Reviewer Guideline

Manuscripts submitted to the Green Discourse undergo an initial screening for thematic relevance and alignment with the journal’s aims. Reviewers are requested to conduct an objective, critical, and constructive assessment based on the criteria outlined below.

 

Criteria	Description
Title	The title should be concise, clear, and reflect the article's main argument or key findings, indicating relevance to the fields of ecolinguistics and ecocriticism.
Abstract	A single paragraph of 150–250 words that explicitly states the research purpose, methodology, main findings, and scholarly contributions.
Keywords	It should consist of 3–6 words or phrases that represent the main concepts and are relevant to pragmatics and discourse research.
Introduction	Ideally 4–6 paragraphs covering the research gap, the state of the art, and an explicit statement of the main argument or contribution.
Methodology	The presentation should be in 2–3 paragraphs and must clearly explain the types of research, data sources, collection techniques, and analytical frameworks.
Results and Discussion	Core analysis engages with relevant theories and previous studies, clearly explaining the theoretical, practical, and pragmatic implications.
Conclusion	The presentation should consist of 2–3 paragraphs that are reflective and argumentative, highlighting scholarly contributions and future recommendations.
Bibliography	Minimum 50% of scholarly works from reputable publications, including recent literature from the last 10 years.
Recommendation	Accept Submission; Revisions Required; Resubmit for Review; Resubmit Elsewhere; Decline Submission; See Comments.