 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| 5 | 1/1 | 返回列表 |
| 查看: 4825 | 回復(fù): 10 | ||||||
| 當(dāng)前只顯示滿(mǎn)足指定條件的回帖，點(diǎn)擊這里查看本話(huà)題的所有回帖 | ||||||
highhmily木蟲(chóng) (正式寫(xiě)手)
|
[交流]
如何寫(xiě)response 已有9人參與
|
|||||
| 大家好。我初次投外文，然后專(zhuān)家提出了一些修改意見(jiàn)。因?yàn)榈谝淮瓮锻馕母寮�，所以沒(méi)有寫(xiě)response的經(jīng)驗(yàn)，不知道怎么恰當(dāng)?shù)剡\(yùn)用語(yǔ)言和語(yǔ)氣。請(qǐng)高手發(fā)給我?guī)追輗esponse參考一下，不勝感激！另外，我是學(xué)心理學(xué)的，如果有類(lèi)似專(zhuān)業(yè)的就更好了，謝謝~ |
回復(fù)此樓» 收錄本帖的淘帖專(zhuān)輯推薦
 有用的資源 | 小凡的文寫(xiě)作收藏 | 科研內(nèi)容 |
» 猜你喜歡
317分 一志愿南理工材料工程 本科湖工大 求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有11人回復(fù)
-
332求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有12人回復(fù)
-
材料專(zhuān)碩 085600求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有5人回復(fù)
-
0703化學(xué)/290求調(diào)劑/本科經(jīng)歷豐富/工科也可
已經(jīng)有14人回復(fù)
-
283求調(diào)劑（080500）
已經(jīng)有14人回復(fù)
-
材料工程專(zhuān)碩求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有6人回復(fù)
-
材料專(zhuān)碩調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有9人回復(fù)
-
求調(diào)劑 有機(jī)化學(xué)考研356分
已經(jīng)有11人回復(fù)
-
環(huán)境科學(xué)與工程334分求調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有8人回復(fù)
-
考研調(diào)劑
已經(jīng)有5人回復(fù)
» 本主題相關(guān)價(jià)值貼推薦，對(duì)您同樣有幫助:
- 請(qǐng)教修改語(yǔ)言的回復(fù)該怎么寫(xiě)啊？
已經(jīng)有5人回復(fù)
- Elsevier投稿時(shí)comments怎么寫(xiě)？
已經(jīng)有11人回復(fù)
- 求助Response to reviewers具體怎么寫(xiě)？
已經(jīng)有9人回復(fù)
- comment 文章要不要寫(xiě)�。�
已經(jīng)有6人回復(fù)
- CC投稿 要求寫(xiě)每個(gè)作者做了什么工作對(duì)文章貢獻(xiàn)
已經(jīng)有11人回復(fù)
- 如何撰寫(xiě)修改稿說(shuō)明
已經(jīng)有6人回復(fù)
- Response to Technical Check Results
已經(jīng)有10人回復(fù)
- 編輯讓重投的稿還需要寫(xiě)response和文章標(biāo)紅么
已經(jīng)有8人回復(fù)
- 大修后，寫(xiě)Response的不解的幾個(gè)問(wèn)題
已經(jīng)有5人回復(fù)
- 如何寫(xiě)一個(gè)好的Discussion ？？？
已經(jīng)有12人回復(fù)
- CC投稿被仲裁，如何寫(xiě)response letter
已經(jīng)有6人回復(fù)
- communication 如何寫(xiě)
已經(jīng)有7人回復(fù)
- 如何寫(xiě) response to review comments
已經(jīng)有5人回復(fù)
- 修改說(shuō)明怎么寫(xiě)
已經(jīng)有7人回復(fù)
- 修改稿提交都要求寫(xiě)Response to Comment？
已經(jīng)有12人回復(fù)
- Response to Technical Check Results 里面如果文章題目修改了是寫(xiě)新題目還是舊題目
已經(jīng)有5人回復(fù)
- 談?wù)劦谝淮螌?xiě)Response to other's comments的體會(huì)
已經(jīng)有11人回復(fù)
- 大家是怎么寫(xiě)introduction的？？
已經(jīng)有9人回復(fù)
- 修改后的cover letter和Response to Referee
已經(jīng)有15人回復(fù)
- 投稿時(shí)要求寫(xiě)comments,該寫(xiě)點(diǎn)什么呢
已經(jīng)有4人回復(fù)
jiaoxg
木蟲(chóng)之王 (文學(xué)泰斗)
- 應(yīng)助: 165 (高中生)
- 金幣: 147487
- 散金: 524
- 紅花: 35
- 沙發(fā): 3
- 帖子: 117110
- 在線(xiàn): 8631.3小時(shí)
- 蟲(chóng)號(hào): 256221
- 注冊(cè): 2006-06-03
- 性別: GG
- 專(zhuān)業(yè): 昆蟲(chóng)學(xué)
給一例子！
