英文论文审稿意见范文

This paper addresses an important and interesting problem -automatically identifying adult accounts on Sina Weibo. The authors propose two sets of behavior indicators for adult groups and accounts, and find that adult groups and accounts have different behavioral distributions with non-adult groups and accounts. Then a novel relation-based model, which considers the inter-relationships among groups, individual accounts and message sources, is applied to identify adult accounts. The experimental results show that compared with state-of-the-art methods, the proposed method can improve the performance of adult account identification on Sina Weibo. Overall, the article is well organized and its presentation is good. However, some minor issues still need to be improved:

(1) The authors should summarize the main contributions of this paper

in Section 1.

(2) In Section 4.2, the authors mentioned that “A group will attain a

value very close to on GACS if all its accounts have entirely copied

their own texts, images or contact information”. However,

according to Equation 8, contact information is not considered

when computing GACS.

(3) In Algorithm 1 on Pg. 17, it seems that “t=t+1” should be added

after line 6.

(4) I suggest that the limitation of this work should be discussed in

Section 9.

(5) There are a few typos and grammar errors in this paper.

英文期刊审稿意见模板

1、目标和结果不清晰。 It is noted that your manuscript needs careful editing by someone with expertise in technical English editing paying particular attention to English grammar, spelling, and sentence structure so that the goals and results of the study are clear to the reader. 2、未解释研究方法或解释不充分。 In general, there is a lack of explanation of replicates and statistical methods used in the study. Furthermore, an explanation of why the authors did these various experiments should be provided. 3、对于研究设计的rationale: Also, there are few explanations of the rationale for the study design. 4、夸张地陈述结论/夸大成果/不严谨： The conclusions are overstated. For example, the study did not show if the side effects from initial copper burst can be avoid with the polymer formulation. 5、对hypothesis的清晰界定： A hypothesis needs to be presented。 6、对某个概念或工具使用的rationale/定义概念： What was the rationale for the film/SBF volume ratio? 7、对研究问题的定义： Try to set the problem discussed in this paper in more clear, write one section to define the problem 8、如何凸现原创性以及如何充分地写literature review: The topic is novel but the application proposed is not so novel. 9、对claim,如A＞B的证明，verification: There is no experimental comparison of the algorithm with previously known work, so it is impossible to judge whether the algorithm is an improvement on previous work. 10、严谨度问题： MNQ is easier than the primitive PNQS, how to prove that. 11、格式（重视程度）： In addition, the list of references is not in our style. It is close but not completely correct. I have attached a pdf file with "Instructions for Authors" which shows examples. Before submitting a revision be sure that your material is properly prepared and formatted. If you are unsure, please consult the formatting nstructions to authors that are given under the "Instructions and Forms" button in he upper right-hand corner of the screen. 12、语言问题（出现最多的问题）：

英文论文审稿意见英文版

英文论文审稿意见汇总 1、目标和结果不清晰。 It is no ted that your manu script n eeds careful edit ing by some one with expertise in technical English editing paying particular attention to English grammar, spelling, and sentence structure so that the goals and results of the study are clear to the reader. 2、未解释研究方法或解释不充分。 In general, there is a lack of explanation of replicates and statistical me thods used in the study. . Furthermore, an expla natio n of why the authors did these various experime nts should be provided. 3、对于研究设计的ratio nale: Also, there are few expla nati ons of the rati on ale for the study desig n. 4、夸张地陈述结论/夸大成果/不严谨： The con clusi ons are overstated. For example, the study did not show if the side effects from initial copper burst can be avoid with the polymer formulation.

