Focus and Scope

Our aim is to make the papers available via an open access platform to allow the results of the research to reach a larger audience.

We welcome submissions in English, French and German. Guest edited volumes at the request of the guest editor may be published in Italian, Polish, Russian and Chinese.

We encourage researchers to submit proposals for guest-edited Special Issues. Proposals should be sent to the EIC.

The main aim of the journal is:

1) to broaden knowledge in the field of legal languages and comparative legilinguistics (especially legal translation and court interpreting),

2) to develop co-operation between lawyers and linguists in the field of forensic linguistics,

3) to develop co-operation between lawyers and linguists in the field of legal linguistics

4) to identify, promote and publish interdisciplinary and innovative research papers in legal linguistics,

5) to present comparative studies on the legal reality of different legal languages and the impact of such differences on legal communication,

6) to educate adepts of legal translation,

7) to provide a forum of exchange of information between researchers investigating the intersection of language and law.

The scope of the journal encompasses legal linguistics, forensic linguistics, legal translation studies, legal interpreting, the history of legal language development, legal semiotics, legal discourses, the philosophy of legal languages, legal translation and interpretation models, the intersection between law and language, law and literature, as well as the relation between law and aesthetics.
We publish original and high quality papers as well as reviews of books and research projects.

Peer Review Process

Peer review is an essential element of scholarly publication which serves two key functions:

(i) It ensures proper verification of articles before publishing (assessing their validity, significance and originality to ensure only good research is published), and

(ii) It improves the quality of the research by helping eliminate and correct inadvertent errors or to increase the quality of submitted papers. The reviewers should accept an invitation to peer review a paper only if they are competent to review the article (the topic of the article is within their field of expertise).

The reviewers should be aware of the fact that on average it takes about 5 hours to review a paper properly. If a reviewer cannot conduct the review within the stipulated time limit, he or she shall let the editor know about the fact immediately, and if possible advise the editor of alternative reviewers or the alternative deadline.

In order to avoid any potential conflicts of interest the journal has implemented double-blind peer review process. The editors reserve the right to appoint a third reviewer in case of doubts.

The editorial board reserves the right to publish selected articles without two reviews. We reserve a right to have one review in cases where the topic of the paper is very niche and it is not possible to find two competent reviewers.

Reviewers shall not disclose information acquired in the review process.

The reviewers must have a reviewer’s profile at the Pressto Open Journal System  platform: https://pressto.amu.edu.pl/index.php/cl. Reviewers should fill in the journal review form onto the journal platform. Any recommendations made by a reviewer will contribute to the final decision made by the editor. It is recommended to provide a quick summary of the article in your report to reassure the author and editor that you have understood the article. The review should be courteous, constructive and should provide insight into any deficiencies. In the event of an article being rejected due to poor quality, or out of scope, the reviewer should justify his opinion making sure that both editors and authors are able to fully understand the reasoning behind the comments. If the reviewer suggests revision, it should be indicated whether minor or major changes are required. Additionally, a reviewer should indicate to the editor whether or not he/she would be happy to review the revised article or whether it is up to the editor to check that the author has followed the reviewer’s instructions.

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. For articles published in Comparative Legilinguistics there are neither article submission charges nor article processing charges whatsoever. Publication in Comparative Legilinguistics  is entirely free.

Authors who publish with Comparative Legilinguistics agree to the following terms and conditions:

(i) Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.

(ii) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.

(iii) Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) after the publication of the paper in the journal.

Reviewers

 

