Romance Notes

You are here Home  > Journals >  Romance Notes
Item image

Founded in 1959 at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Romance Notes is published three times a year. The journal welcomes the submission of innovative, interdisciplinary articles on Spanish, Portuguese, French and Italian literature and culture. We highly encourage submissions that present original approaches to the study of gender and feminism, historical memory, literary history and theory, popular culture, film, colonialism and postcoloniality, postnationalism and globalization. Romance Notes does not accept unsolicited book reviews.

Our address

Department of Romance Languages, CB#3170 Dey Hall The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Chapel Hill, NC 27599-3170.
35.9089514, -79.04839820000001

Close Comments

Comments (28)

  1. This was my first journal publication in grad school. They accepted a short article from me (around 8 pages). If I remember correctly, the feedback was prompt-ish (4 months or so) and the proofs were great.

  2. This journal seems to me an excellent place to send a short article (3000 word max.) on either Peninsular or Latin American themes. The time they took to respond was reasonable, around a half year, and their comments upon provisional acceptance were brief but constructive. Overall a pleasant, straightforward experience.

  3. I agree with previous anonymous comment. My last experience with them was very positive.

    “Notes” is a bit of a misnomer, since most articles there are 8-12 pages, but I suppose “Romance Short Articles” would not have the same hook.

  4. Great experience, VERY quick turnaround. I submitted a piece and received a confirmation of receipt letter within a week. The formal acceptance letter arrived the following week with a request for minor formatting corrections. Although the acceptance made the whole transaction pretty much perfect, I have to note how satisfying it was to get a typed letter on letterhead rather than an email. I know I’m an earth-killing snail-mail-lover, but still, it’s nice to get a response in the same mode that we’re expected to submit.

  5. Excellent experience overall – I submitted my article online and it was formally accepted about 2 months later. They do expect contributors to subscribe for one year ($40), and after making the requested format changes (margins, notes, title format, etc), you must mail a CD and printed copies of your paper to them. This seemed odd, since the initial submissions were all done online… but overall not a big deal. i definitely recommend this journal for short articles

  6. Great experience! they were very fast (2-3 months) and their editing was careful. I would highly recommend!

  7. Very fast response and turnaround. My article went form submission to print in seven or eight months.

    Also, they will still make offprints for you (if you’re willing to pay for them, naturally), which is getting more and more rare.

  8. I had a very positive experience here. The assistant editors are very quick to respond to questions via email and are very efficient at keeping you apprised of the process. My conditional acceptance arrived in approximately 4 months (including the winter holiday) and was accepted after the minor revisions were made in about a month. The publication will come out about a year after the original submission.

  9. My experience was similar to that of everyone above. Quick turn around, professional and reasonable feedback.

  10. My submission was rejected with not much feedback after seven months. I thought this was too long to wait, but maybe it’s more common than I realize. I wish I’d received more constructive feedback to help me rework the piece. Now I’ve lost a lot of time, and my tenure clock did not stop ticking.

  11. I had a very positive experience. The process was fast. And I received constructive feedback that improved the article. The editorial assistant maintained great communication. Overall, a fantastic experience.

  12. The journal has just changed editorship (though it is still housed in the same department). The new editor has extended the length of submissions to 6000 words and the journal is slated to include several special issues in the coming years.

  13. The old 3000-word limit was seldom observed in RN anyway, so the new limit seems to just reflect what was already happening in practice. Hopefully it will not lose its uniqueness as a venue for short academic pieces.

  14. I can second the quick turnaround, for which I’m grateful. The comments were marginally helpful, even if it seemed that the reader missed the point of the argument.

  15. I had to rescind a submission after waiting almost a year with no reply from reviewer. When I finally inquired, the assistants were polite and apologetic, and told me that changes taking place on the editorial board were affecting the turnaround times for articles. I appreciated the candor, but still, disappointing.

  16. Can those who have submitted to RN in the recent past speak to the time elapsed from initial acknowledgement of receipt of submission to the reply with commentaries/feedback? The website FAQ for RN and Hispanofila reports recommending 1-1.5 months to their readers, but this seems ambiguous, particularly in light of some of the more recent comments posted above. I am just wondering when it might be appropriate to contact the editor regarding the status of my submission so as to avoid the situation of the post from May 28, 2014.

  17. I received an acknowledgment within a week of submission and a rejection with brief comments approximately 3 months after that.

  18. I had an overall quite pleasant experience. The editors sent me an acknowledgment of receipt within two weeks of submission. The review process took about two months and had a positive outcome. The feedback from the reviewers was helpful and showed a careful reading. This helped me improve the final and slightly revised version of the article. Email communication was extremely efficient and very professional. I would definitely recommend submitting something to Romance Notes.

