首先大家需要明确一点，给编辑的叫cover letter，不是response letter ，我们先来看下大致格式。
- Thank you for giving us the opportunity to submit a revised draft of the manuscript “XXX” for publication in the Journal of YYY. We appreciate the time and effort that you and the reviewers dedicated to providing feedback on our manuscript and are grateful for the insightful comments on and valuable improvements to our paper. We have incorporated most of the suggestions made by the reviewers. Those changes are highlighted in the manuscript. Please see below, in blue, for a point-by-point response to the reviewers’ comments and concerns. All page numbers refer to the revised manuscript file with tracked changes.
- According to the reviewer’s comments, we have revised the manuscript extensively. If there are any other modifications we could make, we would like very much to modify them and we really appreciate your help. We hope that our manuscript could be considered for publication in your journal. Thank you very much for your help.
- Thank you again for your positive comments on our manuscript. 杂志名 is an influential journal which aims to improve our understanding of cancer prevention / other. From all the papers published in your journal, readers have been learning a lot. Hopefully, we could have our article been considered of publication in your journal. Should there been any other corrections we could make, please feel free to contact us.
- Thank you for your email dated xxxxxx enclosing the reviewers’ comments. We have carefully reviewed the comments and have revised the manuscript accordingly. Our responses are given in a point-by-point manner below. Changes to the manuscript are shown in underline / red / bold.
- I hope that the changes I’ve made resolve all your concerns about the article. I’m more than happy to make any further changes that will improve the paper and/or facilitate successful publication.
- Based on these comments and suggestions, we have made careful modifications to the original manuscript, and carefully proof-read the manuscript to minimize typographical and grammatical errors. We believe that the manuscript has been greatly improved and hope it has reached your magazine’s standard.
回到正题，给审稿人的意见回信，叫做Response to Reviewers。
- We feel great thanks for your professional review work on our article. As you are concerned, there are several problems that need to be addressed. According to your nice suggestions, we have made extensive corrections to our previous draft, the detailed corrections are listed below.
- We sincerely thank the editor and all reviewers for their valuable feedback that we have used to improve the quality of our manuscript. The reviewer comments are laid out below in italicized font and specific concerns have been numbered. Our response is given in normal font and changes/additions to the manuscript are given in the blue text.
- On behalf of all the contributing authors, I would like to express our sincere appreciations of your letter and reviewers’ constructive comments concerning our article entitled “XXX” (Manuscript No.: XXXX). These comments are all valuable and helpful for improving our article. According to the associate editor and reviewers’ comments, we have made extensive modifications to our manuscript and supplemented extra data to make our results convincing. In this revised version, changes to our manuscript were all highlighted within the document by using red-colored text. Point-by-point responses to the nice associate editor and two nice reviewers are listed below this letter.
- Thank you again for your positive comments and valuable suggestions to improve the quality of our manuscript.
- If there are any other modifications we could make, we would like very much to modify them and we really appreciate your help. Thank you very much for your help.
- According to the associate editor and reviewers’ comments, we have made extensive modifications to our manuscript and supplemented extra data to make our results convincing.
- Thank you for your nice comments on our article. According to your suggestions, we have supplemented several data here and corrected several mistakes in our previous draft. Based on your comments, we also attached a point-by-point letter to you and the other two reviewers. We have made extensive revisions to our previous draft. The detailed point-by-point responses are listed below.
- We were really sorry for our careless mistakes. Thank you for your reminder.
- Thank you for pointing this out. The reviewer is correct, and we have …. The revised text reads as follows.
- Thank you for pointing this out. The… has been corrected on….
- We sincerely thank the reviewer for careful reading. As suggested by the reviewer, we have corrected the “___” into “___”.
- We feel sorry for our carelessness. In our resubmitted manuscript, the typo is revised. Thanks for your correction.
- We have carefully checked the manuscript and corrected the errors accordingly.
- it is really a giant mistake to the whole quality of our article. We feel sorry for our carelessness. We have corrected it and we also feel great thanks for your point out.
- Thanks for your careful checks. We are sorry for our carelessness. Based on your comments, we have made the corrections to make the unit harmonized within the whole manuscript.
- We tried our best to improve the manuscript and made some changes to the manuscript. These changes will not influence the content and framework of the paper. And here we did not list the changes but marked in red in the revised paper. We appreciate for Editors/Reviewers’ warm work earnestly and hope that the correction will meet with approval.
- Thanks for your suggestion. We feel sorry for our poor writings, however, we do invite a friend of us who is a native English speaker from the USA to help polish our article. And we hope the revised manuscript could be acceptable for you.
- Thanks for your suggestion. We have tried our best to polish the language in the revised manuscript.
- We sincerely appreciate the valuable comments. We have checked the literature carefully and added more references on ___ and___ into the INTRODUCTION part in the revised manuscript.
On YYY, 文献
- As suggested by the reviewer, we have added more references to support this idea (文献1.2.3…). According to 文献1, … is …
- We think this is an excellent suggestion. We have [explain the change made, including the exact location where the change can be found in the revised manuscript].
- As suggested by the reviewer, we have [explain the specific change made, including the exact location where the change can be found in the revised manuscript].
- We agree with the reviewer’s assessment. Accordingly, throughout the manuscript, we have revised [explain the widespread change made, for instance, switching the order in which the study variables are presented or replacing a term or acronym in the paper].
- Your suggestion really means a lot to us. Yes, it would be more understandable if we XXX.
- Thank you for this suggestion. It would have been interesting to explore this aspect. However, in our study, this would not be possible because [provide a clear explanation for why the suggestion was not implemented].
- Thank you for pointing this out. Although we agree that this is an important consideration, it is [beyond the scope / not appropriate for inclusion / cannot be analyzed] in this manuscript because [provide a justification for why the content cannot be added to the manuscript].
- While we appreciate the reviewer’s feedback, we respectfully disagree. We think this study makes a valuable contribution to the field because [describe the knowledge gained, insights provided, questions answered, etc. by your study and/or its results or findings].
- We have added the suggested content to the manuscript on [insert the exact location where the change can be found in the revised manuscript].
- Specific section has been updated, such that [explain the change made].
- We agree that this is a potential limitation of the study. We have added this as a limitation on [insert the exact location where the change can be found in the revised manuscript]:
- The manuscript has been revised accordingly to clarify the above concerns…..
- As suggested by the referee, we have tried our best to verify XXX by____. However, no ___ signal has been detected in our synthesis system. Other researchers also found that it is very difficult to obtain a well-resolved hyperfine structure for ___. As suggested in the literature, ____; Some researchers even think that it is impossible to obtain a well-resolved hyperfine structure by ___.
- We agree that more studies would be useful to understand the details of interaction and enhancement. At this point, we do not have the necessary tool-set to study the ___. We hope, in the future, to employ ___ techniques to determine ___. This study is beyond the scope of this report which focuses on answering critical questions regarding the ___. We note also that since submission of our manuscript there has been a publication by Alex Bell and Martin Head-Gordon at Berkeley showing that Fe on Au2O3 has enhanced OER activity with DFT calculations (Ref. 79). We have added this citation and reference to the manuscript.