SCI英文论文审稿意见汇总

英文论文审稿意见汇总 以下12点无轻重主次之分。每一点内容由总结性标题和代表性审稿人意见构成。1、目标和结果不清晰。 It is noted that your manuscript needs careful editing by someone with expertise in technical English editing paying particular attention to English grammar, spelling, and sentence structure so that the goals and results of the study are clear to the reader. 2、未解释研究方法或解释不充分。 ◆In general, there is a lack of explanation of replicates and statistical me thods used in the study. ◆Furthermore, an explanation of why the authors did these various experiments should be provided. 3、对于研究设计的rationale: Also, there are few explanations of the rationale for the study design. 4、夸张地陈述结论/夸大成果/不严谨： The conclusions are overstated. For example, the study did not show if the side effects from initial copper burst can be avoid with the polymer formulation. 5、对hypothesis的清晰界定： A hypothesis needs to be presented。 6、对某个概念或工具使用的rationale/定义概念： What was the rationale for the film/SBF volume ratio? 7、对研究问题的定义： Try to set the problem discussed in this paper in more clear, write one section to define the problem 8、如何凸现原创性以及如何充分地写literature review: The topic is novel but the application proposed is not so novel. 9、对claim,如A＞B的证明，verification: There is no experimental comparison of the algorithm with previously known work, so it is impossible to judge whether the algorithm is an improvement on previous work. ：题问度谨严、10． MNQ is easier than the primitive PNQS, how to prove that. 11、格式（重视程度）： ◆In addition, the list of references is not in our style. It is close but not completely correct. I have attached a pdf file with Instructions for Authors which shows examples. ◆Before submitting a revision be sure that your material is properly prepared

英文论文审稿意见范文

This paper addresses an important and interesting problem -automatically identifying adult accounts on Sina Weibo. The authors propose two sets of behavior indicators for adult groups and accounts, and find that adult groups and accounts have different behavioral distributions with non-adult groups and accounts. Then a novel relation-based model, which considers the inter-relationships among groups, individual accounts and message sources, is applied to identify adult accounts. The experimental results show that compared with state-of-the-art methods, the proposed method can improve the performance of adult account identification on Sina Weibo. Overall, the article is well organized and its presentation is good. However, some minor issues still need to be improved: (1) The authors should summarize the main contributions of this paper in Section 1. (2) In Section 4.2, the authors mentioned that “A group will attain a value very close to on GACS if all its accounts have entirely copied their own texts, images or contact information”. However, according to Equation 8, contact information is not considered when computing GACS. (3) In Algorithm 1 on Pg. 17, it seems that “t=t+1” should be added after line 6. (4) I suggest that the limitation of this work should be discussed in Section 9. (5) There are a few typos and grammar errors in this paper.

英文论文投稿及修改流程

SCI投稿过程总结、投稿状态解析、拒稿后处理对策及接受后期相关问答综合荟萃目录（重点是一、二、四、五、六）： （一）投稿前准备工作和需要注意的事项、投稿过程相关经验总结 （二）SCI期刊投稿各种状态详解及实例综合（学习各种投稿状态+投稿经历总结） （三）问答综合篇（是否催稿、如何撤稿、一稿两投及学术不端相关内容等） （四）如何处理审稿意见（回复意见、补实验、润色、重整数据、作图及调整、申辩及其他） （五）Reject 或者Reject and resubmit后的对策和处理 （六）稿件接受后期的相关问题（作者信息、地址版权、单行本、彩图费、版面费、如何汇款、清样相关等） （七）进阶篇（如何选投SCI杂志、各专业方向期刊选择、SCI写作经验） （一）投稿前准备工作和需要注意的事项、投稿过程相关经验总结 投稿前准备工作和需要注意的事项： 总结提示语： 1)第一作者和通信作者的区别： 通信作者（Corresponding author)通常是实际统筹处理投稿和承担答复审稿意见等工作的主导者，也常是稿件所涉及研究工作的负责人。 通信作者的姓名多位列于论文作者名单的最后（使用符号来标识说明是Corresponding author)，但其贡献不亚于论文的第一作者。 通讯作者往往指课题的总负责人，负责与编辑部的一切通信联系和接受读者的咨询等。 文章的成果是属于通讯作者的，说明思路是通讯作者的，而不是第一作者。 第一作者仅代表是你做的，且是最主要的参与者！ 通信作者标注名称：Corresponding author，To whom correspondence should be addressed,或The person to whom inquiries regarding the paper should be addressed 若两个以上的作者在地位上是相同的，可以采取“共同第一作者”（joint first author)的署名方式，并说明These authors contributed equally to the work。 2)作者地址的标署： 尽可能地给出详细通讯地址，邮政编码。有二位或多位作者，则每一不同的地址应按之中出现的先后顺序列出，并以相应上标符号的形式列出与相应作者的关系。 如果第一作者不是通讯作者，作者应该按期刊的相关规定表达，并提前告诉编辑。期刊大部分以星号（*）、脚注或者致谢形式标注通讯联系人。 3)挑选审稿人的几个途径： 很多SCI杂志都需要作者自己提出该篇论文的和您研究领域相关的审稿人，比较常见的是三名左右，也有的杂志要求5-8人。介绍几个方法： ①利用SCI、SSCI、A&HCI、ISTP检索和您研究相关的科学家； ②文章中的参考文献； ③相关期刊编委或学术会议的主席、委员； ④以前发表的类似文章的审稿人； ⑤询问比较熟识的一些专业人士；