LIST OF REVIEWERS 2019

  1. dr Agata de Laforcade     ISIT, France
  2. dr Agnieszka Doczekalska             Kozminski University, Warsaw, Poland
  3. dr Alex Kasonde Africa University, Zimbabwe
  4. dr hab., prof. UP Artur Kubacki Pedagogical University of Cracow, Poland
  5. Carmen Bestué              Universitat Autònoma de Barcelona, Spain
  6. Clara Ho-yan Chan     The Chinese University of Hong Kong
  7. dr Daria Zozula    Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland
  8. dr Edyta Więcławska        University of Rzeszów, Rzeszów, Poland
  9. dr Halina Sierocka            University of Białystok, Poland
  10. dr Jan Gościński Pedagogical University of Cracow, Cracow, Poland
  11. Jean-Claude Gémar    University of Geneva, Switzerland
  12. dr Jeffrey Killman             University of North Carolina at Charlotte, USA
  13. dr hab. Joanna Grzybek Jagiellonian University in Kraków, Poland
  14. Judith Rosenhouse     before retirement: Technion - Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel. After retirement - SWANTECH LTD., HAIFA, ISRAEL
  15. dr hab. Karolina Kaczmarek Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland
  16. dr Karolina Paluszek        Jan Dlugosz University in Częstochowa, Poland
  17. dr Ksenia Gałuskina         University of Silesia, Katowice, Poland
  18. Lavinia Nadrag             Ovidius University, Constanţa, Romania
  19. dr hab., prof. UW Łucja Biel          University of Warsaw, Poland
  20. dr Margarete Flöter-Durr              Université de Strasbourg, France
  21. dr Marianne Starlander   Université de Genève, Switzerland
  22. dr Marta Andruszkiewicz               University of Białystok, Poland
  23. dr Ondrej Klabal Palacký University Olomouc, Czech Republic
  24. dr Onorina Botezat           Dimitrie Cantemir Christian University, Bucharest, Romania
  25. Silvia Parra-Galiano    University of Granada, Granada
  26. Sylvie Monjean-Decaudin       Sorbonne University, France
  27. PhDr. Tomáš Duběda              Charles University in Prague, Czech Republic
  28. dr Witosław Awedyk         University of Szczecin, Poland

 

LIST OF REVIEWERS 2018

1. Alex Kasonde, Africa University, College of Social Sciences Theology Humanities & Education, Zimbabwe 
2. Artur D. Kubacki, Pedagogical University of Cracow, Poland 
3. Dan Ophir, Ariel University, Computer Science and Mathematics Department, Ariel, Israel 
4. Edyta Więcławska, University of Rzeszów, Poland 
5. Elsa Skenderi, University of Tirana, Albania 
6. Emilia Wojtasik-Dziekan, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland 
7. Ewa Betańska, University of Warsaw, Poland 
8. Joanna Grzybek, Jagiellonian University in Kraków, Poland 
9. Joanna Rydzewska-Siemiątkowska, University of Warsaw, Poland 
10. Judith Rosenhouse, Technion I.I.T., Deptartment of Humanities and Arts, Haifa, Israel 
11. Karolina Paluszek, Jan Dlugosz University in Czestochowa, Poland 
12. Katarzyna Siewert-Kowalkowska, Kazimierz Wielki University, Bydgoszcz, Poland 
13. Ksenia Gałuskina, University of Silesia in Katowice, Poland 
14. Lavinia Nădrag, Ovidius University of Constanta, Romania 
15. Mami Hiraike Okawara, Takasaki City University of Economics, Japan 
16. Maria Teresa Lizisowa, Pedagogical University of Cracow, Poland 
17. Marta Andruszkiewicz, University of Bialystok, Poland 
18. Mateusz Stępień, Jagiellonian University in Kraków, Poland 
19. Onorina Botezat, Universitea Spiru Haret, Romania 
20. Paulina Nowak-Korcz, University of Lodz, Poland 
21. Stanislaw Goźdź-Roszkowski, University of Lodz, Poland 
22. Szymon Machowski, The University of Commerce and Services (WSHIU) in Poznań, Poland 

 

LIST OF REVIEWERS 2017

  1. prof. dr hab. Jerzy Bańczerowski, Wyższa Szkoła Języków Obcych, Poznań,Poland
  2. dr Ewa Betańska, Warsaw University
  3. dr Onorina Botezat, Universitea Spiru Haret, Romania
  4. dr Ksenia Gałuskina, University of Silesia, Poland
  5. dr hab. Joanna Grzybek, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland
  6. prof. dr hab. Artur Dariusz Kubacki, Pedagogical University of Cracow, Kraków, Poland
  7. prof. dr hab. emeritus Maria Teresa Lizisowa
  8. prof. dr hab. Lavinia Nadrag, Ovidius University, Constanţa, Romania
  9. dr Katarzyna Siewert-Kowalkowska, Kazimierz Wielki University, Bydgoszcz, Poland

Internal reviewers appointed when three reviews are required or no other competent reviewers may be found due to the topic of the paper under the journal peer-review policy:

  1. dr Paulina Nowak-Korcz, Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań, Poland
  2. dr hab. prof. UAM, Aleksandra Matulewska, Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań, Poland
  3. dr Hanka Błaszkowska, Adam Mickiewicz University in Poznań, Poland

