The American Journal of Semiotics
The American Journal of Semiotics publishes topical articles, response articles or comments, and critical reviews. There are no methodological restrictions but all contributions must combine a rigorous standard of scholarly research with the appropriate application of a semiotic theory and method relevant to the author's chosen subject matter.
The Semiotic Society of America has its own style sheet for its publications. Authors should refer to this style sheet when preparing manuscripts for submission.
A principle unique to the SSA Style Sheet - the principle of the historical layering of sources - is explained below.
- Manuscripts are to be prepared for blind-review, with a separae cover sheet with the author's name and contact information. Manuscripts should be double-spaced throughout the text, notes and references, with at least 1 inch top, bottom, and right margins, using 11 point type size for text, 10 point for extracts (block quotes) and the list of References, and 9 point for notes. Manuscripts may be divided as appropriate into sections with headings, not numbers alone. All pages of the manuscript are to have the title of the manuscript and the page number. Single quotes are to be used within double quotes; brackets within parentheses; single underlining or italics for emphasized expressions.
- Line drawings (called “Figures” in the text) and photographs (glossies, not negatives; also called “Figures” in the text) are to be reproducible originals submitted on separate sheets, carefully numbered and labeled. Captions are to be typed on a separate sheet and placed at the end of the manuscript.
- Tables should be numbered consecutively and titled, and must be referred to in the Text. Avoid referring to the ‘preceding’ or ‘following’ table, since the original position may be shifted in the final camera-ready preparation.
- Notes should be kept to an absolute minimum, typed on a separate page (double-spaced throughout) and included at the end of the text, but before the references. If a wordprocessing program is used, footnoting is preferred.
- References are to add to the current scientific practice the refinement of historical layering. That is to say, references should be cited in the text by giving, all within parentheses: the name of the author(s) and the year according to which the work cited from called the source work is properly located within the lifetime of the author who produced it, followed by a colon, a space, and the specific page number(s) of the actual volume according to which the citation is made the access volume when these are called for.
Principle of Historical Layering
Authors should pay explicit and systematic attention to this distinction between "source works" and "access works" in their manuscripts. This is what is meant by the "principle of historical layering” - it is the essence of the SSA Style Sheet.
In cases where source work and access volume differ, the relation of the two - including any discrepancy of dates and publishers, and mediator between source and access where there is the added discrepancy of language (i.e., the special case of translations), and whatever additional information or glosses seem useful - is given in the list of references at the end of the manuscript. This list is to be arranged alphabetically by last name of authors, all in capital letters.
Manuscript files should be submitted as attachments by email to the managing editors:
Dr. Christopher Morrissey
E-mail: [email protected]
Dr. Jamin Pelkey
E-mail: [email protected]
Books Available for Review
- Marcel Danesi, The Semiotics of Emoji
- Gary Genosko, Critical Semiotics
- Domenico Pietropaolo, Semiotics and Pragmatics of Stage Improvisation
- Igor Pilshchikov (ed.), Urban Semiotics
Publications Ethics Statement
The editorial team of the The American Journal of Semiotics is committed to ensuring the integrity of the publication process. Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The author(s) should ensure that their work is original and that any previously published passages, along with the work or words of others, have been appropriately acknowledged if used in the manuscript. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers must treat received manuscripts as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider 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 paper.