应《网络安全法》要求，自2017年10月1日起，未进行实名认证将不得使用互联网跟帖服务。为保障您的帐号能够正常使用，请尽快对帐号进行手机号验证，感谢您的理解与支持！

24小时热门版块排行榜    

CyRhmU.jpeg
小木虫论坛-学术科研互动平台 » 学术交流区 » 论文投稿 » 投稿求助 » 如何写response
111/2返回列表12下一页
查看: 4637  |  回复: 10
只看楼主@他人 存档 新回复提醒 (忽略) 收藏    在APP中查看

highhmily

木虫 (正式写手)

[交流] 如何写response已有9人参与

大家好。我初次投外文，然后专家提出了一些修改意见。因为第一次投外文稿件，所以没有写response的经验，不知道怎么恰当地运用语言和语气。请高手发给我几份response参考一下，不胜感激！另外，我是学心理学的，如果有类似专业的就更好了，谢谢~
回复此楼

» 收录本帖的淘帖专辑推荐

有用的资源 小凡的文写作收藏 科研内容

» 猜你喜欢

» 本主题相关价值贴推荐，对您同样有帮助:
1楼2010-06-10 21:26:12
已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
回帖支持 ( 显示支持度最高的前 50 名 )

wzz525

木虫 (著名写手)
highhmily(金币+2): 2010-06-14 21:08:02
引用回帖:
Originally posted by highhmily at 2010-06-10 21:26:12:
大家好。我初次投外文，然后专家提出了一些修改意见。因为第一次投外文稿件，所以没有写response的经验，不知道怎么恰当地运用语言和语气。请高手发给我几份response参考一下，不胜感激！另外，我是学心理学的，如 ...

……….., Ph.D. Professor
Laboratory of Plant Nutrition and
Ecological Environment Research,
Huazhong Agricultural University,
Wuhan, 430070, P.R.China
E-mail: .....................

Jun 10, 2009


RE:  HAZMAT-D-09-00655
Dear Editor，

We would like to thank the editor for giving us a chance to resubmit the paper, and also thank the reviewers for giving us constructive suggestions which would help us both in English and in depth to improve the quality of the paper. Here we submit a new version of our manuscript with the title “………………………”, which has been modified according to the reviewers’ suggestions. Efforts were also made to correct the mistakes and improve the English of the manuscript. We mark all the changes in red in the revised manuscript.

Sincerely yours,

……………….., Ph.D. Professor

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The following is a point-to-point response to the two reviewers’ comments.

Reviewer #1:

General comments:

Reviewer #1: The paper presents an interesting experimental investigation to assess the photocatalytic degradation of polyethylene plastic with goethite under UV irradiation. The research work is clearly presented but the conclusions, the introduction and other parts of the paper relate the results obtained with unjustified claims about the impact of the work. In addition, the background information provided in the introduction part needs significant enrichment. In particular:
Answer: Thank you for the comments on the paper. We have revised the manuscript as suggested since we consider that some sentences or descriptions in the Conclusion part are not so accurate based on the results.  


Page 3, line 46: recycling is not available…
Even though a large amount of agricultural plastic waste in burnt or buried in the fields, some quantities of specific categories of good quality agricultural plastic waste are recycled in several countries while research efforts and projects are in progress to improve the corresponding percentage. The authors should refer to the corresponding recent literature.
Answer:Yes. Your opinions inspired us and we revised the manuscript accordingly. In the revised paper, the sentence “Recycling is not available for economy,” was changed to “In order to reduce costs, the thickness of application agriculture films in some regions in China is less than 0.005 mm result in diffcult to recycle, And because the process of recycling is expensive and time-consuming, only a small percentage of the agricultural plastic waste is currently recycled at the end of cultivation in China [4]”(Page 3 line 49-52).

Page 3, line 76: biodegradable and photodegradable….
There are developments in the area of biodegradable materials that indicate the opposite. Concerning photodegradable materials, they are not considered to represent a solution as they have not been proven to be biodegradable. The authors should refer to the corresponding recent literature.  
Answer: Thank you for reminding us the improper description on the study. We have the improper parts revised accordingly and hope that this new manuscript will be convincing ( Page 3 line 52-55).

Page 4, line 65: find an eco-friendly….
The best eco-friendly disposal for agricultural plastic waste is recycling and for non-recyclable materials, energy recovery. Degrading materials produced from fossil sources is not an eco-friendly disposal! The authors should refer to the corresponding recent literature.
Answer: Thank the reviewer for the comments. We’ve recognized that some of the descriptions in the previous copy were really not so accurate and a little bit arbitrary due to our poor English level and the study on recent literature. After consulting more references, we therefore revised paper to be more reasonable and convincing.

Page 4, line 66: to carbon dioxide and water….
Conversion of fossil oil based materials into carbon dioxide and water is much worse than converting renewable-based materials into carbon dioxide and water  
Answer: Thank the reviewer for the comments. We’ve recognized that this description in the previous copy were not accurate, due to our poor study on recent literature. The sentence “it is very important to find an eco-friendly disposal of plastic waste where they degrade to carbon dioxide and water under the sunlight irradiation without producing toxic byproducts.” has been deleted.