 

LIST OF REVIEWERS 2016

1. prof. dr hab. Jerzy Bańczerowski, Wyższa Szkoła Języków Obcych, Poznań 
2. dr Grażyna Bednarek, University of Economy, Medical University, Bydgoszcz 
3. dr Łucja Biel, University of Warsaw 
4. Prof. Kateryna Bondarenko, Kirovohrad Volodymyr Vynnychenko State Pedagogical University, Ukraine 
5. dr Onorina Botezat, Universitea Spiru Haret, Rumunia 
6. prof. dr hab. Lavinia (Nadrag) Dan, Ovidius University, Constanţa 
7. dr Agnieszka Doczekalska, Kozminski University, Warsaw 
8. dr Ksenia Gałuskina, University of Silesia 
9. dr hab. Joanna Grzybek, Jagiellonian University, Kraków, Poland 
10. dr Alex Kasonde, Africa University, Zimbabwe 
11. dr Ewa Kościałkowska-Okońska, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Toruń 
12. Prof. Larisa Krjukova, Tomsk State University Russia 
13. prof. dr hab. Artur Dariusz Kubacki, Pedagogical University of Cracow 
14. Prof. Heikki Mattila, University of Lapland, Finland 
15. Dr Miljen MATIJAŠEVIĆ, University of Zagreb, Croatia 
16. dr Anna Nowakowska-Głuszak, University of Silesia, Katowice 
17. dr Dan Ophir, Ariel University, Israel 
18. Prof Judith Rosenhouse, Technion, Haifa 
19. dr Halina Sierocka, University of Białystok 
20. dr Katarzyna Siewert-Kowalkowska, Kazimierz Wielki University, Bydgoszcz 
21. prof. UMK dr hab. Lech Zieliński, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Toruń 

 

LIST OF REVIEWERS 2015

  1. prof dr. Janet Ainsworth, Seattle University School of Law, USA
  2. dr Sol Azuelos-Atias, University of Haifa, Izrael
  3. prof. dr hab. Jerzy Bańczerowski, Wyższa szkoła Języków Obcych, Poznań 
  4. dr Grażyna Bednarek, University of Economy, Bydgoszcz 
  5. dr Ewa Betańska, universytet Warszawski, Polska 
  6. dr Łucja Biel, University of Warsaw 
  7. dr Christos Bintoudis, University of Warsaw 
  8. dr Onorina Botezat, Universitea Spiru Haret, Rumunia
  9. dr Karsten Dahlmanns, Uniwersytet Śląski, Katowice Polska 
  10. prof. dr hab. Lavinia (Nadrag) Dan, Ovidius University, Constanţa 
  11. dr Agnieszka Doczekalska, Kozminski University, Warsaw 
  12. dr Anna Dolata-Zaród, University of Silesia, Katowice 
  13. dr Ksenia Gałuskina, University of Silesia 
  14. dr Mike Garant, University of Helsinki 
  15. dr Ada Gruntar, University of Ljubljana 
  16. dr Józef Jarosz, University of Wrocław 
  17. dr Ewa Kościałkowska-Okońska, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Toruń 
  18. prof. dr hab. Artur Dariusz Kubacki, Pedagogical University of Cracow 
  19. Mouri Masako, Kansai Gaidai University, Japonia
  20. dr Karolina Nartowska, University of Vienna, Austria
  21. dr Anna Nowakowska-Głuszak, University of Silesia, Katowice 
  22. Professor Mami Hiraike Okawara, Graduate School of Regional Policy, Takasaki City University of Economics, Japonia
  23. dr Dan Ophir, Ariel University, Israel 
  24. dr Kiriakos Papoulidis University of Wrocław 
  25. dr Sara Pennicino, University of Padua 
  26. dr Lopez Samaniego, University of Barcelona 
  27. dr Katarzyna Siewert-Kowalkowska, Kazimierz Wielki University, Bydgoszcz 
  28. dr Tanja Wissik, University of Vienna

Internal reviewers appointed when three reviews are required under the journal peer-review policy:

  1. Karolina Gortych-Michalak, Adam Mickiewicz University of Poznan 
  2. Yuki Horie, Adam Mickiewicz University of Poznan 
  3. Karolina Kaczmarek, Adam Mickiewicz University of Poznan 
  4. Paulina Nowak-Korcz, Adam Mickiewicz University of Poznan 
  5. Joanna Nowak-Michalska, Adam Mickiewicz University of Poznan 
  6. Kyong-geun Oh, Adam Mickiewicz University of Poznan

