AAA is 50! Some questions on the possible futures of Anglophone Studies and publishing in the field On the occasion of AAA’s 50 th anniversary, the editors invited experts from the main fields of Anglophone Studies to reflect on future developments in the discipline. Five questions were designed to prompt reflection on challenges, research dynamics, and future academic publishing: 1. What do you see as important challenges for Anglophone Studies in the years to come? 2. Which topics and questions do you see as very relevant for the future of research in your field? 3. How do you envision the future of academic publishing in your field? 4. What would you see as advantages and disadvantages of journals with a wider focus in English studies such as AAA compared to more specialized journals? 5. Is there anything else you would like to add that is relevant for the possible futures of Anglophone Studies and the development of publishing in the field? Cornelia Klecker (literature/ culture), Laurenz Volkmann (language education), and Peter Siemund (linguistics) shared their perspectives on these questions. Below, readers are invited to tap into their different perspectives, which will hopefully spark more reflection and action contributing to shaping the possible futures of Anglophone Studies. Interviews with Laurenz Volkmann and Peter Siemund were held in writing while Cornelia Klecker engaged in an oral exchange with the editor responsible for the area of literature. We, the editors, would like to wish you a stimulating read and engaging research in the years ahead! Alexander Onysko (linguistics), Ulla Ratheiser (literature/ culture), and Werner Delanoy (language education/ culture) AAA - Arbeiten aus Anglistik und Amerikanistik Agenda: Advancing Anglophone Studies Band 50 · Heft 2 Gunter Narr Verlag Tübingen DOI 10.24053/ AAA-2025-0009 AAA is 50! 124 Laurenz Volkmann (English Language Education) What do you see as important challenges for Anglophone Studies in the years to come? The most pressing and pivotal challenge for Anglophone Studies, the Humanities and any field of enquiry that values critical thinking, creativity and productive approaches, as well as the development of students’ or practitioners’ own views and voice, is one key issue. The writing isn’t just on the wall; it’s virtually “in your face”. The use of generative artificial intelligence and its various tools, such as chatbots, virtual reality goggles, avatars and direct oral translation devices, is revolutionising Anglophone Studies, and specifically my professional field of academic engagement with teaching and learning English (or any other foreign language). Politicians, parents and students are already asking why learners should spend valuable time cramming for vocabulary or grammar tests when they could be learning how to use a direct translation tool. Why read a complete novel when you can easily create a personalised summary with interpretative questions and answers with the help of ChatGPT? Why read Wayne C. Booth’s seminal book on “unreliable narration” when discussing The Great Gatsby in class? Or why read an academic article when ChatGPT can offer a brief, concise definition of unreliable narration, including quotes from the novel that illustrate Nick Carraway’s unreliability according to Booth’s criteria? Why engage in the cumbersome task of reading secondary literature when AI can offer a succinct summary with bullet points and answer questions about how the article can be related to specific learning and teaching contexts? These few examples merely scratch the surface of what the academic field will be like in general. I won’t even mention the issue of PowerPoint presentations, written term papers and theses, and how the use of AI will radically change both practices and formats. All other issues will have to take a back seat, so to speak, including the deepening and enhancement of the international profile of Anglophone Studies. My PhD supervisor once half-jokingly quoted a saying he had heard about German/ Austrian scholarship in English literature being considered unworthy of quotation in English-speaking countries: “Germanica sunt, non leguntur.” This maxim - “It’s German, so it’s not read or quoted” - held true for decades in Anglophone Studies. This was partly due to Germany’s pariah status after World War II and the perception that German is a difficult language, but also due to the lack of quality literary scholarship as perceived by status-conscious Oxbridge and Ivy League academics. However, with the shift towards English-language publication and an international outlook - enhanced by AI-supported language proficiency in publishing - Anglophone Studies in Germany and Austria must increase their efforts to become internationally visible and Interviews: possible futures of (publishing in) Anglophone Studies 125 accepted. The international acceptance of Anglophone studies from German-speaking countries may be aided by the USA and the UK losing their status as the “target cultures” of English as a foreign language and by the increasing use of English as a lingua franca (see Kachru’s three-circle model). Using English as a foreign language (EFL) as an example, there are now numerous publication outlets outside the USA and the UK. The formerly uncommon opportunity to publish articles on EFL