Page 6, line 112: volatile products….
Define the products.
Answer: We have defined the volatile products in Page 6 line 124-125.

Page 9, line 185: eco-friendly disposal….
The claims of the authors that this technique is an eco-friendly one are not justified. The conclusions and other parts of the paper need to be rewritten and limit the scope of the presented research work to the technical objectives without deriving unjustified general conclusions and claims about the impact of this work.
Answer: Thank the reviewer for the comments. We’ve recognized that this description in the previous copy were not accurate. The sentence “The development of this kind of composite polymer can lead to an eco-friendly disposal of polymer wastes.” was changed to “The present paper intends to study goethite as photocatalytst for degradating plastic. Further attention could be focused on the application of the technique.” (Page 9 line 192-194).

Reviewer #3:
1. Title and abstract should indicate that the work has been done with PE-Goethite composite film.
Answer: Your suggestion is greatly appreciated. We agree and therefore change the title to: Solid-phase photocatalytic degradation of polyethylene–goethite composite film under UV-light irradiation.

2. Please revise the first paragraph of 'Introduction'.  It is difficult to understand.  In general, the language of the paper should be revisited.
Answer: The Introduction part has been rewritten both in contents and in English. We particularly revised some sentences since they are not correct or so confusing.

3. Materials and methods - Details of the chemicals to be furnished
Answer: The reviewer and editor’s suggestions have been adopted and the details of the chemicals has been shown in Page 4 line 79-83.

4. Characterization are required for PE (Molecular weight, grade) and Goethite prepared (particle size, BET surface area, SEM-EDS and XRD)
Answer: The reviewer and editor’s suggestions have been adopted and the characterization for PE has been shown in Page 4 line 79. The Goethite prepared (particle size, BET surface area, SEM and XRD) has been reported by Liao et al. (2007), We clarify that in the revised manuscript in Page 5 line 91-93.

5. A schematic diagram of the experimental set up to be given
Answer: The reviewer and editor’s suggestions have been adopted and a schematic diagram of the experimental has been given in Fig. 1 in the present paper. The original Fig. 1. was changed to Fig. 2 and Fig. 3.

6. Results - A rate equation should be proposed from the time-weight data
Answer: The reviewer and editor’s suggestions have been adopted and the rate equation a schematic diagram of the experimental has been given in Table. 1in the present paper.

7. A few data are required to show the influence of process parameters such as goethite loading, intensity of UV radiation.
Answer: Reviewer and editor’s suggestions have been adopted and the influence of goethite loading has been shown in Fig. 2 in the present paper. And the influence of intensity of UV radiation has been shown in Fig. 3 in the present paper. The original Fig. 2 was changed to Fig. 4 and The original Fig. 3 was changed to Fig. 5 in the present paper.

8. Until other intermediates are isolated, upto Eqn.(7) (line 162) is sufficient.
Answer: Reviewer and editor’s suggestions have been adopted and We changed the Eqns as recommended. Eqs. (8)-(12) are deleted and Eqn.(7) was change to “–(CH2CH2)– + .OH → degradationproducts” (Page 9 line 184).

9. Figure 3 and 4: 3 pairs are required, namely (i) Only PE film before and after irradiation, (ii) PE-Goethite film (0.4wt %) - before and after irradiation (iii) PE-Goethite film (1.0 wt %) - before and after irradiation.
Answer: Reviewer and editor’s suggestions have been adopted and the original Fig. 3 and 4 was changed to Fig .5 in the present paper.

10. Point 3 above is also applicable for SEM photographs. Please rearrange and clearly mark the difference between the films before and after irradiation for both SEM and FTIR results.
Answer: Thank the reviewer and editor’s for the comments. During the revision of the paper, we did a supplementary experiment got some new SEM photographs, which has been shown in Fig. 4 in the present paper. And The FTIR results has been rearranged in Fig.5 in the present paper, respectively.

11. It should be clearly mentioned in the conclusion that the degradation was more when goethite loading and intensity of light both were more
Answer: The reviewer and editor’s suggestions have been adopted and the conclusions has been changed in Page 9 line 192-198.
赞一下(2人) 回复此楼
3楼2010-06-10 21:50:54
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

jiaoxg

木虫之王 (文学泰斗)

