Studies uploaded to DergiPark for Söylem Journal of Philology are directed to the journal secretary. Magazine secretary; If the maximum number of articles for the relevant issue has been reached, if there is a second submission by the same author, if the relevant article is not suitable in terms of scope, it can consult the editorial board and decide on "rejection".

After this stage, the articles are sent to one of the assistant editors for the convenience of publication policy, purpose-coverage and originality check. At this stage, in addition to these criteria, it is examined whether there is a similarity report that does not exceed 20% of the article, if necessary, the ethics committee report and signed copyright transfer form.

Minor corrections are made by the assistant editors, major corrections are requested from the author. The article is rejected if any incompatibility with the basic principles in the study is detected. In the accepted articles, the information that reveals the identity of the author such as the author's name, institution, etc. is removed and the process is transferred to the editor.

Studies that successfully complete the pre-review phase are sent to the field editor by the editor. The field editor appoints 2 referees from the committee if the article is found suitable for their field of expertise, otherwise from outside the board. An invitation is sent to the referees through the DergiPark system. The referees can accept or reject the invitation based on the summaries. In case of refusal, a new referee is appointed. The full article text and the referee evaluation form are sent to the referees who accept the invitation.

The period given to the referees to accept the invitation is 7 days. Invitations not accepted within this period are canceled and a new referee is appointed. The deadline for the referee who accepts the invitation is 15 days. An additional 7 days is given to the referees who cannot complete the evaluation within this period. At this stage, the identity of the referee is hidden from the author and the identity of the author is hidden from the referee.

Authors must complete the correction proposals coming from the referees, field editor or editor within 7 days and upload new file to the system. If one of the two referees’ reports is "unpublishable", the relevant article is sent to the third referee. The negative report of the third referee causes the article to be rejected, and the positive report causes it to be included in the publication process.

Reviewers consider the following while evaluating the articles:

* The originality and actuality of the article

* The contribution to the field of the article

* The use of scientific terminology

* Abstract’s successful coverage of the article

* Clearly statement of the purpose or the hypothesis

* The existence of a method or a specific theoretical framework

* The sufficient findings and result

* The sufficiency and appropriateness of sources used in the article

The relevant article is evaluated by the referees in the context of "major revision", "minor revision", "decline" and "accept" options. The referee corrections can be displayed on the text of the article or they can be uploaded to the system with a report prepared by the referee.

The works, whose publication process is completed successfully, are sent to the layout editor. Each article is subjected to design and editing separately. Articles whose internal layout is completed in accordance with the Söylem format are uploaded to the system by the editor or the publication editor. It is published with the current issue of "DOI".

The preliminary examination of the blurbs is done by the secretary and the work is sent to the assistant editor. If correction is requested after this review, it is requested from the author. Then it is sent to the editor for the final decision, the referee process is not executed. If the editor agrees, the article is published in the relevant current issue without "DOI".