topics in Indonesian or Japanese journals, for example, opens up new perspectives. The loss of a privileged selection of target cultures, coupled with the broadening of literary studies to include media and area studies, has created an ever-expanding field of interest for Anglophone Studies and EFL. This presents an opportunity as well as a problem of demarcation: What, after all, is/ are Anglophone Studies? This is a question that has been around for at least a generation and will continue to be relevant. Moreover, in light of the call for committed scholarship in the face of morally and ethically problematic sociopolitical developments, another pressing issue has emerged: How activist or committed should scholars and educators be when it comes to issues of gender, ecology, ethnicity, and so on? What will the future hold for committed perspectives such as transhumanism, posthumanism, LGBTQ+ studies and critical whiteness studies, particularly in the face of right-wing, anti-emancipatory forces? Which topics and questions do you see as very relevant for the future of research in your field? As already partly discussed above, I consider the following issues to be the most relevant: (1) Addressing the topic of AI-enhanced and supported teaching and learning. Since AI is here to stay and will improve rapidly, the question of how to integrate AI into all aspects of EFL will require continuous adaptation. (2) The specific challenge of integrating AI into testing formats will revolutionise testing formats. The traditional term paper is obsolete - new hybrid (oral/ written) formats will need to be explored. (3) The empirical turn in EFL is also here to stay. However, in media education and critical reflection and literary studies specifically, time-honoured protocols of interpretation and new forms of critical reflection should still find their place. (4) There must still be a place for learning about and applying critical theories, from close reading to applying “race, class and gender” perspectives, as well as new and evolving angles such as “posthumanism”, in order to avoid the proliferation and prominence of blinkered, undertheorised empirical micro-studies. (5) In the field of EFL, the issue of how the basics of foreign language learning are taught and learnt should remain key: how do the development of the four skills (reading, writing, speaking and listening), mediation and intercultural AAA is 50! 126 learning change in the “post-digital age”, where the virtual and real worlds intersect and AI will increasingly support and perhaps replace communication formats as we have known them for centuries? (6) As an antidote to virtual encounters, there may be a revival of hands-on, faceto-face teaching and learning methods in the real world, such as placebased learning, excursions and drama techniques (“the workshop approach”). How do you envision the future of academic publishing in your field? Personally, I wonder whether a monograph will remain the gold standard for academic publishing in the field of EFL. Monographs tend to be published theses, introductions, or standard studies of a particular topic or field. We may find that publishing is increasingly defined by specialisation, with new trends emerging and attracting the interest of young scholars trying to establish themselves in the field. Publishing in international, peer-reviewed journals, which are proliferating worldwide, is increasingly becoming the norm. I do not foresee this changing, and the “Hirsch factor” or the number of entries on Google Scholar or other platforms will be the digital mark of distinction, which does not necessarily define the innovative or pioneering quality of a publication. What would you see as advantages and disadvantages of journals with a wider focus in English Studies such as AAA compared to more specialized journals? Publishing with a quality journal such as AAA should be linked to its reputation and blind peer-review processes, as well as the number of ground-breaking, field-defining articles it offers its international audience. In the case of AAA, it should also be associated with the expectation that each issue will contain one or two articles that will stimulate discussion or provide an overview of important debates, rather than dealing with minor issues of specialist interest. Is there anything else you would like to add that is relevant for the possible futures of Anglophone Studies and the development of publishing in the field? The issue of how to deal with the influence of AI tools on students’ work and publishing practices is enormous and requires open discussion, perhaps in a special issue of AAA. One way to counter the overuse of AI would be for published articles to feature a more personal touch or voice. The weaknesses of relying on AI for academic publishing are becoming particularly evident in several key areas, which may be apparent to experienced critical reviewers or readers. Firstly, AI-enhanced or AI-produced articles (as well as students’ theses) often contain monotonous, redundant Interviews: possible futures of (publishing in) Anglophone Studies 127 and descriptive passages. These fail to establish strong argumentative connections between sections, both within and between subsections. Similar ideas are sometimes repeated within a single page, and theories, concepts or