 

LIST OF REVIEWERS 2014

  1. prof. dr hab. Jerzy Bańczerowski, Wyższa szkoła Języków Obcych, Poznań 
  2. dr Grażyna Bednarek, University of Economy Bydgoszcz 
  3. dr Ewa Betańska, universytet Warszawski, Polska 
  4. dr Łucja Biel, University of Warsaw 
  5. dr Katarzyna Biernacka-Licznar, University of Wrocław 
  6. dr Christos Bintoudis, University of Warsaw 
  7. dr Onorina Botezat, Universitea Spiru Haret 
  8. prof. dr hab. Lavinia (Nadrag) Dan, Ovidius University, Constanţa 
  9. dr Agnieszka Doczekalska, Kozminski University, Warsaw 
  10. dr Anna Dolata-Zaród, University of Silesia, Katowice 
  11. dr Ksenia Gałuskina, University of Silesia 
  12. dr Mike Garant, University of Helsinki 
  13. dr Ada Gruntar, University of Ljubljana 
  14. dr Chen Jason, National Taiwan University of Science and Technology 
  15. dr Józef Jarosz, University of Wrocław 
  16. dr Ewa Kościałkowska-Okońska, Nicolaus Copernicus University, Torun 
  17. prof. dr hab. Artur Dariusz Kubacki, Pedagogical University of Cracow 
  18. prof. dr hab. Maria Teresa Lizisowa, Pedagogical University of Cracow 
  19. dr Julia Mazurkiewicz-Sułkowska, University of Lodz 
  20. dr Anna Nowakowska-Głuszak, University of Silesia, Katowice 
  21. dr Dan Ophir, Ariel University, Israel 
  22. dr Kiriakos Papoulidis University of Wrocław 
  23. dr Sara Pennicino, University of Padua 
  24. prof dr Fernando Prieto Ramos, University of Geneva 
  25. dr Lopez Samaniego, University of Barcelona 
  26. dr Katarzyna Siewert-Kowalkowska, Kazimierz Wielki University, Bydgoszcz 
  27. dr Rafał Szubert, University of Wrocław 
  28. prof. dr Le Dinh Tu, Adam Mickiewicz University of Poznan 
  29. dr Tanja Wissik, University of Vienna

Internal reviewers appointed when three reviews are required under the journal peer-review policy:

  1. Karolina Gortych-Michalak, Adam Mickiewicz University of Poznan 
  2. Yuki Horie, Adam Mickiewicz University of Poznan 
  3. Karolina Kaczmarek, Adam Mickiewicz University of Poznan 
  4. Paulina Nowak-Korcz, Adam Mickiewicz University of Poznan 
  5. Joanna Nowak-Michalska, Adam Mickiewicz University of Poznan 
  6. Kyong-geun Oh, Adam Mickiewicz University of Poznan

 

LIST OF REVIEWERS 2013

  1. Jerzy Bańczerowski, professor, Wyższa Szkoła Języków Obcych, Poznań, Poland
  2. Łucja Biel, PhD, University of Gdańsk, Poland
  3. Katarzyna Biernacka-Licznar, PhD, Uniwersytet Wrocławski 
  4. Onorina Botezat, PhD, Universitea "Spiru Haret"/ University "Spiru Haret", Facultatea de Drept si Administratie Publica, Constanta/ Faculty of Law and Public Administration
  5. Sheng-Jie Chen, PhD, Nati

 

Publishing Ethics

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

For all parties involved in the act of publishing (the author, the journal editor(s), the peer reviewer and the publisher) it is necessary to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior. The ethics statements for the Comparative Legilinguistics are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

 

Editor Responsibilities

Accountability

The editor of a peer-reviewed journal is responsible for deciding which articles submitted to the journal should be published, and, moreover, is accountable for everything published in the journal. In making these decisions, the editor may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board as well as by legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers when making publication decisions. The editor should maintain the integrity of the academic record, preclude business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards, and always be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed.

Fairness

The editor should evaluate manuscripts for intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the author(s). The editor will not disclose any information about a manuscript under consideration to anyone other than the author(s), reviewers and potential reviewers, and in some instances the editorial board members, as appropriate.

