一些英文审稿意见的模板

一些英文审稿意见的模板一些英文审稿意见的模板一些英文审稿意见的模板xxx公司一些英文审稿意见的模板文件编号：文件日期：修订次数：第1.0次更改批准审核制定方案设计，管理制度最近在审一篇英文稿，第一次做这个工作，还有点不知如何表达。幸亏遇上我的处女审稿，我想不会枪毙它的，给他一个majorrevision后接收吧。呵呵

网上找来一些零碎的资料参考参考。

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

1、目标和结果不清晰。

ItisnotedthatyourmanuscriptneedscarefuleditingbysomeonewithexpertiseintechnicalEnglisheditingpayingparticularattentiontoEnglishgrammar,spelling,andsentencestructuresothatthegoalsandresultsofthestudyarecleartothereader.

2、未解释研究方法或解释不充分。

Ingeneral,thereisalackofexplanationofreplicatesandstatisticalmethodsusedinthestudy.

Furthermore,anexplanationofwhytheauthorsdidthesevariousexperimentsshouldbeprovided.

3、对于研究设计的rationale:

Also,therearefewexplanationsoftherationaleforthestudydesign.

4、夸张地陈述结论/夸大成果/不严谨：

Theconclusionsareoverstated.Forexample,thestudydidnotshow

ifthesideeffectsfrominitialcopperburstcanbeavoidwiththepolymerformulation.

5、对hypothesis的清晰界定：

Ahypothesisneedstobepresented。

6、对某个概念或工具使用的rationale/定义概念：

Whatwastherationaleforthefilm/SBFvolumeratio

7、对研究问题的定义：

Trytosettheproblemdiscussedinthispaperinmoreclear,

writeonesectiontodefinetheproblem

8、如何凸现原创性以及如何充分地写literaturereview:

Thetopicisnovelbuttheapplicationproposedisnotsonovel.

9、对claim,如A＞B的证明，verification:

Thereisnoexperimentalcomparisonofthealgorithmwithpreviouslyknownwork,soitisimpossibletojudgewhetherthealgorithmisanimprovementonpreviouswork.

10、严谨度问题：

MNQiseasierthantheprimitivePNQS,howtoprovethat.

11、格式（重视程度）：

Inaddition,thelistofreferencesisnotinourstyle.Itisclosebutnotcompletelycorrect.Ihaveattachedapdffilewith"InstructionsforAuthors"whichshowsexamples.

Beforesubmittingarevisionbesurethatyourmaterialisproperlypreparedandformatted.Ifyouareunsure,pleaseconsulttheformattingnstructionstoauthorsthataregivenunderthe"InstructionsandForms"buttoninheupperright-handcornerofthescreen.

12、语言问题（出现最多的问题）：

有关语言的审稿人意见：

ItisnotedthatyourmanuscriptneedscarefuleditingbysomeonewithexpertiseintechnicalEnglisheditingpayingparticularattentiontoEnglishgrammar,spelling,andsentencestructuresothatthegoalsandresultsofthestudyarecleartothereader.

Theauthorsmusthavetheirworkreviewedbyapropertranslation/reviewingservicebeforesubmission;onlythencanaproperreviewbeperformed.Mostsentencescontaingrammaticaland/orspellingmistakesorarenotcompletesentences.

Aspresented,thewritingisnotacceptableforthejournal.Thereareproblemswithsentencestructure,verbtense,andclauseconstruction.

TheEnglishofyourmanuscriptmustbeimprovedbeforeresubmission.Westronglysuggestthatyouobtainassistancefromacolleaguewhoiswell-versedinEnglishorwhosenativelanguageisEnglish.

PleasehavesomeonecompetentintheEnglishlanguageandthesubjectmatterofyourpapergooverthepaperandcorrectit

thequalityofEnglishneedsimproving.作为审稿人，本不应该把编辑部的这些信息公开（冒风险啊），

但我觉得有些意见值得广大投稿人注意，

就贴出来吧，当然，有关审稿人的名字，Email，文章题名信息等就都删除了，

以免造成不必要的麻烦！

希望朋友们多评价，其他有经验的审稿人能常来指点大家！

国人一篇文章投Mater.类知名国际杂志，

被塞尔维亚一审稿人打25分！

个人认为文章还是有一些创新的，

所以作为审稿人我就给了66分，（这个分正常应该足以发表），提了一些修改意见，望作者修改后发表！

登录到编辑部网页一看，一个文章竟然有六个审稿人，

详细看了下打的分数，60分大修，60分小修，66分（我），25分拒，（好家伙，竟然打25分，有魄力），拒但没有打分（另一国人审），最后一个没有回来！

两个拒的是需要我们反思和学习的！

（括号斜体内容为我注解）

Reviewer4

ReviewerRecommendationTerm:Reject

OverallReviewerManuscriptRating:25

CommentstoEditor:Reviewersarerequiredtoentertheirname,affiliationande-mailaddressbelow.Pleasenotethisisforadministrativepurposesandwillnotbeseenbytheauthor.