英语论文评语

英语论文评语 篇一：英语本科论文指导教师评语英语本科毕业论文评语 对毕业论文（设计）完成情况及质量、工作能力及态度、思想表 现、论文学术水平等进行总体评价孙悟空： 孙悟空同学能按照相关论文写作要求，认真地展开工作并作按时 完成毕业论文任务，质量一般。论文的选题有一定研究价值，结构基本合理，各部分基本符合英语论文的写作要求。为了写好这篇论文，作者作了一定研究，但对原著的内容是不够熟悉。语言错误表达不够简洁，说理欠充分，观点具有一定独创性，语料欠充实，论证力度不够，未能沉入剖析主题。总体而言，基本达到毕业论文要求。 任我行： 学术界对双关语与歧义的研究虽然较多，但是把两者联系在一起 的研究较少，故该论文选题具有一定的研究意义，作者在吸收学术界研究成果的基础上，提出自己的见解，有说服力。论述观点正确，语料比较充实，思路清晰、叙述层次分明，有较强的逻辑性。语言基本功较好，文字通顺、流畅。行文符合学术规范。如 “4. Application of Ambiguity in Puns从更深层次剖析双关语与歧义在用法上的关系，则能彰显一定的学术水平。总体而言，这是 一篇较好的毕业论文。

东方不败东方不败同学的论文探讨农村留守初中生课后英语词汇学习存在问题，并提出了相应的解决策略。符合具有一定的现实意义，论文结构合理，思路清晰，层次清晰，语句通顺。观点表达准确。能在论证过程中能有效的将专业原理与要研究的主题结合起来。作者对于论文内容有一定的了解和熟悉。但文章不足之处在于研究的效度有待提高，总体上达到毕业论文要求。 左冷禅 该文分析了地区院校英语专业免费师范生在教育实习中存在的问题，并提出了解决策略。选题符合英语专业培养培养目标与专业特色，具有较强的针对性和现实意义。文章结构安排合理，层次清晰，写作时参考的相关文献资料与主题联系紧密，而且参考的资料较新，在写作过程中作者能较好地运用专业基本知识原来分析问题，在论证过程中，主要用理论论证和事实论证。但在数据分析时，在于未能透过现象揭示本质，论证还不够深刻充分，创新点不够。总体上符合毕业论文要求。 1 篇二：毕业论文指导教师评语参考范例 毕业论文指导教师和评阅教师的论文评语参考范例 优秀（90分以上）论文评语参考范例 论文选题有新意，有实际应用价值，论文有自己独到的观点，能够反映出学生的创造性劳动，结构安排合理，论证充分、透彻，有足够的理论和实例支撑，英语语言表达顺畅、得体，没有语法错误，论文格式符合规范