Confidentiality

The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure, conflicts of interest, and other issues

The editor will be guided by COPE’s Guidelines for Retracting Articles when considering retracting, issuing expressions of concern about, and issuing corrections pertaining to articles that have been published in the Comparative Legilinguistics.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

The editor is committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

The editor should seek to ensure a fair and appropriate peer review process. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern.

Involvement and cooperation in investigations

Editors should guard the integrity of the published record by issuing corrections and retractions when needed and pursuing suspected or alleged research and publication misconduct. Editors should pursue reviewer and editorial misconduct. An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.

 

 

Reviewer Responsibilities

Contribution to editorial decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and, through the editorial communication with the author, may also assist the author in improving the manuscript.

Promptness

Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its timely review will be impossible should immediately notify the editor so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Confidentiality

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the editor.

Standards of objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is unacceptable. Referees should express their views clearly with appropriate supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published data of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and conflict of interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider evaluating manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the submission.

 

 

Author Responsibilities

Reporting standards

Authors reporting results of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the manuscript. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Originality and Plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Parallel submission of the same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgement of sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of a manuscript

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be named in an Acknowledgement section.

The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors (according to the above definition) and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the author list of the manuscript, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Hazards and human or animal subjects

If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the authors must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal’s editor or publisher and cooperate with them to either retract the paper or to publish an appropriate erratum.

Publisher’s Confirmation

In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum or, in the most severe cases, the complete retraction of the affected work.

 

Ghostwriting and anti-plagiarism policy

The Editors of Comparative Legilinguistics are committed to a policy of academic fairness. We consider it our duty to prevent ghost-writing, guest authorship and honorary authorship in scholarly research. Any author submitting a plagiarized and ghost-written paper will be subject to academic sanctions. The papers are checked with an anti-plagiarism software.

Any relevant information about the financing (by any institution) of the research on which a submitted paper is based should also be disclosed in footnotes on the first page (financial disclosure) in manuscript as well as online on the platform. The names of funding organizations should be written in full in manuscript as well as online on the platform.

The journal is published by Faculty of Modern Languages and Literatures, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań and De Gruyter

More information on the journal publishing policy available here: https://pressto.amu.edu.pl/index.php/cl/about/aboutThisPublishingSystem

The journal is indexed in:

WorldCat; Google Scholar; Primo Central Index, Erih Plus; DOAJ

DOI: 10.14746/cl

ISSN: 2080-5926 ISSN (online): 2391-4491

 

Editorial Policy

Editorial Policy – Comparative Legilinguistics

https://pressto.amu.edu.pl/index.php/cl/about

 

The journal publishes articles within its scope (see: scope and focus https://pressto.amu.edu.pl/index.php/cl/about) in 4 volumes per year. 

The articles are peer-reviewed by two reviewers (double-blind review). However, in case of doubt the editorial board has a right to appoint a third reviewer acting as an arbitrator. The editorial board reserves the right to publish selected articles without two reviews. We reserve a right to have one review in cases where the topic of the paper is very niche and it is not possible to find two competent reviewers.

The authors are strongly asked to upload the papers to the Open Journal System Platform PRESSto – in order to do so please, register first: https://pressto.amu.edu.pl/index.php/cl/user/register 

Authors should upload a blinded manuscript without any author names and affiliations in the text or on the title page. Self-identifying citations and references in the article text should be avoided. After the text is accepted, the Author(s) will be asked to add the relevant personal data to the text, including ORCID number.

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge, The journal does not have article processing charges (APCs) nor article submission charges.

All articles are given DOI number and are citable straight after publishing online.

The authors are strongly advised to have their texts proofread in order to ensure a sufficient quality of the texts. 

Journal History

Comparative Legilinguistics (International Journal for Legal Communication) is published four times a year by the Faculty of Modern Languages and Literatures, Adam Mickiewicz University, Poznań, Poland. We are pathfinders in mapping the contours of legal linguistics and legal translation especially in its comparative aspects. Comparative Legilinguistics is equally devoted  to forensic linguistics, theory of the law and the intersection of legal language and legal translation

We publish articles, reviews and reports in English, French, Spanish, Chinese and Russian. The reviews are stored in the journal’s editorial office. The articles are peer-reviewed by two reviewers (double-blind review) via our online submission platform www.pressto.amu.edu.pl with well-established expert reviewers from all over the world.