lang-workflow

Language Workflow Router (lang-workflow)

The orchestrator for a submission to Language, the flagship journal of the Linguistic Society of

America (LSA), published continuously since 1925 and, from January 2026, by **Cambridge University

Press** (fully open access from Volume 102). Language takes work from every subfield — phonology,

phonetics, syntax, semantics, morphology, historical and typological linguistics, sociolinguistics,

psycholinguistics, and computational linguistics — and judges each by the standards of its own

tradition while demanding one thing across the board: a **theoretically grounded claim carried by

rigorous linguistic evidence**, legible to a general linguistics readership, not to one framework's

insiders.

When to trigger

• Starting a new Language manuscript and unsure where to begin
• Mid-project and unsure which skill applies next
• Deciding whether the work is a full General Research Article or a shorter Research Report
• Considering an online-only section (Perspectives / Phonological Analysis / Language and Public

Policy / Teaching Linguistics)

• Returning with a decision letter (route to lang-rebuttal)

First question: which piece type?

| Situation | Piece type | Route to |

|-----------|-----------|----------|

| In-depth study advancing linguistic theory for a general audience | General Research Article (≤18,000 words incl. notes/tables/appendices, excl. references) | full pipeline below |

| Smaller, sharply targeted empirical or analytic contribution | Research Report | lang-topic-selection → compressed pipeline |

| State-of-the-art synthesis of a research area (≤5,000 words) | Review Article | lang-literature-positioning → lang-writing-style |

| Comment on a published Language piece / a focused analytic point | Discussion Note | lang-literature-positioning + lang-rebuttal |

| Field-shaping thesis inviting responses | Perspectives (target article + Commentaries + Rejoinder) | lang-theory-building + lang-rebuttal |

| Pedagogy analysis / policy application | Teaching Linguistics / Language and Public Policy (online-only) | lang-topic-selection |

> A General Research Article over 12,000 words is held to a more stringent standard — length must

> be earned. Confirm current section rules in lang-submission.

Routing map (stage → skill)

Idea / fit for Language?            → lang-topic-selection
What is the theoretical claim?      → lang-theory-building
In dialogue with which literature?  → lang-literature-positioning
Is the design/data defensible?      → lang-research-design
Are the analyses sound?             → lang-data-analysis
Data + annotation transparent?      → lang-data-and-transparency
Are examples/exhibits clean?        → lang-tables-figures
Does it read across frameworks?     → lang-writing-style
Ready for ScholarOne?               → lang-submission
How will it be judged?              → lang-review-process
Got an R&R / writing a Rejoinder?   → lang-rebuttal

Default order

`topic-selection → theory-building → literature-positioning → research-design → data-analysis →

data-and-transparency → tables-figures → writing-style → submission → review-process → rebuttal`

Iterate: Language papers typically loop theory ↔ data ↔ analysis several times — the account

that explains the pattern usually sharpens after the data are in hand, not before.

Calibration anchors (what a Language trajectory feels like)

Orienting heuristics, not editorial guarantees; confirm volatile specifics on the current author pages.

• Evidence-first, framework-fluent. The router never rewards a formalism for its own sake. A clean

analysis in one theory that ignores rival accounts is routed back to lang-theory-building; a pile

of glossed data with no claim is routed to lang-topic-selection.

• Cross-subfield legibility. Reviewers may sit outside your subfield. The router prioritizes making

the stakes and the data readable to a syntactician and a sociolinguist, not only to specialists.

Stage-to-symptom dispatch (route on the complaint, not the calendar)

| The author says… | Route to |

|------------------|----------|

| "Reviewer 2 says it's just description." | lang-theory-building |

| "It feels too narrow for the flagship." | lang-topic-selection |

| "They said I ignored the competing framework." | lang-literature-positioning |

| "The data can't bear the generalization." | lang-research-design |

| "Reviewer doubts my statistics." | lang-data-analysis |

| "Glosses and examples are a mess." | lang-tables-figures |

| "Desk-returned before review." | lang-review-process then lang-submission |

Worked micro-example (illustrative)

A study of an understudied Bantu tone alternation opens the router unsure where to begin. The glossed

data are rich but the contribution reads as "language X does this," so the router sends it to

lang-topic-selection, then lang-theory-building to state what the alternation is a case of (an

illustrative claim about the phonology–morphology interface), then lang-research-design to defend the

elicitation and consultant sampling, looping theory↔data twice. At an illustrative 14,000 words it is a

full General Research Article — but every section must earn its place under the more-stringent bar past

12,000 words.

Anti-patterns

• Treating Language like a subfield venue — the claim must read across linguistics, not one framework
• Submitting a descriptive data dump with no theoretical stakes (a classic desk return)
• Single-framework parochialism — analyzing only inside one formalism and ignoring rivals
• Assuming a generic style — Language uses the Language Style Sheet and Leipzig glossing
• Quantitative claims with no proper modeling or shared data (route to lang-data-analysis)
• Routing as if acceptance were quick; a substantive R&R is the normal first-round outcome

Output format

【Stage】idea / theory / positioning / design / analysis / transparency / exhibits / writing / submit / review / rebut
【Type】General Research Article / Research Report / Review Article / Discussion Note / Perspectives / Teaching Linguistics / Language & Public Policy
【Route to】lang-<skill>
【Why】one line
【Then】the next skill after that

Supplementary resources

• [../../resources/external_tools.md](../../resources/external_tools.md) — linguistics data + software by subfield
• [../../resources/official-source-map.md](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — official LSA/CUP URLs behind every fact in this pack