack of comments from the reviewers upon their decision. The only justification I received for rejecting my article was a “great number of submissions”. I don’t mind the rejection, but I would appreciate some feedback.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *