Akofena, revue Scientifique des Sciences du Langage, Lettres, Langues & Communication
Journal / Akofena, revue Scientifique des Sciences du Langage, Lettres, Langues & Communication / Submissions

No journal may publish an article that has not been written in accordance with editorial standards (NORCAMES). Typographical standards are set by each journal. The structure of an article must comply with the rules of scientific writing, depending on whether the article is a theoretical contribution or the result of field research. The structure of a scientific article in the humanities is as follows:

• For an article that is a theoretical and fundamental contribution: Title, First name and surname of the author, Home institution, e-mail address, Abstract in French, Keywords, Introduction (justification of the theme, problem, scientific hypotheses/objectives, approach), Articulated development, Conclusion, Bibliographical references.
• For an article resulting from field research: Title, First name and surname of the author, Institution, e-mail address, Abstract in French, Keywords, Introduction, Methodology, Results and Discussion, Conclusion, Bibliographical references.

HOW DO I SUBMIT AN ARTICLE?
Note : All manuscripts sent to Akofena must be unpublished, i.e. they must not have been previously published in any other journal. Manuscripts must comply with the following requirements:

• The first page should include the title of the article, the first and last names of the authors, their institution of affiliation and their full address.
• Translate the title of the subject into English if the article is written in French. For all languages other than French, the title, abstract and keywords must be translated into French.
• The abstract (French) must not exceed 350 words. It must be succinct so as to highlight the essential points of the analysis.
• Abstract (English) should not exceed 350 words. It should be succinct so as to highlight the essence of the analysis.
• Keywords (French) must not exceed five words.
• Keywords (english) should not exceed five words.
• The introduction should provide sufficient background information, setting the context in which the study was undertaken. It should enable the reader to judge the qualitative value of the study and evaluate the results obtained.
• Body of the subject: The different parts of the body of the subject must appear in a logical order (e.g.: 1.; 1.1; 1.2; 2.; 2.1; 2.2; etc.).
• The introduction and conclusion are not numbered.
• Footnotes do not refer to bibliographical references, but to additional information.

Formatting : The sections of an article, with the exception of the introduction, conclusion and bibliography, must be titled and numbered (examples: 1. ; 1.1. ; 1.2 ; 2. ; 2.2. ; 2.2.1 ; 2.2.2. ; 3. ; etc.). Quoted passages are presented in roman and in inverted commas. When the quoting sentence and the quotation exceed three lines, the quotation must be presented (line spacing 1) in Bodoni Bk BT and indented, reducing the font size by one point. Citation references are integrated into the citing text, in accordance with APA standards.

PRESENTATION OF THE AMERICAN PSYCHOLOGICAL ASSOCIATION (APA) STANDARDS
Quotations of less than three (03) lines should be incorporated into the text, between inverted commas, and directly followed by the name of the author, the year of publication and the pagination of the extract quoted (preceded by p., or pp. if the extract covers more than one page).

• Example: In the case of adolescents, « certain suicide attempts should be understood as an action highlighting a non-transmissible ». (Ghyssels & Goffinet, 2012:92). However, if the document is not paginated, we indicate the paragraph with the abbreviation « paragr. »

If the author’s name is incorporated into the sentence, it is followed by the year of publication in brackets, but the pagination is placed after the quotation, after the inverted comma that closes it.

• Example: Liguori points out that the relationship of conflict ‘to drive duality, transference and the automatism of repetition is at the heart of Freudian dynamics’ (2017:207).

Quotations longer than three lines are presented in an independent block of text, omitting the inverted commas. This block begins on a new line, indented about 1cm from the left and right margins.

HOW DO YOU PRESENT A QUOTATION?
Model quote : The process of underdevelopment resulting from this shock is experienced in concrete terms by the populations concerned as a global crisis: a socio-economic crisis (brutal exploitation, permanent unemployment, accelerated and painful exodus), but also a socio-cultural and civilisational crisis reflecting a socio-historical unpreparedness and a failure of human cultures and behaviour to adapt to the forms of life imposed by foreign technologies. Diakité (1985: 105)
Conclusion should not duplicate the summary and discussion. It should be a reminder of the main results obtained and the most important consequences that can be deduced from them.

REVIEW / JOURNAL (ONLINE)
The bibliographical references cited are those actually consulted in the body of the text.

One author

• N’guessan, A. C. (2020). Quelques modalités d’attribution anthroponymiques Baoulé : l’exemple de l’Ahétou. Akofena, revue scientifique des Sciences du Langage, Lettres, Langues & Communication, L3DL-CI, Université Félix Houphouët-Boigny (Côte d’Ivoire), (2)1, 03-16 [Online], accessed on 20 October 2020, URL: https://www.revue-akofena.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/01-T02-01-pp.03-16.pdf
• N’guessan, A. C. (2020). Quelques modalités d’attribution anthroponymiques Baoulé : l’exemple de l’Ahétou. Akofena, revue scientifique des Sciences du Langage, Lettres, Langues & Communication, L3DL-CI, Université Félix Houphouët-Boigny (Côte d’Ivoire), (2)1, 03-16 [On line], available at URL:https://www.revue-akofena.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/01-T02-01-pp.03-16.pdf 

Two authors

• Tape, J-M & Menlan, Y. (2020). Tropicalisation des terminologies linguistiques en campagne de sensibilisation : exemple de la Covid-19 en Côte d’Ivoire. Akofena, revue scientifique des Sciences du Langage, Lettres, Langues & Communication, L3DL-CI, Université Félix Houphouët-Boigny (Côte d’Ivoire), Spécial (3), 171-182 [En ligne], consulté le 18 octobre 2020, URL: https://www.revue-akofena.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/13-T03-40-Tape-pp.-171-182.pdf

REVIEW/ JOURNAL (PRINT OR PAPER VERSION)
One author

• Claudine, M. (2006). Analyse de la violence verbale : quelques principes méthodologiques. Actes des XXVIes journées d’études sur la parole, 103-114

More than two authors

• Ajado, T. & al. (2008). E-Learning and Distance Education in Nigeria. The Turkish Online Journal of Educational Technology, (7), 4-7

PROCEEDINGS OU CONFERENCES
Kossonou, K. T. & Assanvo, A. D. (2018). Étude des verbes complexes de l’agni. Actes du 1er colloque scientifique national du Laboratoire de Description, de Didactique et de Dynamique des Langues en Côte d’Ivoire (L3DL-CI) : « Le nom dans les langues naturelles », Université Félix Houphouët-Boigny, (Côte d’Ivoire), CRELIS : La Revue du Centre de Recherche et d’Études en Littérature et Sciences du Langage, Faculté des Langues, Littératures et Civilisations, Série spéciale, 123-136

BOOKS/ MONOGRAPHS
Chomsky, N. & Halle, M. (1973). Principe de phonologie générative, Ed. Seuil, Paris

PEER-REVIEWERS
Like most scientific journals that aspire to high quality, Akofena, the scientific journal for Language, Literature, Languages & Communication, subscribes to the principle of double-blind peer review as decided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) DOI : https://doi.org/10.24318/dvuDitEV To avoid any risk of complacency and to ease the task of the Editorial Boards, Akofena’s Editorial Secretariat is responsible for steering the review of all articles. According to this principle, all articles submitted to Akofena must go through this process. It consists of submitting the version of an article received and deemed acceptable by the Editorial Board to a review by at least two credible specialists, who may or may not be members of the Scientific and Reading Committee, and who may (or may not) ask the authors to make changes before publication. The notion of double-blind peer review means that the reviewers will read the article without knowing the author, and that they will not know the identity of the people who have reviewed their text when they make the final version, at least not before final publication.

Editorial Independance
The Scientific and Reading Committee evaluates submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit (importance, originality, validity of the study, clarity) and their relevance to the scope of the journal, without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation. Decisions to publish are not determined by the policies of governments or any other agency outside the journal itself. The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over all editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of that content.

Understanding
Each article submitted to Akofena is first rapidly evaluated by the Editorial Board, which decides whether or not to accept it. If the article is accepted, the Committee suggests two names of referees to the Editorial Secretariat, from within or outside the journal’s Scientific and Reading Committee, depending on the article’s speciality. Ideally, the referees will be from a university other than that of the contributor, but will be familiar with the context of the article. The reviewers receive the Word version of the article to be reviewed, together with the review form. They have two (02) weeks to write their assessment. The Akofena Editorial Secretariat ensures that deadlines are met and that the quality of the evaluation is maintained. It forwards these evaluations to the journal’s Editorial Board, which will summarise them. They can still request changes, provided they justify them. This justification forms part of the article’s history. The Editorial Secretariat carries out a full linguistic revision of the final version of the accepted article: errors, typos, typography, reference checks, metadata checks (summary in several languages, keywords), anti-plagiarism software. If there is still room for improvement in the corrected text (complicated wording, misunderstood passages, missing references, confusion, etc.), the Editorial Secretariat will draw up a revision report and send it to the author for further information. The author will then be asked to respond promptly in the same file and return it to the Editorial Secretariat. The revised version is sent to the authors for final approval before being posted on the journal’s website.

If the assessments are contradictory, the text is sent to a third assessor for an opinion. When the process is complete, the Editorial Secretariat sends the authors of the article a summary of the assessments and the Editorial Committee’s recommendations. This evaluation report sets out the strengths and weaknesses identified by the evaluators, with the aim of helping authors to bring their text up to standard in terms of form and/or the advancement of knowledge on the subject it covers, but it also reminds them of a number of provisions (inclusive writing, translation of the abstract into an African language, application of APA standards) that must be complied with in order to publish in Akofena. Authors whose texts are recommended for publication with modifications have two weeks to produce a second version of their work. The Editorial Board is responsible for the final decision on the second version of the article.