models discussed or used are not always perceived as conceptually similar, differing only in terminology or small detail. Overall, there is a lack of critical synthesis and/ or evaluation. Rather than offering nuanced analyses, discussions remain superficial and additive, merely listing points without deeper engagement. Another issue is the overuse of vague, clichéd critical statements that lack a meaningful connection to the specific issue being discussed. While more personal or subjective statements may appear plausible in isolation, in accumulation they result in tiresome and ultimately hollow argumentation. Furthermore, analyses rarely address the specific needs and contextual constraints of the target group in the area under discussion (e.g. English language learning in Germany), instead working with more generic pedagogical, didactic and critical approaches that neglect true critical engagement. Specifically, the use of these “international” sources is intended to create an impression of scholarly breadth and global relevance. However, upon closer inspection, such writing lacks critical depth, thorough evaluation of sources and consistent argumentative precision. What is needed, then, is an ongoing discussion about the use of AI tools, new rigorous reviewing guidelines, and possibly new formats of scholarly articles. Peter Siemund (Linguistics) What do you see as important challenges for Anglophone Studies in the years to come? As English is currently the most widely used language in the world, I do not foresee a decreasing interest in learning it. The opposite will probably be the case, as English is firmly engraved in school curricula all over the world. However, Anglophone Studies goes considerably beyond teaching and learning English. Researchers critically engage with the Anglophone world, examining cultural and linguistic patterns and differences. This research interest needs to be stimulated and disseminated into upcoming generations of academics. The humanities in general appear to be suffering from a decreasing interest among the younger generations at the moment, as the hard sciences are viewed as the more useful and viable economic options in the long run. Anglophone Studies needs to make a case for the field’s relevance, both to students and broader society. The origin of the field lies in British and US American studies. It is obvious, however, that the Anglophone world is much bigger. Not only does it include Australia, New Zealand, and French-English bilingual Canada, but also a multitude of postcolonial countries where English has re- AAA is 50! 128 mained as an official and second (additional) language after independence. In the latter countries, quite often, English further serves as the main (or sole) medium of instruction in secondary and tertiary education. Typically, the Englishes found there are different from standard British or American English. The field of English linguistics has dedicated substantial resources into the study of emerging varieties of English, such as Singaporean, Indian, and Philippine English, as well as the numerous African Englishes. However, there has also been a nearly exclusive focus on English to the neglect of the many other languages in the local, typically multilingual ecologies. The challenge here lies in the formulation of more inclusive approaches that consider the local multilingual ecologies in their entirety as well as the positions English occupies in it - including across generations. This way English linguistics can actively contribute to current concerns regarding decolonization and diversity, and integrate the often hybridized voices from postcolonial Anglophone regions. Localized forms of English need to be understood as part of the local language mixtures where they serve specific purposes in tandem with the indigenous languages. For example, and as of today, it appears reasonable to consider English an Asian as much as an African language. English fulfils specific functions there, and recognizing these functions may even help to protect the indigenous languages in their own functions, thus working against language endangerment and loss. Globalization and transnationalism are forces that propel English to new spaces. A salient example is the Gulf Region where the discovery of oil and extensive infrastructure projects have attracted people from many world regions. The unofficial official language of the Gulf Region is English - in spite of Arabic being the official language. English has developed into a quasi mandatory language without which countries like Bahrein, Kuwait, or the United Arab Emirates cannot be navigated successfully. English speakers hail from English-speaking countries like the US, the UK, or Australia. However, in far greater numbers they originate in postcolonial Anglophone countries, especially India, Pakistan, and the Philippines, and bring with them their requisite varieties of English. Levels of ‘foreigners’ in the Gulf countries can easily reach ninety per cent in certain locales (e.g., Dubai or Doha). To complicate matters further, there are large numbers of speakers in the region for whom English is a foreign language. The result is a complex dialect laboratory where different forms of English interact and possibly merge into something new in the long run. In addition, there are