英文审稿意见

在比较高级别的会议、期刊等，评审系统中包括给编辑的和给作者的评审意见。本文就这两部分评审以及进行汇总 第一部分：给作者的审稿意见 1、目标和结果不清晰。 It is noted that your manuscript needs careful editing by someone with expertise in technical English editing paying particular attention to English grammar, spelling, and sentence structure so that the goals and results of the study are clear to the reader. 2、未解释研究方法或解释不充分。 ◆In general, there is a lack of explanation of replicates and statistical me thods used in the study. ◆Furthermore, an explanation of why the authors did these various experiments should be provided. 3、对于研究设计的rationale: Also, there are few explanations of the rationale for the study design. 4、夸张地陈述结论/夸大成果/不严谨： The conclusions are overstated. For example, the study did not show

一些英文审稿意见的模板

一些英文审稿意见的模板【转】 来源：Elaine 王倩的日志 最近导师让我帮忙审了两篇英文文章，觉得写的都不怎么样，顿时觉得自己的也不太差吧嘿嘿。但是怎么写评审还是有经验需要学习，自己也不能写的太不专业。不过我的意见也不过是给老师写意见的一个参考，具体能不能过我就毋须多言了。 网上找来一些零碎的资料参考参考。 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1、目标和结果不清晰。 It is noted that your manuscript needs careful editing by someone with expertise in technical English editing paying particular attention to English grammar, spelling, and sentence structure so that the goals and results of the study are clear to the reader. 2、未解释研究方法或解释不充分。 In general, there is a lack of explanation of replicates and statistical methods used in the study. Furthermore, an explanation of why the authors did these various experiments should be provided. 3、对于研究设计的rationale: Also, there are few explanations of the rationale for the study design. 4、夸张地陈述结论/夸大成果/不严谨： The conclusions are overstated. For example, the study did not show if the side effects from initial copper burst can be avoid with the polymer formulation. 5、对hypothesis的清晰界定： A hypothesis needs to be presented。 6、对某个概念或工具使用的rationale/定义概念： What was the rationale for the film/SBF volume ratio? 7、对研究问题的定义： Try to set the problem discussed in this paper in more clear, write one section to define the problem

英文论文审稿常用套话

编辑一般会发给审稿人一个提纲，类似于这样的： 文章编号 题目 对文章一个概括性的描述及审稿人自己的决定（接受，拒，大修，小修等） 审稿意见： 1、XX 2、XX 3、XX ... 审稿意见的一些套话 1. This is a carefully done study and the findings are of considerable interest. A few minor revision are list below. 2. This is a well-written paper containing interesting results which merit publication. For the benefit of the reader, however, a number of points need clarifying and certain statements require further justification. There are given below. 3. Although these observation are interesting, they are rather limited and do not advance our knowledge of the subject sufficiently to warrant publication in PNAS. We suggest that the authors try submitting their findings to specialist journal such as – 4. Although this paper is good, it would be ever better if some extra data were added. 5. This manuscript is not suitable for publication in the journal of –because the main observation it describe was reported 3 years ago in a reputable journal of - . 6. Please ask someone familiar with English language to help you rewrite this paper. As you will see, I have made some correction at the beginning of the paper where some syntax is not satisfactory. 7. We feel that this potentially interesting study has been marred by an inability to communicate the finding correctly in English and should like to suggest that the authors seek the advice of someone with a good knowledge of English, preferable native speaker. 8. The wording and style of some section, particularly those concerning HPLC, need careful editing. Attention should be paid to the wording of those parts of the Discussion of and Summary which have been underlined. 9. Preliminary experiments only have been done and with exception of that summarized in Table 2, none has been repeated. This is clearly unsatisfactory, particularly when there is so much variation between assays. 10. The condition of incubation are poorly defined. What is the temperature? Were antibody used?

