成功的经验：
本人硕士三年级了，经常看到一些虫友上来谈自己发文章的感想交流经验，从中获利不少，首先感谢各位虫友。上次也中了一篇SCI的，一直也想上来秀一下，前段时间忙于考博和完成学位论文，这回终于事都做完了，这不，也拿出来给晒晒。
研一下学期确定导师，他给了我三个字的课题，除此之外什么资料也没有。之后，我设计了一下实验方案给他，他是学院院长，我每次找他都最多给我一分钟时间，且边说边忙自己的，一直只和我说“可以，可以”，只好自己平时要多看这方面的文献了。研二上学期（06年9月）进实验室，11月出来的数据，12月成文，由于是第一次写外文，自己先改了10遍以上，交给导师修改，他叫我译成中文，说只有中文搞完整了，才能搞英文，没办法又给译为中文给他看。就这样中文的来回改了三次，可外文的他还是没动呀！到点07年4月底了，五一之前，我有点急了，文章出不来，我毕不业呀，再说投过去会不会中还是一个问题，即便是中了，不还要排队吗？我就和导师说外文的我都改好了，要不要先投出去？有问题的话审稿人还会提见议的。由于他也没时间改，同意了！就这样我自己再压了几天，好好看了n 遍后，于07年5月4后投到elsevier的一个期刊上。从来没做过，上传文章也不懂，只好一步步慢慢来，一上午才投完（中间打了不少次电话给投过稿的同学，哈……）。老外办事效率就是高，6月30号退修。下面是退修信：
View Letter
Date: Jun 30, 2007
To:***. cc: ***. From:  ***
Subject: Your Submission
Ms. Ref. No.:  ***
Title:***
****

Dear ****,
Reviewers have now commented on your paper. You will see that they are advising that you revise your manuscript. If you are prepared to undertake the work required, I would be pleased to reconsider my decision.  

For your guidance, reviewers' comments are appended below.

If you decide to revise the work, please submit a list of changes or a rebuttal against each point which is being raised when you submit the revised manuscript.

To submit a revision, please go to ***and login as an Author.
Your username is: ******
Your password is: ******
On your Main Menu page is a folder entitled "Submissions Needing Revision". You will find your submission record there.
Yours sincerely, ***  Editor *****

Reviewers' comments:
Reviewer #1: You can find 1.reviewer comments as follows:

1- Authors were used "UV curing mechanism" of ** in the manuscript title, but there are not any originalities of the suggested mechanism.

2- The aim of the research is not clear. Is it search for UV curing mechanism of ** or initiate of the curing reaction without initiator?  

3- Although the title of manuscript had been focused on curing mechanism, there were many details about the mechanical properties (especially pencil hardness) of the films. I suggest that the changing title of the manuscript according to this direction.

4- What is the exact time of UV curing? It must be given to emphasize the differences reaction time with and without photoinitiator. It is not enough to write "several minutes" in many places in the manuscript.  

5- In section 3.1: sentences 2 and 3 must be removed from the manuscript. The determination of molecular weights for crosslinked materials is impossible, and the solubility of these materials is also impossible any kind of solvents, because of crosslinking structure. I am sure the author's know this general information for these materials, so no need to write this section.

6- There is a contradiction between section 3.3 and Table 2. The oxygen content had increased slightly with the irradiation time according to Table 2. But in section 3.3. had written "The oxygen content did not increase with the irradiation time; this proved that the mechanism, different from the polymerization……..". This sentence or data in table 2 must be checked again and changed or corrected related parts.

7- The title of y axis must be added in Figure 1.

8- There are several writing mistakes in the manuscript. They are listed below.
In Abstract section: 13.lines:     UV curing
                : didn't and wasn't must be corrected did not and was not
In Introduction Part 5. lines: with must be separated 0-3 olefins,……..
In section 2.2.2 line 2: GY.UV2kW/ ??
In section 2.3, 2. lines     : The IR spectra was
         4. lines: elements must be changed as percentage
In Reference section     Ref. 2:  Press must be corrected as capital letter
              Ref. 4: Polym. must be corrected as capital letter
                 Some of author's names must be written as full name(s) of author(s).  
              Ref. 6: J. of ……..
              Ref. 13: The name of journal must be written short form.         
              And must be removed from Ref. 10,15, 17, and 20.  

As a result, the manuscript is suitable publication for **** after major revision.