spaces in Western Europe where English has developed into an additional language (the Netherlands, Scandinavian countries, major cities), and some of these spaces effectively require English if one wishes to succeed there. The challenge for Anglophone Interviews: possible futures of (publishing in) Anglophone Studies 129 studies is to understand and model the internal dynamics of these new English spaces. Another global space where English plays a crucial role is digital media. English here is an important carrier of texts, ideas, cultural conventions, and linguistic norms. Anglophone studies is there to understand how English circulates globally, including its manifold national varieties. Further, there is the question of how large language models (LLMs) interfere with and influence current language norms, as people become increasingly dependent on their output. This may concern language structure as much as discourse conventions. What is more, LLMs offer new research methodologies allowing the comparison of established textual sources of English against the language knowledge behind these models. Speech to text as well as text to speech conversion are largely automatic processes these days, and typically based on artificial intelligence. Interdisciplinarity has always been a challenge and will remain to be one. Interdisciplinarity requires disciplinarity, and Anglophone Studies can only reach out to other disciplines from a firm self-conception. There is an increasing recognition that Anglophone Studies can benefit from closer connections to disciplines such as regional studies, ethnology, history, sociology, political science, and media studies. The development of innovative, interdisciplinary methodologies will be crucial in addressing intricate questions pertaining to language usage and its underlying meanings. Navigating interdisciplinary work while preserving disciplinary rigor will be a continuing challenge. Which topics and questions do you see as very relevant for the future of research in your field? The study of World Englishes has firmly established itself in the canon of English linguistics. World Englishes is a cover term for the various localized forms of English (e.g., Australian English, Nigerian English, Malaysian English, etc.), but - of course - also includes the (still) norm-providing standard varieties of British and American English. The label may further subsume lingua franca Englishes, learner varieties, hybridized forms of English, and perhaps even English-based pidgins and creoles. English has developed into a pluricentric language in different senses. This broader conception of World Englishes can be seen as an important research outcome, since there is substantial overlap in terms of linguistic features across these varieties. The future study of World Englishes is likely to intersect more strongly with sociolinguistics, regional studies, and ethnology, so as to examine forms, functions, and use of English in specific speech communities worldwide. Largely for methodological reasons, there has been a historical research focus on the more educated speaker groups. Broadening speaker groups and their language backgrounds, social backgrounds, milieus, and educational levels is likely to uncover AAA is 50! 130 more variation and new features, but perhaps also important similarities between different world regions. On the whole, I foresee less occupation with the established post-colonial national varieties, but an increasing interest to investigate the internal dynamics of speech communities for whom English is among the central languages. This shift in focus easily carries over to the classic inner circle countries where numerous and diverse immigrant communities substantially increase variation in the use of English. It may well be the case that globalization and transnationalism are among the most important forces that lead to a blurring of the boundaries between varieties of English. When I talk to students from different countries in the world, both postcolonial and non-postcolonial, I am noticing substantial differences, especially regarding their accents, but at the same time many similarities that are indicative of global convergence processes. One could hypothesize that the global English of the younger, mobile, and highly educated, generation is converging on some particular norm. This convergence is likely driven by the preeminent position of English in their language repertoires in combination with a strongly developed written register. These global convergence processes need attention. At the same time, one can also attest to the exploitation of localized, sometimes hybridized, features for the creation and expression of local and other identities around the world. However, these are more strongly bound to the spoken registers, and it is less clear what kinds of speaker groups these are indicative of. It can be assumed that the more educated speaker groups are able to exploit such localized features quite deliberately. The local processes of identity formation require more research. Studying and documenting them is an important prerequisite for their recognition and valorisation in education and language policy. Studying the position of English in different multilingual ecologies around the world is a major current research concern. Here, many