给一例子！

highhmily(金币+5): 2010-06-14 21:07:41
highhmily(金币+2): 2010-07-09 08:30:48
Dear Editor,
Thank you for your useful comments and suggestions on the language and structure of our manuscript.
We have modified the manuscript accordingly, and detailed corrections are listed below point by point:
1) In its current state, the level of English throughout your manuscript does not meet the journal's
required standard. Authors have the responsibility to present their papers in good English
which can be understood by the journal's readership without difficulty.
􀀹 We have revised the WHOLE manuscript carefully and tried to avoid any grammar or
syntax error. In addition, we have asked several colleagues who are skilled authors of
English language papers to check the English. We believe that the language is now
acceptable for the review process.
2) Please note that your abstract (250 words) has exceeded the maximum length of 150 words for
research articles in this journal.
􀀹 The abstract has been revised and its word count is now 149.
3) Figures should be cited in sequential order in the main text. In your manuscript, Fig. 6 is
provided but not cited. Please check and revise accordingly.
􀀹 Now all figures are provided and cited in sequence in the main text.
4) A cover letter should include the following statement: the manuscript has not been previously
published, is not currently submitted for review to any other journal, and will not be submitted
elsewhere before a decision is made by this journal. This is not seen in your cover letter.
􀀹 The required information is now included in the cover letter.
5) The manuscript, including references, figure captions and tables, should be typewritten in
uniform lettering and sizing, and with double spacing throughout.
􀀹 We now have used uniform lettering and sizing throughout the manuscript, with double
spacing.
6) Please note that the reference style must conform strictly to the journal’s Guide for Authors.
To specify one problem in the reference list provided, journal names are not abbreviated and
page span not provided.
􀀹 We have checked all the references and formatted them strictly according to the Guide for
Authors. Especially, journal names have been abbreviated and page span provided.
The manuscript has been resubmitted to your journal. We look forward to your positive response.
赞一下(2人) 回复此楼
4楼2010-06-10 21:52:44
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
普通回帖

yanxiumei0

哇，这么多金币啊，可惜我没写过，要不然给你投一个！
赞一下 回复此楼
2楼2010-06-10 21:32:33
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

zhiyongwang

至尊木虫 (文坛精英)
highhmily(金币+1): 2010-06-14 21:08:17
highhmily(金币+2): 2010-07-09 08:30:58
首先应该感谢审稿人和编辑的意见，然后逐一回答审稿意见，最好一条一条列出，尽量满足审稿人的意见，如果审稿意见有误解，你可以举例委婉说明，但是不要直接说审稿人意见不对，审稿人一看就知道你说的有道理，最好是去网上或者就在小木虫搜索一下，有回复的模板！！！祝福楼主好运
赞一下 回复此楼
5楼2010-06-10 21:53:29
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

zhiyongwang

至尊木虫 (文坛精英)
highhmily(金币+1): 2010-06-14 21:08:19
就可以仿照4楼的模板回答！祝福好运
赞一下 回复此楼
6楼2010-06-10 21:54:37
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

tj800920

铁杆木虫 (正式写手)

专业杀手
好多期刊在让你修改时都提供response的模板，你再看看你投的期刊有没有！
赞一下 回复此楼
7楼2010-06-10 21:56:59
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

xiaoshch26
8楼2010-06-10 22:06:54
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

senrenwei

金虫 (小有名气)
highhmily(金币+5): 2010-06-14 21:07:52
highhmily(金币+2): 2010-07-09 08:31:12
< Journal of Materials Processing Technology >
< A novel aqueous co-precipitation process for preparing ITO nanopowders >
Dear editor,
Thank you for your useful comments and suggestions on the language and the structure of our manuscript. We have modified the manuscript accordingly, and the detailed corrections are listed below point by point:
1) In its current state, the level of English throughout your manuscript does not meet the journal's desired standard. There are a number of grammatical errors and instances of badly worded/constructed sentences. Please check the manuscript and refine the language carefully.
We revised the whole manuscript carefully to avoid language errors. In addition, the revised and reformulated manuscript has been polished by senior scientist and English teacher. We believe that the language is now acceptable for the review process.
2) Reference style should be as per journal style given in the Guide for Authors. Citations of references in the text should be indicated by the author name together with the year of publication. References should be listed alphabetically by author's name in the references list. Please submit each individual reference separately.  JMPT no longer accepts the use of references cited in lists. Each one of the cited sources must be discussed individually and explicitly to demonstrate their significance to your study. You are required to use the referenced authors' surnames, and then state in one or two sentences what they claim, what evidence they provide to support their claim, and how you evaluate their work.
Reference style has been revised according to the Guide for Authors. We believe that the reference style is now acceptable for the review process
3) All figures put at the end of the manuscript should be labeled with their names (e.g., Figure 1, Figure 2 etc).
This has been revised in the manuscript. The figures have been put in the paper.
4) Number the pages consecutively.
This has been revised correctly.
The manuscript has been resubmitted to your journal. We look forward to your positive response.
Name
每个期刊要求不太一样的，有些期刊要按照他的格式来写，但最好按照编辑或审稿人的问题一条一条的回答。
赞一下 回复此楼
实事求是勇于拼搏
9楼2010-06-10 22:11:20
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖

cherryjing1786

铁虫 (正式写手)
希望多些例子 学到很多啊
赞一下 回复此楼
10楼2010-06-10 23:12:35
 已阅   回复此楼   关注TA 给TA发消息 送TA红花 TA的回帖
相关版块跳转 我要订阅楼主 highhmily 的主题更新
111/2返回列表12下一页
普通表情 龙 兔 虎 猫 高级回复(可上传附件)
信息提示
关闭
请填处理意见
关闭