I had submitted a manuscript to a journal. After a while, they requested major revisions. The end of their request, they mentioned that:
"You will be unable to make your revisions on the originally submitted version of your manuscript. Instead, revise your manuscript using a word processing program and save it on your computer."
It is a bit confusing for me. I do not know exactly what they mean. Can I turn on Track Changes in Microsoft Word to remain changes in my document?
I, myself, have never seen this language, but this likely means that you won't be able to edit your first submission. This really isn't a big deal. When editing your manuscript, make the modified or added text red so the editors and reviewers can easily see what you changed. Don't bother with track changes. It's not likely to work anyway. You should submit your edited paper (some call it a red-lined version) as a separate file. In addition, you should reply to every reviewer comment/criticism also in a separate file (called a reply or response to reviewers) and submit that file along with your edited manuscript. The fact that the paper was returned to you requesting major revisions is a victory; the editor could have rejected it outright. This means both the editor and reviewers believe you've got publishable work. It's been my experience if you go through and answer every criticism and try to incorporate every reviewer suggestion in the paper, your paper will be accepted.
I, myself, have never seen this language, but this likely means that you won't be able to edit your first submission. This really isn't a big deal. When editing your manuscript, make the modified or added text red so the editors and reviewers can easily see what you changed. Don't bother with track changes. It's not likely to work anyway. You should submit your edited paper (some call it a red-lined version) as a separate file. In addition, you should reply to every reviewer comment/criticism also in a separate file (called a reply or response to reviewers) and submit that file along with your edited manuscript. The fact that the paper was returned to you requesting major revisions is a victory; the editor could have rejected it outright. This means both the editor and reviewers believe you've got publishable work. It's been my experience if you go through and answer every criticism and try to incorporate every reviewer suggestion in the paper, your paper will be accepted.
I believe what they simply mean is to submit a separate revised manuscript which is what usually people do when doing a major revision of the manuscript. I submit three documents in addition to a cover letter when submitting for a major revision:
1. The revised manuscript.
2. The document that makes a point by point response to each of the reviewers questions. This file should also point out where in the revised manuscript each of the change has been incorporated. This file may also contain any additional changes you made in the manuscript.
3. The revised manuscript with highlighted changes. This is the same as the revised manuscript content wise, but only the revised portions are highlighted to guide the reviewers. I prefer to use colored font to highlight changes.
Read the editors’ comments and then rewrite your paper based on them.
I’m sure you can overcome this.
Just keep in mind it is really subjective!
You can simply submit it elsewhere.
Does the journal require you to submit paper hard copies as well as an electronic version? The last time I saw something similar what the editor meant is that the author couldn't just alter a print copy with the adjustments and ask for these to be typed up by the print setter but had to type the changes up themselves. I've not seen this for many years though except in relation to university theses.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Linguistics
- Philology
- Classical Philology
- Manuscripts