pressing issues arise. For example, researchers are interested in how multilingual speakers in Anglophone societies navigate between English and the other languages in their respective ecologies. They currently study negotiation processes of identity through language mixing, code-switching, translanguaging, and other multilingual practices. The indexing of identities and orientations is a hot topic. In general, researchers ask what the long-term effects are of intense language contact, especially in urban areas with high densities of diasporic communities, and what the impact of English is in these processes of language change. There is further the question about the extent English is impacted on in such multilingual ecologies. Interviews: possible futures of (publishing in) Anglophone Studies 131 How do you envision the future of academic publishing in your field? I believe that digital media and Open Access publishing will dominate the field in the future. Digital media and platforms are cheaper and can reach more researchers. They can also be produced more quickly than print media and allow the integration of multimedia content. Open Access offers maximally inclusive publishing and is invaluable especially for researchers from the Global South and those without institutional embedding. Open Access publishing helps to democratize knowledge. I further expect the appearance of alternative formats of reviewing. Double blind reviewing is the currently accepted community standard, but one can already see the emergence of more open formats where the reviewers are known to the authors or are made public after the publication process has been completed. Data transparency serves as a fundamental pillar in the realm of publishing. It is essential to foster platforms that emphasize transparency, particularly in areas such as methodological clarity, data accessibility, and the replicability of research findings. What would you see as advantages and disadvantages of journals with a wider focus in English Studies such as AAA compared to more specialized journals? Journals with a broader focus, such as AAA, provide platforms for dialogue across subdisciplines (linguistics, literature, cultural studies, etc.), thus fostering cross-fertilization of ideas and methodologies. They can potentially harness a wider readership than specialized journals and, accordingly, produce more impact. AAA can offer a platform for publications that do not fit specialized journals, as, for example, overview articles or state-of-the-field pieces that summarize or synthesize insights from across English Studies. There may also be opportunities for interdisciplinary projects or for scholars whose work does not fit tightly defined categories. AAA could be an apt platform for early career researchers. Regarding potential disadvantages relative to more specialized journals, there is a risk of failing to attract key research, as such research is likely to go into focused journals. There, both reviewers and readers possess the requisite expertise to appreciate the relevant research. Articles can delve more deeply into technical details, theoretical debates, or methodological issues without over-explaining for a general audience. Peer reviewers of specialized journals can provide more targeted, detailed, and constructive feedback. Broad journals such as AAA further present challenges for the editors who need to possess skills and expertise in interdisciplinary work. AAA is 50! 132 Cornelia Klecker (CK) and Interviewer Ulla Ratheiser (UR) (Literature/ Culture) UR: Thank you very much, Cornelia, for agreeing to answer my questions. My first question is: what do you see as important challenges for Anglophone Studies in the years to come? CK: A few aspects come to mind. One ongoing challenge, which will likely become even more significant in the future, is AI. That is a major challenge for research in general but particularly for fields like ours that are very much based on producing texts. That is what we do: we are not in the lab conducting experiments, we are producing texts. So, of course, there will be challenges if AI becomes increasingly better in this area: how do we position ourselves? How do we ensure quality control? Also, how do we as editors of journals avoid receiving AI-generated article submissions, and so on? That is another issue that looms large over everything. I think something broader is the ongoing hostility towards the humanities - ongoing and perhaps even intensifying. That is not helpful, particularly these days. It is more important than ever with everything that is happening in the world politically and culturally. That, of course, is also part of the reason why we have seen, at least in Austria, a decline in student numbers. I find that very troubling, also in terms of the next generation of scholars. That is a really important issue because, traditionally, you study the subject first and then you move into it - with very few exceptions, anyway. So that is a broader issue. More specifically regarding Anglophone Studies, I think one of the beautiful aspects of the field is that, because it is so broad, it can be very inclusive and can promote a sense of equality. You don’t have to prioritise the literature of one country over another. For instance, you don’t necessarily have to focus on