Reviewer #2: There are some important details missing in the paper:
- How were the samples prepared on the glass slide from xylene solution (vacuum,
time, temperature, final film thickness)?
- What was the temperature of the films during the UV irradiation?
- For comparison of hardness measurements, what is the hardness of fully cured
*** film when ***-catalyzed polymerization is used?
- Are the results of Elemental analysis in Table 2 average from more measurements?
How can be explained the increase in carbon content after irradiation?
- What is the lifetime of *** radicals observed by ESR spectroscopy?
I recommend the paper for publication after clarification of missing details.
看到退修信之时，我还不懂“major revision”是多么严重的一个词，但只是觉得，没有提出多少语法上的错误，我还是有点开心，毕竟从写、改到投，都是我一个人完成的呀。但我知道前面三个问题是致命之处，” no any originalities”, “The aim of the research is not clear”.
第二天在实验室一位年轻的老师说，给了“major revision”，没希望 了，你要么是补充数据，要么是改投。我想我的处女作就这样完了？后面来到小木虫里又找到了自信，不记得是哪个帖子里，有一位虫友说过，如果给了“major revision”或“miner revision”, 就可以坐下来喝杯咖啡了，这个时候可以小小庆祝一下。于是就在导师的指导下，自己一条条的给予回答，有的回答还比较偏激，听了年轻老师那段话，我也不抱什么希望了。一周后修改稿投出，由他去吧，自己做好了就可以了，接不接收主编的事。没想到8月15接收了，下面是接收信：

View Letter

Date: Aug 15, 2007  To: **cc: **  From: **
Subject: Your Submission  
Ms. Ref. No.:  ***R1
Title: ****     ，****
Dear ***,

I am pleased to confirm that your paper "****" has been accepted for publication in ***.

Comments from the Editor and Reviewers can be found below.

Thank you for submitting your work to this journal.

With kind regards,

***
Editor
***

Comments from the Editors and Reviewers:

Reviewer #1:
The manuscript ***R1 entitled "**" by *** has been carefully reviewed.

These authors have been made all of related corrections and changes according to referee's comments. As a result, the manuscript is suitable publication for *** without revision.

Additionally, the author's letter made me very happy especially the author's thinking on referee's comments. All suggestions of referee's considered by authors. They I also would like to thank you and these authors.
这个评委的最后一段话，使我比文章被接收还开心，因为我的修改稿能让他” very happy”.

Reviewer #2: I recommend the paper for publication after the revision.


失败的教训：
     后面的工作做了一些数据，自己觉得比上次的还好一些，又是前面工作的进一步发展，想再试试同一期刊，这次我们老板托了关系，外文稿件给了北化所的牛人修改过。但我自己就没有象第一次那样，自己改那么多次了。07年10月初投稿，11月18号送审，2月22号写了催稿信，3月9号打开查看投稿状态查看里面，发现到了最后一步去了，主编下决定了。心里想直接收可能性不大，肯定是拒了，打开一看果然“reject”了。报告导师，原来都是因为一些细节问题被拒，有点郁闷。如下：
View Letter

Date: Mar 09, 2008  
To: ****  
cc:****
From: **  
Subject: Your Submission  
Ms. Ref. No.: ***
Title: ***      *****

Dear ***,

Reviewers' comments on your work have now been received.  You will see that there are so many critical points in your experiment before publication of your work.  Therefore I must terminate our process with " reject".
I will recommend you to submit it again after your consideration.

For your guidance, I append the reviewers' comments below.

Thank you for giving us the opportunity to consider your work.

Yours sincerely,
****
Editor
***
一看只有一个审稿人的意见，是不是我催得太急了？再细看审稿人的意见，更是郁闷了。都是一些细节性的问题，就直接拒了，不给改的机会？在每一个问题中我有说明。当然如果是给主编看不能如下解释了！哈……

Reviewers' comments:


Reviewer #1: There are some critical details missing in the experimental part of the paper:
On p. 4 - How is ** soluble in absolute ethanol? What was the particle size after **?（怎么溶解的，我可以说明清楚嘛）
On p. 4 - What and when happened to ethanol from solution as the samples were UV irradiated? Was any left in the films?（酒精是否还在膜上面，怎么样了，有多少？审稿人是不是涂料类的专家？常识呀，涂料干了，溶济是挥发了）
On p. 4 - How were powders prepared from the films?（膜怎么样搞成粉末？这个还难吗？）
On p. 4 - In preparation of （**） are missing details - amounts, time, temperature, particle size ...
（实验用量，温度，粒径大小？文中都写清楚了呀）
On p. 6 - What is JCPDS No. ***?（这个Jade中的PDF数据，是硫化镉晶型的一种，说硫化镉是立方晶系。另有ACS上一篇文献里也说立方晶系的该纳米可以从这里比较得出，可见该审稿人根本没什么水平，自己不知道，连查也不去查，问这么低级的问题！哈……）
On p. 6 - In addition to 14.1 and 185.6 nm particle size it would be desirable to compare those values with particle size of *** from Figure 3c.（你看这不是粒径大小吗？他明明看到了的。）
On p. 7 - Figure 3a is showing that the ***particles are in big clusters and not "homogeneously dispersed".（图形和ACS的一篇高级别的文献极似，上面也是说"homogeneously dispersed".）
On p. 8 - Can be the Figure 3b enlarged? It looks that the *** particles are irregular and not "spherical".（我们测试时看到的边界都很清晰，可能是仪器不先进，图片洗出来有点模糊，可以用先进的仪器重测TEM嘛）
On p. 8 - It would be desirable to have unmodified **** included in the Figure 4 for comparison of thermal stability.（这个数据测过，加进去不就可以了）
     我准备过几天再写信去主编那辩解一下。把这些问题都说明清楚，看看情况会怎么样。哈……
最后送各位虫友四个字：自信，严谨！
祝各位虫友好运。并欢迎有不同见解的虫一起交流。以下是我个人的一些看法及经历：

1. 写作前大量阅读以英语为母语的文献，充分了解自己的课题内容，找出自己的目标期刊，掌握英语科技论文的表达方式。
2.写作时一定要有针对性。在自己的目标期刊中查阅相关文献，严格按照最近的格式写，参照该期刊中论文的结构思路来布置自己的论文，避免犯如单位、图表等方面的低级错误。
3. 文献引用尽量多的引用本期刊及影响因子高于本期刊的文献。
4. 退修时对审稿人的意见要逐一回答。除了写清修改内容外，还有一些话是必须要写的。对审稿人的意见提出不同的看法也应该讲究一定的技巧。

首先，要对审稿人表示感谢！
“We appreciate you and the reviewer’s comments and revision suggestions about our manuscript. Some corrections and/or responses reviewer’s comments are illustrated as follows: ”

有些审稿人的comments会比较坚锐，也不用紧张，可能是他对你做的内容是不太熟，想好应对措施。如我针对第一个审稿人的第一点not any originalities 是如下回答的：
“1.The laccase–catalyzed and aerobic oxidative polymerization of*****
require a long period and special conditions, and this strictly restricts the
applications of lacquer. When *** films 50μm thick on glass substrates
were placed in the air about 55~60% relative humidity at 20℃~26℃, 48h later, the hardness of the ** films was 2B, and 15d later, it was 4H. The yield of ** adds up to about 90% in the world, and the processing industry of ** in China is pervasive. However, how to make ** drying fast is
still a difficult problem in this field. In our manuscript an efficient method
(UV irradiation) was reported to cure *** rapidly within 2min (the hardness
of the films is 4H) without any photoinitiator. There is no previous literature
which has reported this research, so it is very important in this field. We think this is the originality in this field.”
我做的是涂料方面的，以前膜的自然干燥 要15天硬度才达4H，而我采用新方法只2min就可以达4H,同时说明我国这方面在世界上的影响及地位“The yield of ** adds up to about 90% in the world, and the processing industry of ** in China is pervasive. ”

如果审稿人提的意见你暂时无法回答或做到（比如，要你增加实验或改进实验等）（这样需要时间，也许我们等着这篇文章毕业），可委婉的拒绝。

如我对“What is the lifetime of *** radicals ”（问自由基寿命，我没做过）。
我是如下回答的：“………………As to the lifetime of *** radicals,
I think it is not very important to our research, so we are sorry to
tell you that we have not measured it so far.”

最后说明“Please don’t hesitate to contact me
if you have any other questions about our manuscript.”


29楼

Quote:
Originally posted by 水蛭 at 2008-3-28 20:32:
楼主介绍的详尽，谢谢。想问一下，发外文自己翻译的，能成吗？？  



我想说得是，人的潜能是无限大的，当你没办法依靠别人时，你就可以了。
实事上，我第一篇完全是我一个人完成的，我们是一般大学的，可能老师当时对我们没多少期望，当我第一篇接受后，第二篇他才请人改了一下。但结果是被直接拒了！

[ Last edited by 漆酚 on 2008-7-10 at 19:14 ] 返回小木虫查看更多