英文论文审稿意见汇总

英文论文审稿意见汇总 2011-04-24 19:24 以下12点无轻重主次之分。每一点内容由总结性标题和代表性审稿人意见构成。 1、目标和结果不清晰。 It is noted that your m anus cript needs careful editing by s om eone with expertise in technical Englis h editing paying particular attention to Englis h gramm ar, spelling, and s entence s tructure s o that the goals and results of the s tudy are clear to the reader. 2、未解释研究方法或解释不充分。 ◆In general, there is a lack of explanation of replicates and s tatis tical me thods us ed in the s tudy. ◆Furthermore, an explanation of why the authors did these various experim ents s hould be provided. 3、对于研究设计的rationale: Als o, there are few explanations of the rationale for the s tudy des ign. 4、夸张地陈述结论/夸大成果/不严谨： The conclus ions are overs tated. For exam ple, the s tudy did not s how if the s ide effects from initial copper burs t can be avoid with the polym er form ulation. 5、对hypothes is的清晰界定： A h ypothesis needs to be pres ented。 6、对某个概念或工具使用的rationale/定义概念： What was the rationale for the film/SBF volum e ratio? 7、对研究问题的定义： Tr y to s et the problem dis c uss ed in this paper in m ore clear, write one section to define the problem 8、如何凸现原创性以及如何充分地写literature review: The topic is novel but the application propos ed is not so novel. 9、对claim,如A＞B的证明，verification: There is no experim ental com paris on of the algorithm with previous ly known work, s o it is imposs ible to judge whether the algorithm is an im provem ent on previous work. 10、严谨度问题： MNQ is eas ier than the prim itive PNQS, how to prove that. 11、格式（重视程度）： ◆In addition, the lis t of refere nces is not in our s tyle. It is close but not com pletely correct. I have at tached a pdf file with "Ins tructions for Authors" which shows exam ples.

一些英文审稿意见及回复的

一些英文审稿意见的模板 好东西 原文地址：对英文审稿意见的回复作者：海天奥博 一篇稿子从酝酿到成型历经艰辛，投出去之后又是漫长的等待，好容易收到编辑的回信，得到的往往又是审稿人不留情面的一顿狂批。这时候，如何有策略有技巧的回复审稿人就显得尤为重要。好的回复是文章被接收的重要砝码，而不恰当的回复轻则导致再次修改从而拖延发稿时间，重则导致文章被拒，前功尽弃。下面把我平时总结的一些答复审稿人的策略和写回复信的格式和技巧跟大家交流一下。 首先，绝对服从编辑的意见。在审稿人给出各自的意见之后，编辑一般不会再提出自己的意见。但是，编辑一旦提出某些意见，就意味着他认为这是文章里的重大缺陷，至少是不合他的口味。这时，我们唯一能够做的只能是服从。因为毕竟是人家掌握着生杀予夺的大权。 第二，永远不要跟审稿人争执。跟审稿人起争执是非常不明智的一件事情。审稿人意见如果正确那就不用说了，直接照办就是。如果不正确的话，也大可不必在回复中冷嘲热讽，心平气和的说明白就是了。大家都是青年人，血气方刚，被人拍了当然不爽，被人错拍了就更不爽了。尤其是一些名门正派里的弟子，看到一审结果是major 而不是minor 本来就已经很不爽了，难得抓住审稿人的尾巴，恨不得拖出来打死。有次审稿，一个审稿人给的意见是增加两篇参考文献（估计也就是审稿人自己的文章啦），结果作者在回复中写到，makingareferenceisnotcharity ！看到之后我当时就笑喷了，可以想象审稿人得被噎成什么样。正如大家所想的那样，这篇稿子理所当然的被拒了，虽然后来经编辑调解改成了majorrevision ，但毕竟耽误的是作者自己的时间不是？ 第三，合理掌握修改和argue 的分寸。所谓修改就是对文章内容进行的修改和补充，所谓argue 就是在回复信中对审稿人的答复。这其中大有文章可做，中心思想就是容易改的照改，不容易改的或者不想改的跟审稿人argue 。对于语法、拼写错误、某些词汇的更换、对某些公式和图表做进一步解释等相对容易做到的修改，一定要一毫不差的根据审稿意见照做。而对于新意不足、创新性不够这类根本没法改的，还有诸如跟算法A, B, C, D做比较，补充大量 实验等短时间内根本没法完成的任务，我们则要有理有据的argue 。在Argue 的时候首先要肯定审稿人说的很对,他提出的方法也很好,但本文的重点是blablabla ,跟他说的不是一回 事。然后为了表示对审稿人的尊重,象征性的在文中加上一段这方面的discussion ,这样既照顾到了审稿人的面子,编辑那也能交待的过去。 第四,聪明的掌握修改时间。拿到审稿意见,如果是minor ,意见只有寥寥数行,那当然会情 不自禁的一蹴而就,一天甚至几小时搞定修改稿。这时候,问题在于要不要马上投回去了？ 我的意见是放一放，多看一看，两个星期之后再投出去。这样首先避免了由于大喜过望而没能及时检查出的小毛病，还不会让编辑觉得你是在敷衍他。如果结果是major ，建议至少放一