the UK; you can study South Africa or other regions. However, there is a pitfall here: we have to be careful that different cultures are not subsumed too much under a broad umbrella. Do you know what I mean? UR: Absolutely. CK: In the same vein, we must be careful not to believe that we are experts in everything. Just because I know about the British novel, or American television in my case, does not mean I know anything about Australian literature, media, or culture. So, I think this inclusivity is a really good thing in one way, but we also need to be cautious. UR: Also so that we teach and are aware of certain basic qualities, or basic skills and tools. Yet, building on those tools, you still have to get your expertise, of course. Interviews: possible futures of (publishing in) Anglophone Studies 133 CK: That’s right, and consider the specific context. UR: Yes, I agree. Can I follow up on the points about AI you brought up? Since you’re a journal editor yourself, do you check the articles that are submitted to your journal on whether AI has been used? CK: I don’t have a programme for that because, although it’s interesting to upload the articles and see, these tools are not reliable. Maybe I’m completely wrong, but I think, right now, AI is not good enough to actually produce the kinds of academic articles that we publish. I still believe I could tell when a submission is not written by a human. Of course, it’s perfect English, with no grammatical mistakes and so on, but there is a lot of repetition, a lot of empty phrases, and phrases that sound good but don’t mean much. UR: Extremely shallow, right? CK: Yes, submissions like that, of course, we would not publish. So, right now, I’m not that worried, but we’ll see if AI gets better. I mean, I’m sure that some scholars are already working with it, maybe even just “quote unquote” to improve their English. I’ve heard that in terms of grant applications, there are noticeable differences in language quality already. It is striking that academic writing from certain countries, where language levels used to vary, is now written in perfect English. But I think that is fair because, ultimately, it’s still your own ideas. This is especially true in fields such as the natural sciences, where the emphasis is not on beautiful prose and how well you argue something but rather on conveying your research clearly and accurately. UR: My second question - my actual second question - is: which topics and questions do you see as very relevant for the future of research in your field? CK: So, in my field, which I would define specifically as American Studies, I think a lot of it is ongoing and obvious: climate change, Indigenous Studies, Border Studies, Inter-American Studies, and similar areas. However, one thing that is currently really important to me is US politics. No surprise there. Generally, that has been an interest of mine for quite some time. Obviously, it’s a personal interest, but I also find it important that US politics is discussed from a humanities and Cultural Studies perspective. It should not be the case that, whenever something happens in the US, journalists, for instance, only consult somebody from Political Science or Sociology. Scholars in American Studies also have expertise about the country and can provide explanations. This is very important because it is a different perspective that we bring to the discussion. Regarding current AAA is 50! 134 US politics, we will really have to be strongly engaged with questions of democracy and its erosion. You can see that very clearly in the US right now but, of course, not only there. They are just louder. So that is something that I’m really grappling with: how to approach this in my work, in my research, in my teaching; how to explain what is going on, even when you don’t fully understand it yourself; also, how to channel this notion that it is not just political but cultural polarisation that is really problematic. Moreover, a more general issue of ours is: how can we reach people, and how can we talk to people outside of academia? Particularly, if we are dealing with these big issues - democracy, climate change, and so on. I think we need to engage even more, do more public-facing publications or organise events where we can reach a broader audience. UR: Yes, and I think particularly in the case of the US, which has such a strong influence on so many parts of the Western world in particular, whatever happens there has an impact in Europe and other parts of the world. I think that’s really, really essential. CK: I only half-joke sometimes: who becomes president in the US is more important to an Austrian than who the Austrian president is. UR: Very often it is, unfortunately. CK: Because of how dependent and connected we are. UR: Yes, and you also see the rollback on citizens’ rights in the US, and how that also influences European discussions. So, I think that is really essential. CK: They become an excuse, right? If the US can do it, then so can we. Obviously, criticism of the US in those terms has been around in America for a long time, but I think now we have reached a point where this criticism needs to be done even more forcefully. UR: Of course, if they get away with it, then why shouldn’t we? That’s the kind of trend I feel. Indeed, I very much agree. What would you