Decentring linguistic hegemony in peer review: relational epistemology, affect and ethical becoming

Purpose This paper introduces Onto-Epistemic Mutual Becoming as a relational, affective and ethical approach to peer review. It critiques dominant epistemic and linguistic gatekeeping practices in traditional reviewing, particularly their marginalising effects on non-Anglophone scholars. Drawing on Confucian, Daoist, Buddhist, Indigenous and affective epistemologies, we reimagine peer review as dialogic, inclusive and co-constructive. Through translingual, intergenerational narratives, we call for publishing practices premised on ethical responsibility, interpretive generosity and epistemic justice. Design/methodology/approach This paper applies a narrative inquiry approach and draws on Deleuzian and Eastern relational ontologies to propose a transversal, ethically attuned peer review approach. Through the experiences of three multilingual scholars – early-career (Xingxing), mid-career (Nashid) and senior (Sender) – we illustrate affective harm, epistemic exclusion and transformative alternatives grounded in translanguaging, mentorship and dialogic reciprocity. Theoretical lenses include Ren, Wu Wei, Pratityasamutpada and collective Indigenous accountability. Findings Traditional peer review often enacts affective and epistemic harm through linguistic regulation and methodological policing. However, relationally grounded, translanguaging-friendly and mentorship-based approaches disrupt dominant norms and foster inclusion. Experiential narratives show how scholars actively resist marginalisation and co-create epistemic spaces of care, reciprocity and plural recognition. Research limitations/implications Based on a small set of narrative accounts, this study prioritises depth and transferability over objectivity and generalisability. Nonetheless, its theoretical innovation opens pathways for empirical inquiry into affective justice and inclusive peer review across contexts. Practical implications We propose education in epistemic justice, dialogic mentorship and translanguaging-affirming review models. Editorial policies should decentralise monolingual norms, diversify reviewer pools and support relational feedback. Social implications This approach promotes equity in knowledge production by challenging epistemic hierarchies and amplifying plural traditions. It empowers marginalised scholars and nurtures scholarly ecosystems of care and ethical co-becoming. Originality/value This is among the first papers to theorise Onto-Epistemic Mutual Becoming in peer review. By weaving Eastern, Indigenous and feminist philosophies with lived narratives, it reimagines peer review as an ethical, transversal and relational practice.