ACLshort paper被拒，有点郁闷，本以为short paper本来就是考虑到是一个正在进行中的工作的前期部分，可能实验不会太完整，不过似乎我想错了，在文章中由于篇幅，没有将实验部分交待的很细致，实验也没有完全展开，本以为能对前面的基本假设做一个初步证明即可，结果3个评审倒是意见一致了：

（1）the description of the experiment on Semeval 2007 needs more details. It’s
not clear how the training set expansion is done and the different systems are
defined. This could be the more interesting part of the paper but is vaguely
described in one paragraph and consequently difficult to understand. A
comparison with the features used by other Semeval participants would help to
understand the contribution of the proposed technique.

（2）All in all, the results over ngrams are interesting, but the application to WSD
needs more work.

（3）It will be more interesting to see your comparison for several languages---
currently I find your results too limited for ACL.

当然，外语写作的问题再次暴露，虽然我找了个人帮我改过了。

The paper would really profit from an English native speaker for
proof-reading. It is partially very hard to understand and some sentences just
don't make much sense. Ths goes beyond the standard number of mistakes that are
unavoidable for non-native speakers.