say: how do you envision the future of academic publishing in your field, or in our field, in this case? CK: I think, eventually, there won’t be any hard copies at all. I think the trend is there. UR: So, you believe that we will only have online publications? Interviews: possible futures of (publishing in) Anglophone Studies 135 CK: Online publications, yes. I haven’t researched that, so please don’t quote me on it, but I think there are only few left that don’t have an online version. Ongoing trends suggest there will be more and more open-access publications. I think so far those are mostly new journals, like the one I’m editor-in-chief of. It’s not a journal that changed from one way to open access but was founded as open access, and I know this is true of other journals as well. I wonder whether more established journals will also try to do this eventually. It’s difficult, of course. I think we as scholars generally agree that we love the notion of open access, of everybody having access to our work. Yet I wonder how long this could be sustained because it is only possible if institutions or governments - whoever it may be - are willing to finance that, invest in that. Openaccess journals and online publications in general are no less work than a printed version. Somebody needs to do this work. Not just the scholarly part, but editing, which is part of our job as academics, the layout and all those kinds of tasks - somebody needs to do that, and those people need to be paid. UR: Also, the technical infrastructure. CK: That’s right, all of that as well. It’s going to be interesting to see how that develops. UR: There are environmental issues, too, right? I think we always pretend as if anything that’s online does not impact the environment but, actually, a lot of energy and resources go into that. CK: That’s exactly what I sometimes say to students: how sure are you that 30 laptops running for 90 minutes are better for the environment than distributing hard copies of a text, for instance? I haven’t seen studies, but I wonder whether the laptops are really more sustainable. UR: I don’t think so. I read somewhere - I can’t remember what it was, but it was a good source - that every email has the ecological footprint of a plastic bag. Just think about how much energy is used by the many emails we send that just say “yes, thank you,” or emails with photos attached automatically as part of signatures. To wrap this question up, I would agree: I think that is clearly one of the central questions. Now, I have a question that is more concerned with journals that have a relatively broad focus, like AAA. What would you see as advantages and disadvantages of journals with a wider focus in English Studies, such as AAA, compared to more specialised journals? CK: I think a big disadvantage is that it’s more difficult for the editors because you cannot possibly be an expert in such a broad field. Even the AAA is 50! 136 first decision of whether to do a desk rejection or actually pass an article on to reviewers can already be tricky because it might be a field that is further away from your specific expertise. That is hard and, of course, one reason why external peer reviewers are so important. I usually try to find reviewers who work very specifically in that area to make sure that nothing slips through. However, that can also be a challenge since, usually, we are better connected with scholars in our own specific field. That often makes it more difficult to find external reviewers because you have to, well, blind email them, right? Although more often than not they actually say yes, it is still a big challenge for editors of journals with a wide focus. In my opinion, the big advantage of a journal with a broad scope is that it gives room to topics, methodologies, and articles that wouldn’t find room in a niche journal. So, I think that opens up opportunities, opportunities for innovation, original approaches, interdisciplinary approaches, and so on. I think that is a beautiful thing. Some may say that an article about a really niche topic would not be published in such a journal, but that is up to the editors, so it’s not necessarily the case. They can choose, for whatever reason, to publish a niche article or not. I don’t know how many people read an entire issue - I’m not necessarily a person who does that except if it’s very specific to my research -, but if you pick up an issue of a journal with a broader scope, an advantage is that you might find articles, topics, and approaches that you wouldn’t easily find otherwise because you’re not actively looking for them. UR: AAA not only includes English and American Studies but also linguistics, culture, and related studies. So, could one advantage also be that, even if people don’t read the entire issue, they still get an idea of what’s going on in terms of research? CK: Yes, definitely. I think that’s especially relevant if we consider the context of our own teaching. These fields are all part of the study programme we teach in. Although we don’t cover all aspects ourselves, it is always interesting to find out what is going on in those other research areas that are related to and an integral part of this study programme. And a journal like AAA allows you to get an overview. UR: Yes, that was all. Thank you so much for taking the time!