一些英文审稿意见的模板

'些英文审稿意见的模板【转】

来源：Elai ne 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 no ted that your manu scri pt n eeds careful edit ing by some one with exp ertise in tech ni cal En glish edit ing paying p articular atte nti on to En glish grammar, sp elli ng, 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 explan atio n of why the authors did these various exp erime nts should be pro vided.

3、对于研究设计的rationale:

Also, there are few explan ati ons of the ratio nale 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 exa mp le, the study did not show

if the side effects from initial copper burst can be avoid with the polymer

formulatio n.

5、对hypo thesis的清晰界定：

A hypo thesis n eeds to be p rese nted 。

6对某个概念或工具使用的ratio nale/定义概念:

What was the rati on ale for the film/SBF volume ratio?

7、对研究问题的定义：

Try to set the p roblem discussed in this paper in more clear, write one secti on to defi ne the p roblem

8、如何凸现原创性以及如何充分地写literature review:

The topic is no vel but the app licati on prop osed is not so no vel.

9、对claim,如 A> B 的证明，verification:

There is no exp erime ntal comp aris on of the algorithm with p reviously known work, so it is impossible to judge whether the algorithm is an improvement on prev ious work.

10、严谨度问题：

MNQ is easier than the primitive P NQS, how to p rove that.

11、格式（重视程度）：

In additi on, the list of refere nces is not in our style. It is close but

not completely correct. I have attached a pdf file with "Instructions for Authors" which shows exa mp les.

Before submitt ing a revisio n be sure that your material is prop erly

prep ared and formatted. If you are un sure, pl ease con sult the formatt ing nstructions to authors that are given under the "Instructions and Forms"

butt on in he upper right-ha nd corner of the scree n.

12、语言冋题（出现最多的冋题）：

有关语言的审稿人意见：

It is no ted that your manu scri pt n eeds careful edit ing by some one with exp ertise in tech ni cal En glish edit ing paying p articular atte nti on to En glish grammar, sp elli ng, and sentence structure so that the goals and results of the study are clear to the reader.

The authors must have their work reviewed by a proper

tran slatio n/reviewi ng service before submissi on; only the n can a proper review be p erformed. Most senten ces con ta in grammatical an d/or sp ell ing mistakes or are not comp lete senten ces.

As p rese nted, the writi ng is not acce ptable for the journ al. There are p roblems with sentence structure, verb ten se, and clause con structi on.

The En glish of your manu scri pt must be impro ved before resubmissi on. We stro ngly suggest that you obtai n assista nee from a colleague who is well-versed in En glish or whose n ative Ian guage is En glish.

PI ease have some one comp ete nt in the En glish Ian guage and the subject matter of your paper go over the paper and correct it ?

the quality of En glish n eeds improving.

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）

Reviewer 4

Reviewer Recomme ndatio n Term: Reject

Overall Reviewer Manu scri pt Rat ing: 25

Comme nts to Editor: Reviewers are required to en ter their n ame, affiliatio n and e-mail address below. PI ease n ote this is for adm ini strative purpo ses and will not be see n by the author.

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

Name: XXX

Affiliati on: XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXx

Manuscript entitled "Synthesis XXX。。。。。。。。。。" it has been synthesized with a nu mber of differe nt methods and in a variety of forms. This

manuscript does not bring any new knowledge or data on materials property and therefore only contribution maybe in novel preparation method, still

this point is not elaborated prop erly (see Remark 1). Prese ntati on and writi ng is rather poor; there are several stateme nts not supp orted with data (for somesee Remarks 2) and even someflaws (see Remark 3). For these reas ons I suggest to reject paper in the p rese nt form. 1. The paper describes a new method for prep arati on of XXXX, but:

-the new method has to be comp ared with other methods for prep arati on

of XXXXpo wders (INTRODUCTION - literature data, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

-discussio n), (通常的写作格式，审稿人实际上很在意的)

-it has to be described why this method is better or different from other methods, (INTRODUCTION - literature data, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION - discussi on),

-it has to be added in the manuscript what kind of XXXXXX)y other methods com pared to this

novel one (INTRODUCTION - literature data, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION - discussi on),

-it has to be outli ned what is the ben efit of this method (ABSTRACT, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION, CONCLUSIONS).

(很多人不会写这个地方，大家多学习啊)

2. When discuss ing XRD data XXXauthors

-state that XXXXX

-state that XXXX

-This usually happens with increasing sintering time, but are there any data to p rese nt, den sity, p article size?

(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. Whendiscussing luminescenee measurements authors write "XXXXXIf there is sec ond harm onic in excitati on beam it will stay there no matter what type of material one inv estigates!!!

（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）

Reviewer 5

Reviewer Recomme ndatio n Term: Rejec

本文来源：https://www.bwwdw.com/article/4jie.html