Overview
Articles undergo a double blind review by members of the Scientific and Reading Committee and/or experts specialising in the fields covered by the journal. They each fill in a detailed assessment form, concluding with an opinion on the publication: either « publication authorised » (A), or « publication accepted subject to the necessary corrections being made » (B), or « publication not recommended » (C) (form published on the website). If both opinions are favourable to publication (A), the Secrétariat Éditorial summarises them and sends them to the author. If both opinions express reservations (B), the anonymised files are sent to the author by the same route. After correction, the article is again submitted to the same experts (as far as possible). If the two opinions are unfavourable (C), the anonymised files are sent to the author by the same route. If the two opinions are contradictory, a third opinion is requested from one of the members of the Scientific and Reading Committee; the majority opinion determines the procedure for communicating the results to the author.

ETHICS STATEMENTS
Akofena guarantees the publication of original contributions in the fields of Language, Literature,
Languages and Communication Sciences. In accordance with the CAMES Code of Ethics, all contributions are binding on their author, even years after publication. The contributor is scientifically and ethically responsible for the research he designs and conducts. They may not use any authority to conduct research that contravenes the principles and provisions of this code. In cases where research is likely to go beyond the contributor’s usual scope of practice, he must seek the positive opinion of his peers and, where appropriate, of recognised bodies including representatives of civil society outside the scientific community. In all cases where compliance with the present provisions is proven, the researcher is, if necessary, defended by the institution in which he or she works and by his or her peers.

Article 1 : In accordance with the Akofena editorial policy :

• Suggestions/criticisms of an article proposal must be based on the journal’s confidentiality
  standards. The review process is double-blind.
• If the reviewer has a conflict of interest with the article to be reviewed, does not have the profile to issue a review or does not have sufficient time for the review, he/she must inform the Editorial Board in good time in writing or by phone.
• The reviewer’s assessment must be objective, rigorous and consistent.
• The reviewer must respect the deadline agreed with Akofena for the submission of the review. If this deadline cannot be met, the reviewer must contact the journal’s editorial board as soon as possible.
• Akofena provides financial remuneration for the review of articles. However, non-remunerated (volunteer) reviewers are awarded a certificate of contribution once the review process has been completed. Under no circumstances may the reviewer share with third parties or use for his or her own benefit all or part of the content of the articles reviewed. Inappropriate use of the information contained in the article is considered an ethical breach.

Article 2 : Editor’s ethics:
In accordance with Akofena’s editorial policy, the editor must :

• Be responsible for decisions regarding the acceptance for publication of articles.
• Ensure the integrity and transparency of the editorial process and assign the relevant roles at the right time.
• Inform the editorial committee of any conflicts of interest and take the necessary action.
• Respond promptly to author requests and promote an appropriate editorial process.
• Check articles for plagiarism using specialist software such as COMPILATIO
• Ensure that anonymity is preserved throughout the double-blind peer review process. He/she must ensure continuous rotation of reviewers according to their expertise.

Article 3 : In accordance with the Akofena’s editorial policy, the members of editorial board

• Are responsible for ensuring compliance with the journal’s editorial policies, based on
  the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics – COPE (Principles of transparency and best practice in scholarly publishing)
• Must refrain from participating in decisions where there is a potential conflict of interest, either with the author of an article or its content. Acceptance or rejection of articles must be based exclusively on their intellectual or scientific content, irrespective of the author’s ethnic origin, sexual preferences, nationality, institutional affiliation or political preferences.
• Must reject all articles containing plagiarism or self-plagiarism, in accordance with the plagiarism control methods and guidelines mentioned in the description of the peer review process.
• Must carry out a preliminary evaluation of all papers received. In addition, they must
  ensure that all stages of the editorial process are respected, from start to finish.
• Are responsible for finding and assigning the ideal professionals for the peer review process. Similarly, they must guarantee the anonymity of reviewers and authors throughout the review process.
• Shall periodically evaluate the editorial process through improvement plans.
• Shall monitor the proposals and objectives contained in the improvement plans.
• Shall follow up any queries regarding published articles and, if necessary, draft and publish any necessary post-publication corrections, clarifications, errata or retractions.

Article 4 : Ethics of Scientifics committee
In accordance with Akofena’s editorial policy, the members of the Scientific Committee :

• Shall ensure the scientific quality of the journal’s articles. To this end, the Scientific Committee will assist the Editor in the task of alternating reviewers, by proposing new
  reviewers, in compliance with scientific and professional rigour.
• Must refrain from participating in decisions where there is a potential conflict of interest, either with the author of an article or its content. Acceptance or rejection of articles must be based exclusively on their intellectual or scientific content, regardless of the author’s ethnic origin, sexual preferences, nationality, institutional affiliation or political preferences.
• May not share with third parties or use for their own benefit the total or partial content of the articles reviewed. Inappropriate use of the information contained in the article is considered an ethical breach.