Title(Prof./Dr./Mr./Mrs.):Prof.

Name:XXX

Affiliation:XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXx

Manuscriptentitled"SynthesisXXX。。。。。。。。。。。"ithasbeensynthesizedwithanumberofdifferentmethodsandinavarietyofforms.Thismanuscriptdoesnotbringanynewknowledgeordataonmaterialspropertyandthereforeonlycontributionmaybeinnovelpreparationmethod,stillthispointisnotelaboratedproperly(seeRemark1).Presentationandwritingisratherpoor;thereareseveralstatementsnotsupportedwithdata(forsomeseeRemarks2)andevensomeflaws(seeRemark3).ForthesereasonsIsuggesttorejectpaperinthepresentform.

1.ThepaperdescribesanewmethodforpreparationofXXXX,but:

-thenewmethodhastobecomparedwithothermethodsforpreparationofXXXXpowders(INTRODUCTION-literaturedata,RESULTSANDDISCUSSION-discussion),（通常的写作格式，审稿人实际上很在意的）

-ithastobedescribedwhythismethodisbetterordifferentfromothermethods,(INTRODUCTION-literaturedata,RESULTSANDDISCUSSION-discussion),

-ithastobeaddedinthemanuscriptwhatkindofXXXXXXbyothermethodscomparedtothisnovelone(INTRODUCTION-literaturedata,RESULTSANDDISCUSSION-discussion),

-ithastobeoutlinedwhatisthebenefitofthismethod(ABSTRACT,RESULTSANDDISCUSSION,CONCLUSIONS).

（很多人不会写这个地方，大家多学习啊）

2.WhendiscussingXRDdataXXXauthors

-statethatXXXXX

-statethatXXXX

-Thisusuallyhappenswithincreasingsinteringtime,butarethereanydatatopresent,density,particlesize

（很多人用XRD，结果图放上去就什么都不管了，这是不应该的）

3.Whendiscussingluminescencemeasurementsauthorswrite"XXXXXIfthereissecondharmonicinexcitationbeamitwillstaytherenomatterwhattypeofmaterialoneinvestigates!!!

（研究了什么）

4.英语写作要提高

（这条很多人的软肋，大家努力啊）

Reviewer5

ReviewerRecommendationTerm:Reject

OverallReviewerManuscriptRating:N/A

CommentstoEditor:

Title(Prof./Dr./Mr./Mrs.)rof.

Name:（国人）

Affiliation:XXXXXXXXxxxxXXXXXXXXXXXXXxxxx

Deareditor:

Thankyouforinvitingmetoevaluatethearticletitled"XXXX“.Inthispaper,theauthorsinvestigatedtheinfluencesofsinteringconditiononthecrystalstructureandXXXXXX，However,itisdifficultforustounderstandthemanuscriptbecauseofpoorEnglishbeingused.

Thetextisnotwellarrangedandthelogicisnotclear.ExceptEnglishwriting,therearemanymistakesinthemanuscriptandtheexperimentalresultsdon'tshowgoodandnewresults.SoIrecommendtoyouthatthismanuscriptcannotbeaccepted.Thefollowingarethequestionsandsomemistakesinthismanuscript:

（看看总体评价，不达标，很多人被这样郁闷了，当然审稿人也有他的道理）

1.TheXXXXXXX.However,thiskindmaterialhadbeeninvestigatedsince1997asmentionedintheauthor'smanuscript,andsimilarworkshadbeenpublishedinsimilarjournals.WhatarethenovelfindingsinthepresentworkThesynthesismethodandluminescencepropertiesreportedinthismanuscriptdidn'tsupplyenoughevidencetosupporttheprimenoveltystatement.

（这位作者好猛，竟然翻出自己1997年的中文文章翻译了一边就敢投国际知名杂志，而且没有新的创新！

朋友们也看到了，一稿多发，中文，英文双版发表在网络时代太难了，运气不好审稿人也是国人，敢情曾经看过你的文章，所以必死无疑，这位作者老兄就命运差了，刚好被审稿人看见，所以毫无疑问被拒，（呵呵，我97年刚上初一没见到这个文章，哈哈））

2.Inpage5,theauthormentionedthat:"XXXXBasedonourknowledge,"sintering"describestheprocesswhenthepowdersbecomeceramics.So,Ithinktheword"synthesis"shouldbebetterinsteadof"sintering"here.Second,theXRDpatternsdidn'tshowobviousdifferencebetweenthree"sintering"te