一些英文审稿意见及回复的模板

完美格式整理版一些英文审稿意见的模板处女审稿，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,thestudydidnotshowifthesideeffectsfrominitialcopperburstcanbeavoidwiththepolymerformulation.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,writeonesectiontodefinetheproblem8、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:学习好帮手完美格式整理版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！学习好帮手完美格式整理版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，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）Reviewer4ReviewerRecommendationTerm:RejectOverallReviewerManuscriptRating:25CommentstoEditor:Reviewersarerequiredtoentertheirname,affiliationande-mailaddressbelow.Pleasenotethisisforadministrativepurposesandwillnotbeseenbytheauthor.Title(Prof./Dr./Mr./Mrs.):Prof.Name:XXXAffiliation:XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXxManuscriptentitled"Synthesisithasbeensynthesizedwithanumberofdifferentmethodsandinavarietyofforms.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学习好帮手完美格式整理版-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）Reviewer5ReviewerRecommendationTerm:RejectOverallReviewerManuscriptRating:N/ACommentstoEditor:Title(Prof./Dr./Mr./Mrs.)rof.Name:（国人）Affiliation:XXXXXXXXxxxxXXXXXXXXXXXXXxxxxDeareditor: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.Whatarethenovelfindingsinthepresentwork?Thesynthesismethodandluminescencepropertiesreportedinthismanuscriptdidn'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，运气不好学习好帮手完美格式整理版差了，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"temperaturesof700,800and900?C.（作者老兄做工作太不仔细了，虫子们可别犯啊）3.AlsointhepageX,theauthormentionedthat:XXX。。。。。。。。。。However,theauthordidn'tsupplythemorphologiesofparticlesatdifferentsynthesizingtemperatures.Whataretheexperimentalresultsorthereferenceswhichsupp