论文评阅人评语

论文评阅人评语 篇一：毕业论文评阅人评语模板 毕业论文评阅人评语模板 vip6501 发表于2007-3-18 23:28:00 优： 论文选题符合专业培养目标，能够达到综合训练目标，题目有较高难度，工作量大。选题具有较高的学术研究（参考）价值（较大的实践指导意义）。 该生查阅文献资料能力强，能全面收集关于。。。。。的资料，写作过程中能综合运用。。。。知识，全面分析。。。。问题，综合运用知识能力强。 文章篇幅完全符合学院规定，内容完整，层次结构安排科学，主要观点突出，逻辑关系清楚，有一定的个人见解。 文题完全相符，论点突出，论述紧扣主题。 语言表达流畅，格式完全符合规范要求；参考了丰富的文献资料，其时效性较强；没有抄袭现象。 良： 论文选题符合专业培养目标，能够达到综合训练目标，题目有难度，工作量较大。选题具有学术研究（参考）价值（实践指导意义）。

该生查阅文献资料能力较强，能较为全面收集关于。。。。。的资料，写作过程中能综合运用。。。。知识，全面分析。。。。问题，综合运用知识能力较强。文章篇幅完全符合学院规定，内容较为完整，层次结构安排科学，主要观点突出，逻辑关系清楚，但缺乏个人见解。 文题相符，论点突出，论述紧扣主题。 语言表达流畅，格式完全符合规范要求；参考了较为丰富的文献资料，其时效性较强；未发现抄袭现象。 中： 论文选题符合专业培养目标，能够达到综合训练目标，题目有一定难度，工作量一般。选题具有学术研究（参考）价值（实践指导意义）。 该生查阅文献资料能力一般，能收集关于。。。。。的资料，写作过程中基本能综合运用。。。。知识，全面分析。。。。问题，综合运用知识能力一般。文章篇幅完全符合学院规定，内容基本完整，层次结构安排一般，主要观点集中邮一定的逻辑性，但缺乏个人见解。 文题基本相符，论点比较突出，论述能较好地服务于论点。 语言表达一般，格式完全符合规范要求；参考了一定的文献资料，其时效性一般；未见明显抄袭现象。 及格： 论文选题符合专业培养目标，基本能够达到综合训练目标，题目