highhmily(金幣+5): 2010-06-14 21:07:41
highhmily(金幣+2): 2010-07-09 08:30:48
highhmily(金幣+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. |
4樓2010-06-10 21:52:44
2樓2010-06-10 21:32:33
wzz525
木蟲(chóng) (著名寫(xiě)手)
- SEPI: 1
- 應(yīng)助: 23 (小學(xué)生)
- 金幣: 12532.9
- 散金: 2936
- 紅花: 66
- 帖子: 1526
- 在線(xiàn): 851小時(shí)
- 蟲(chóng)號(hào): 841717
- 注冊(cè): 2009-09-06
- 性別: GG
- 專(zhuān)業(yè): 固體力學(xué)
highhmily(金幣+2): 2010-06-14 21:08:02
|
……….., 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. |
3樓2010-06-10 21:50:54
zhiyongwang
至尊木蟲(chóng) (文壇精英)
- 應(yīng)助: 269 (大學(xué)生)
- 金幣: 48541.4
- 散金: 4759
- 紅花: 26
- 沙發(fā): 3
- 帖子: 25660
- 在線(xiàn): 1151.3小時(shí)
- 蟲(chóng)號(hào): 897198
- 注冊(cè): 2009-11-08
- 專(zhuān)業(yè): 凝聚態(tài)物性 II ：電子結(jié)構(gòu)
highhmily(金幣+1): 2010-06-14 21:08:17
highhmily(金幣+2): 2010-07-09 08:30:58
highhmily(金幣+2): 2010-07-09 08:30:58
| 首先應(yīng)該感謝審稿人和編輯的意見(jiàn)，然后逐一回答審稿意見(jiàn)，最好一條一條列出，盡量滿(mǎn)足審稿人的意見(jiàn)，如果審稿意見(jiàn)有誤解，你可以舉例委婉說(shuō)明，但是不要直接說(shuō)審稿人意見(jiàn)不對(duì)，審稿人一看就知道你說(shuō)的有道理，最好是去網(wǎng)上或者就在小木蟲(chóng)搜索一下，有回復(fù)的模板�。。∽８侵骱眠\(yùn) |
5樓2010-06-10 21:53:29
| 最具人氣熱帖推薦 [查看全部] | 作者 | 回/看 | 最后發(fā)表 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 0703一志愿9，初試成績(jī)：338，四六級(jí)已過(guò)，有科研經(jīng)歷，求調(diào)劑！ +5 | Zuhui0306 2026-03-25 | 5/250 |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
[考研] 295求調(diào)劑 +5 | wei-5 2026-03-26 | 5/250 |
|
|
|
[考研] 材料與化工328分調(diào)劑 +9 | 。，。，。，。i 2026-03-23 | 9/450 |
|
|
|
[考研] 一志愿南航 335分 | 0856 | GPA 4.07 | 有科研經(jīng)歷 +8 | cccchenso 2026-03-29 | 8/400 |
|
|
|
[考研] 材料科學(xué)與工程求調(diào)劑 +6 | 深V宿舍吧 2026-03-29 | 6/300 |
|
|
|
[考研] 332求92調(diào)劑 +8 | 蕉蕉123 2026-03-28 | 8/400 |
|
|
|
[考研] 0703化學(xué)調(diào)劑，求導(dǎo)師收 +9 | 天天好運(yùn)來(lái)上岸?/a> 2026-03-24 | 10/500 |
|
|
|
[考研] 347求調(diào)劑 +3 | 山頂見(jiàn)α 2026-03-25 | 3/150 |
|
|
|
[考研] 308求調(diào)劑 +7 | 墨墨漠 2026-03-27 | 7/350 |
|
|
|
[考研] 328求調(diào)劑 +7 | 嗯滴的基本都 2026-03-27 | 7/350 |
|
|
|
[考研] 085701環(huán)境工程求調(diào)劑 +9 | 多久上課 2026-03-27 | 9/450 |
|
|
|
[考研] 一志愿南師大0703化學(xué) 275求調(diào)劑 +4 | Ripcord上岸 2026-03-27 | 4/200 |
|
|
|
[考研] 復(fù)試調(diào)劑，一志愿南農(nóng)083200食品科學(xué)與工程 +5 | XQTJZ 2026-03-26 | 5/250 |
|
|
|
[考研] 求調(diào)劑 +3 | 劉柯@ 2026-03-24 | 4/200 |
|
|
|
[考研]
 304材料求調(diào)劑
+4
|
鐘llll 2026-03-26 | 4/200 |
|
|
|
[考研] 309求調(diào)劑 +4 | gajsj 2026-03-25 | 5/250 |
|
|
|
[考研] 一志愿哈工大，085400，320，求調(diào)劑 +4 | gdlf9999 2026-03-24 | 4/200 |
|
|
|
[考研] 290分調(diào)劑求助 +3 | 吉祥止止陳 2026-03-25 | 3/150 |
|
|
|
[考研] 296求調(diào)劑 +4 | 汪��？！ 2026-03-25 | 7/350 |
|
|
|
[考研] 材料專(zhuān)碩找調(diào)劑 +5 | 哈哈哈吼吼吼哈 2026-03-23 | 5/250 |
|