About the Journal

Focus and Scope

The Journal of Estonian and Finno-Ugric Linguistics (ESUKA – JEFUL) publishes original research papers on the linguistics of Estonian and other Finno-Ugric languages. The journal aims to stimulate the linguistic study of Estonian and other Finno-Ugric languages and to raise the standards of research for the discipline as a whole. The journal is open to contributions from anyone who may wish to submit. The journal does not charge APCs or submission charges from the authors. The only criterion for publication is the quality of the submission, which is decided on the basis of peer reviews. 

Publication Frequency

ESUKA – JEFUL is published twice a year: a special issue in June and a general issue in December. 

Special issues

ESUKA – JEFUL is open for proposals for special issues. The annual special issue of ESUKA– JEFUL is published in June.

The topics for the special issues must fit in the general scope of the journal. The topics can be grown out of conferences and workshops or a research grant. However, the circle of authors should not come from only one working group and an open call for papers is recommended. The proposal should include

  • the title of the proposed theme issue
  • the names, affiliations and contact information of the guest editors
  • abstract (max 500 words)
  • the list of possible authors (names with affiliations) and, if available, their abstracts (max 150 words)

Proposals for special issues should be sent to the Editors (jeful@ut.ee) and will be reviewed by the members of the Editorial Board. The proposer may be asked to cover the copy-editing and printing costs.

The submissions to the special issue are made through the online editorial system and go through the standard peer reviewing process.

Peer Review Process

Papers published in ESUKA – JEFUL must meet certain criteria relating to audience, technical content, and presentation. The publication of the papers is decided on the basis of single-blind peer reviews (the names of reviewers are kept anonymous, but the author’s identity is known to the reviewer). 

The submissions are initially checked by the editor(s). If the editors find that the manuscript would suit ESUKA – JEFUL, two reviewers are asked to review the manuscript. The reviewers are expected to submit their reviews within four weeks. In some cases (if the two reviews diverge largely or the editors feel that a reviewer has been biased, etc.) it may be necessary to ask for an additional review in order to form the decision. When all reviews are collected the editors make a decision and inform the authors. A copy of the decision and the reviewers’ comments to the authors are sent both to the authors and the reviewers. The decision can be:

  • to accept the manuscript for publication as it is
  • to accept the manuscript for publications with minor revisions
  • major revisions are required after which the manuscript must be re-evaluated
  • to reject the manuscript

In the case revisions are required the authors are asked to re-submit the revised manuscript along with a list of changes where each issue pointed out in the reviews is addressed. In the case major revisions were required the resubmitted manuscript goes through another round of reviews. If available,  the initial reviewers are prefered.

Note on conflict of interests. The reviewers must be neutral towards the authors. A reviewer and an author can not belong to the same working group or be close collaborators in any other way, be in a student-supervisor relation or family members. The reviewers are asked to state any conflicts of interest and in  case of a conflict the reviewer should reject the invitation.

Note on reviewer confidentiality. The editors of ESUKA – JEFUL never disclose the names of reviewers to the authors. If the reviewers wish to reveal their identity to the author(s) they may do so by signing their name in the “Comments to the author” section.  Reviewers should regard a submitted manuscript as a confidential document. They should not use or disclose unpublished information in a manuscript except with the permission of the author(s). Since there is no direct communication between the author(s) and reviewer(s) concerning a manuscript, that permission can be obtained via the Editors.

Downloadable Instructions for the Reviewer in PDF

Open Access Policy

ESUKA – JEFUL 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.

ESUKA – JEFUL is available with CC BY-NC-SA licence. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of open access.

This journal does not have article processing or submission charges.

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

The journal adheres to the following publication ethics and malpractice statement issued by the University of Tartu Press. 

  1. Publication and authorship
  • All submitted papers are subject to a strict peer-review process by at least two reviewers that are experts in the area of the particular paper.
  • The factors that are taken into account in review are relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability and language.
  • The possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection.
  • If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted.
  • Rejected articles will not be re-reviewed.
  • No copyright infringement, plagiarism (incl. self-plagiarism) or presentation of fraudulent data is allowed.
  • No same research can be published in more than one journal.
  • All papers include a list of references and, if applicable, a list of financial supporters.
  1. Authors' responsibilities
  • Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work.
  • Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere.
  • Authors must certify that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.
  • Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process.
  • Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.
  • All authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the research.
  • Authors must state that all data in the paper are real and authentic.
  • Authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest.
  • Authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript.
  1. Reviewers' responsibilities
  • Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information.
  • Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author.
  • Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
  • Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the author.
  • Reviewers should also call to the Editor in Chief's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
  • Reviewers should not review a manuscript where 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 manuscript.
  1. Editors' responsibilities
  • Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article.
  • Editors should guarantee the quality of the papers and the integrity of the academic record.
  • Editors should publish errata pages or make corrections when needed.
  • Editors should have knowledge of a research's funding sources.
  • Editors should base their decisions solely one the paper’s importance, originality, clarity and relevance to the publication's scope.
  • Editors should not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of previous editors without serious reason.
  • Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers.
  • Editors should ensure that all research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
  • Editors should only accept a paper when certain that it meets the above criteria.
  • Editors should act if they suspect misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.
  • Editors should not reject papers based on suspicions, but only on proof of misconduct.
  • Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers and board members.