最新投稿英文文章审稿的一些术语

EIC－Editor in Chief 主编, 对稿件有最终决定权。 ADM- (可能是)Administrator 协助主编日常工作的。相当于编辑部的执行编辑（Managing Editor），你会发现编辑部给你的信大都是他写给你的。他是编辑部里和你最接近的人，给你分配稿件号（Edit the manuscript ID number），修改各种投稿状态和日期（Edit the submission date）。 AE－Associated Editor 副编辑（文章发表后在首页第一栏下方的contributing editor）。此人非常重要，他会在审稿人意见的基础上对文章作个综合评价后，给主编一个recommendation。一般主编都会按照AE的意见写最终的decision letter。 Reviewer--审稿人。（Article要求两个审稿人＋AE，总共三个人审。 Article submitted后 1、awaiting admin. procession一般3－4天后就会安排主编。 2、awaiting reviewer assignment 等待指定审稿人。主编在选择审稿人，等待审稿人回复是否同意审稿。一般在一周以内。看审稿人回复速度。 3、awaiting reviewer scores 等待审稿人审稿意见。一般要求审稿人三周内给审稿意见。但是审稿人觉得时间时间不够，可以写信给主编要求延长审稿期限。这个时间长短要取决于审稿人是否有空看你的文章，还要看他是否守时。一般三周左右。 4、awaiting AE assignment 等待AE的指派。编辑部在选择/联系AE。一般1－3天左右。 5。awaiting AE recommendation 等待AE的推荐。一般要求AE三周内给结果。 6。awaiting EIC decision －激动人心的时刻。等待主编的决定。一般3－4天。 decision 分为五挡 1－Accept 2－accept after minor revision(without re-review不需要再送审) 3－reconsideration after major revision.(要再送审，即要再经过审稿流程3－6) 4－reject and resubmit (论文现在状态不能接受，但可以修改后重新再投。要重新经过审稿流程1－6) 5－reject （没希望了，改投把)

审稿专家总结的英文论文常见问题-模板

审稿专家总结的英文论文常见问题 英语不是我们的母语,用英语写作论文当然就会出现一些问题。大多数人还不具有用英语思考的能力。在这种情况下,比较好的做法是先写中文稿再译成英语,这样至少能避免直接写英文稿时容易出现的语意不连贯的问题。英文稿中最容易出现的用词问题是: ⑴ 按汉语硬译,形成所谓的“中式英语”。虽然不大会看到“good good study, day day up”这类“洋泾浜”,硬译的情况还是常见的。有一篇论文把“车载的”译为“tank-load”,其实,单词“vehicular”的意思就是车载。 ⑵ 介词的使用不当,用“of”、“to”较多,其它介词用得少。 ⑶ 代词“this”、“that”用得多,“it”用得少,而后者恰恰在科技文章中用得多。 ⑷句型单调,喜欢(或不得不)用“to be”构成句子。 ⑸ 不注意动词的词性。有些动词既可是及物动词也可是不及物动词,应该优先用不及物动词成句,而不要用及物动词的被动语态成句。 ⑹ 冠词“a”、“the”的使用不当,尤其容易忘记使用定冠词“the”。 ⑺ 不注意名词的单、复数,不注意主、谓语的人称配合。 ⑻ 论文中的用词应该比较正式,尽量少用一词多意的词,例如,口语中“get”有“获得”的意思,但论文中最好用“obtain”。 ⑼ 中西文化的差异常常使英文稿带有“中国特色”。有一篇稿件的作者很谦虚,在文章的结尾分析了所提出的方法的缺点,说在今后的研究中会逐步克服这些缺点。外国人就不会这么说,他们总是向前看,即使看到了缺点,也会说随着研究的深入,这种方法将会有更广阔的应用前景。有些文章的作者介绍中非要在“教授”后面加个“博士导师”,外国人就想象不出不是博士导师的教授是什么样子

Responses-to-comments-(英文期刊-审稿意见回复)

Responses-to-comments-(英文期刊-审稿意见回复)

Dear Editor-in-Chief in XXXXXXX: Thank you very much for your help in processing the review of our manuscript (Manuscript ID XXXXX). We have carefully read the thoughtful comments from you and reviewers and found that these suggestions are helpful for us to improve our manuscript. On the basis of the enlightening questions and helpful advices, we have now completed the revision of our manuscript. The itemized responses to the reviewers’ comments are listed in the su cceeding sheets. We hope that all these corrections and revisions would be satisfactory. Thanks a lot, again. 1.Title: XXX 2.Manuscript type: Article 3.Corresponding author: XXX 4.Full author names: XXX Sincerely, Prof. XXX School of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, XX Key Laboratory of Controllable Chemistry Reaction & Material Chemical Engineering, XX University, Wuhan, Hubei, 430072 , P R China. 2015-03-05