Introduction to the thematic issue: participating in academic publishing—consequences of linguistic policies and practices

Abstract

The rise of English as the presumed global medium of scholarly publishing has resulted in both obvious and less obvious consequences for individual scholars, journals, institutions of higher education and knowledge production more broadly (Lillis and Curry 2010). A body of research emerging in the past 10 to 15 years has explored these consequences mainly in terms of how individual multilingual scholars working outside of Anglophone contexts respond to the growing pressure to publish in high-status, English-medium journals. Researchers have used qualitative/ethnographic methodologies (e.g., Canagarajah 2002; Curry and Lillis 2004, 2010; Flowerdew 2000; Flowerdew and Li 2009; Lillis and Curry 2006; Lillis 2008) as well as quantitative/survey and bibliometric methodologies (e.g., Hanauer and Englander 2011; Olsson and Sheridan 2012; Tjissen 2007) to investigate and document scholars’ experiences. Key findings index the tensions between scholars’ desires and commitments to publish in multiple languages, their often-restricted access to the material resources needed to conduct and distribute their research, the limitations of language and writing support that translators and editors—when available—can provide, and the potential biases of journal reviewers and editors against research and writing coming from outside the Anglophone ‘centre’. Much less examined has been the role of national, transnational and institutional (language) policies in exerting and extending the pressure for scholars worldwide to publish in high status English-medium journals (but see Lillis and Curry 2010).