guidelines for authors
Contradictions welcomes submissions in the following categories:
- “Studies” and “essays”: These may be articles of a more or less traditional academic character, but with an emphasis on the social significance of the material presented and on original and provocative argumentation. But we also welcome more essayistic contributions that break with some of the conventions of scholarly form. We are interested in rigorously theoretical essays, works of high scholarly value but which might not find a place in other scholarly journals. In this kind of essayistic writing, insightful generalization and shrewd observation will be given more weight than an exhaustive accounting for “existing literature” or a detailed description of research methodology. In other words, we have in mind essays that continue in the genre of most classic works in the modern history of ideas, from Rousseau’s Discourses through Benjamin’s “Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction” and Karel Kosík’s Dialectics of the Concrete. Texts may be up to 10,000 words long (including notes and citations), as long as the text’s length is justified by the needs of the author’s argument. Include a list of key words and an abstract of approximately 200–300 words. All studies and essays will be subject to independent, double-blind peer review.
- “Discussion contributions”: polemical texts addressing a theme of particular interest to the journal’s readership, often reacting to texts already published in the journal. These do not demand the same kind of scholarly formality as do “studies” and “essays”; they need not entail any original research or polished theoretical systems. They are meant for working out ideas that are still unfinished and are recognized as such. They will be evaluated on the basis of the contribution they make to continuing discussion of interest to our readers. Approximately 2500–5000 words.
- “Translations” and “materials”: Here we include important contributions to Central/Eastern European social thought that can be brought to international attention in English translation; internationally important works in new Czech or Slovak translations; and previously unpublished or long-unavailable “materials,” accompanied by annotation that presents the materials’ significance to contemporary readers (these may be submitted in English, Czech, or Slovak). 3000–10,000 words.
- “Reviews” of recent publications in critical social thought. Reviews may be brief (1000–2500 words) or may constitute longer “review essays” (2500–7500 words). Keep in mind that review essays are not only longer reviews, but take one or more reviewed works as a starting point for more extensive original reflection. A list of books available for review is available under this link.
Send submissions, in the formats *.rtf, *.odt, *.doc, or *.docx, to kontradikce (at) flu.cas.cz. Unless otherwise indicated, submissions received by November 15 will be considered for publication in the volume published the following year.
The first time a work is cited, provide a full footnote citation:
Susan Buck-Morss, Dreamworld and Catastrophe: The Passing of Mass Utopia in East and West (Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2002).
For subsequent citations, use shortened notes:
Buck-Morss, Dreamworld and Catastrophe, pp. 164–165.
Include at the end of the article a list of “References”, in this format:
Buck-Morss, Susan. Dreamworld and Catastrophe: The Passing of Mass Utopia in East and West. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press, 2002.
articles in edited volumes
Heide Gerstenberger, “The Bourgeois State Form Revisited”, in Open Marxism, Vol. I: Dialectics and History, ed. Werner Bonefeld, Richard Gunn, and Kosmas Psychopedis (London: Pluto, 1992), p. 155.
Gerstenberger, “The Bourgeois State Form Revisited”, p. 156.
In list of references:
Gerstenberger, Heide. “The Bourgeois State Form Revisited”. In Open Marxism, Vol. I: Dialectics and History, ed. Werner Bonefeld, Richard Gunn, and Kosmas Psychopedis, pp. 151–176. London: Pluto, 1992.
Judith Butler, “Doing Justice to Someone”, GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 7, no. 4 (2001), p. 630.
Butler, “Doing Justice to Someone”, p. 622.
In list of references:
Butler, Judith. “Doing Justice to Someone”. GLQ: A Journal of Lesbian and Gay Studies 7, no. 4 (2001), pp. 621–636.
Dirk Pilz, “Ein anderer Anfang. Die Schwarzen Hefte von Martin Heidegger”, Frankfurt Rundschau 16. March, 2014, http://www.fr-online.de/literatur/die--schwarzen-hefte--von-martin-heidegger-ein-anderer-anfang,1472266,26569072.html.