  19. I received an acknowledgment within 3 weeks of submission and a rejection with brief comments 7 months after that. Comments were constructive, but the reviewer somehow missed the point of my article and proposed some changes that would have extended it to double its length. On the positive side, he/she noted important flaws, so he/she was very right rejecting it and his/her comments have been very valuable to me in order to improve the article and fix its issues. Overall, great experience, even though my article hasn’t been accepted 🙁

  20. It took them 8 months to respond the first time, and that was after contacting the editor several times. They invited me to revise and resubmit. They then rejected the article with the revisions! (and again I had to write them to get them to respond to me within a reasonable period of time). There also appeared to have only been one outside reader. The comments were ‘not’ constructive, and I had the impression the reviewer had not read the novel I was discussing because comments did not make sense. I immediately sent the article to a higher ranking journal and it was accepted within weeks with minor revisions. In short, the lesson I learned: if you sense the reviewer is not familiar with your topic, don’t bother revising (even if you are invited to do so), just send it somewhere else. While many people have had a positive experience with this journal, it was the worst experience I have ever had, and I have published in many journals.

  21. Absolutamente cierto. Mi experiencia con Romance Notes fue muy positiva pero sí es verdad que a veces el lector -en general en nuestra profesión- tiene una somera idea -en el mejor de los casos- o, ni repajolera idea -en el peor- y se ve abocado a emitir un juicio o enmienda sin ton ni son.

    Es cierto que en las publicaciones con cierto renombre como ésta, con evaluadores de cierto prestigio y con parcelas de especialización bien definidas, es menos probable que se dé esta circunstancia pero desafortunadamente también ocurre.

    Felicidades por su publicación en esa nueva revista que Ud. menciona.

  22. I submitted my article in April and received a conditional acceptance in November. Revisions from one reader showed a careful reading and provided helpful ways to improve the article’s content. I was slightly disappointed that I was not able to see the copy edited proofs before the article was published, which is the norm for other journals I’ve worked with.

    Overall, I was satisfied with the process and final product and recommend the journal to colleagues.

  23. This is a great journal for shorter pieces (3000-5000 words). I submitted an article in June and it was accepted with minor revisions in early December. The reader reports were extremely thorough, and it was in print by February or March of the next year. Very positive experience on all counts.

  24. hispanista0876  |  

    Very good experience with this journal. They have an online system that allows you to check at which stage of revision your article is, and they e-mailed me to let me know that my article (a shorter, 4700 word piece) had been accepted. Very thorough comments, very friendly and clear managing editor.

  25. Terrible revista. Son una vergüenza; ni cumplen con deadlines, ni las revisiones, si es que alguna vez las entregan, son serias, y los evaluadores (sy caso hay más de uno) suelen ser individuos con poca preparación en el área que evalúan; eso sí, son amigos de los editores. Patético.

    • Hola. Soy Irene Gomez y fui la editora de Romance Notes desde 2018 hasta 2023. En respuesta al último comentario: uno de los grandes retos de editar una revista académica como RN, que lleva más de 60 años de trayectoria y que recibe decenas de artículos cada mes, es encontrar lectores especialistas que quieran generosamente evaluar artículos.
      En los últimos años, y en mi experiencia y la de otros editores en el campo con los que he trabajado, las crecientes cargas de trabajo administrativo hacen que muchos especialistas no puedan permitirse el lujo de gastar una hora o dos de su valioso tiempo evaluando el trabajo de otros colegas. Es un trabajo completamente invisible. Es por eso que, cuando dices que los editores recurren a “amigos”, me sorprende que te parezca patético, pues muchas veces son los colegas amigos y conocidos los que con mayor probabilidad van a aceptar la carga extra de trabajo invisible que supone evaluar artículos. El esfuerzo por encontrar especialistas es una de las mayores cargas de ser editor.
      Romance Notes, por otra parte, publica artículos sobre muchos campos y literaturas muy diversas, lo cual convierte el trabajo de encontrar evaluadores apropiados en especialmente complejo: publicamos sobre literatura y cultura española, latinoamericana, italiana, francesa y francófona, catalana, portuguesa, brasileña, etc. y sobre campos como cine, lingüística, literatura, cultura, etc.
      Sé que los nuevos editores seguirán enfrentándose al mismo problema y que, a falta de especialistas que quieran aceptar la carga extra de trabajo invisible que supone evaluar artículos, se verán obligados a acudir a los colegas generosos y amigos que puedan ayudarles, aun preservando el sistema ciego de evaluación por pares, como siempre garantizamos.

Leave a Comment

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