If the source does not indicate a publication date, the citation should list the date when the page was “last modified”. If no date of last modification is indicated, the citation should list the date when accessed:
“About Us”, Contradictions: A Journal for Critical Thought. Accessed March 24, 2022, https://kontradikce.flu.cas.cz/en/about-us.
Note: do not use hyperlinks or underline web addresses in your text.
For all questions not covered above, consult the Chicago Manual of Style.
In new citations of an author already cited with regard to other work, include the author’s full name.
Place punctuation outside of quotations:
Marx wrote of the “proletariat”. (Not: Marx wrote of the “proletariat.”)
Use serial commas:
“Wages, labor, and capital” (not “Wages, labor and capital”)
Use double quotation marks (“”) rather than single quotation marks (‘’), except for quotations within quotations:
According to Franklin Rosemont, “Joe Hill was critical of the notion of ‘the people’”; but if the quotation does not appear within another quote, write “the people”.
Quotes longer than three lines (in a word processing document, 12-piont font) should be made block quotes, like this:
In his Course in General Linguistics, first published in 1916, Saussure postulated the existence of a general science of signs, or Semiology, of which linguistics would form only one part. Semiology therefore aims to take in any system of signs, whatever their substance and limits; images, gestures, musical sounds, objects, and the complex associations of all these, which form the content of ritual, convention or public entertainment: these constitute, if not languages, at least systems of signification [...].1
For text following a colon, make the first word lowercase unless it is a proper noun or is the start of at least two complete sentences, or is a direct question.
In the main text (as opposed to footnotes), replace “e.g.” and “i.e.” with “for example” and “that is”. (Footnotes may include abbreviations such as “e.g.” and “i.e.”
There is no need for a separate list of works cited. Provide full bibliographic information in your footnote the first time each work is cited.
In place of “em dashes” (—), use “en dashes” surrounded by spaces ( – ).
More detailed guidelines can be found here.
All scholarly studies published in Contradictions are subject to double-blind peer review. Other texts may be peer reviewed if deemed appropriate for review by the editors.
The editors will take all reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers resulting from research misconduct, especially research that has resulted in preventable harm to subjects. If the editors are made aware of any allegation of research misconduct, they will address allegations appropriately and correct or retract published articles marked by it. Any other corrections, clarifications, retractions, or apologies will be published as appropriate. In all other respects, manuscripts will be judged on the basis of their intellectual content and the editorial focus of the journal. Submissions will be sent anonymously to reviewers and will not be disclosed to third parties without authors’ consent.
Peer reviewers, like the editors, should evaluate manuscripts on the basis of their intellectual content, making every effort to read sympathetically and offer advice that will help authors make their arguments stronger. Reviewers should refrain from unsubstantiated criticism and should identify problems in the manuscript in a way that helps authors improve their work, pointing out inconsistencies in the manuscript but allowing for differences of opinion, which are not grounds for rejecting a manuscript that is internally consistent and backs up its arguments. At the same time, reviewers should call to the editors’ attention any overlap between the manuscript and other published work of which they are aware. They should identify any conflicts of interest, and they must agree not to share or otherwise make use of manuscripts before publication.
Authors’ work is understood to be original, with sources appropriately quoted and cited. The material should not have been published elsewhere (unless republication is agreed upon by editors), and the manuscript should not be submitted to any other journal while still under review at Contradictions. Authors should provide any relevant information regarding financial support provided. If an author becomes aware of any significant inaccuracy in her or his published work, she or he should promptly notify the editors and cooperate with the editors on any appropriate correction or retraction.
The Institute of Philosophy of the Czech Academy of Sciences, as the journal’s publisher, exercises the right to utilize the work in the form in which the work appears in the printed journal Contradictions and on the journal’s website http://kontradikce.flu.cas.cz/en, in accordance with standard principles of ownership rights as defined by the Copyright Act and the Commercial Code of the Czech Republic. While authors retain moral rights as authors of their work, the Institute of Philosophy owns the copyright to works in the form they appear in Contradictions.