Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I am assuming that this is a rewrite of Jonovski 2023, and thus this author is actually the same, because there is direct use of the same text. It should be made clear that this is a revised version of the other article.

The key feature of this article is that it shows a vast and diverse range of migrations, caused by the many conflicts and efforts to limit and transform ethnic groups in this Greek/Slavic borderland. It would be good to make a few comparisons to other studies: is this level of international movement common for most of Macedonia, or was this a particularly complex area?

Since there is Miovski's description of Orovo families, is the Jonovski family similar or greater in the level of movement/migration? Can the Miovski volume be described in more detail: how many families and people are described?

There is a need for a little more background and presentation to people not familiar with the region: the renaming of places is mentioned, but it would be good to be clear about what appears on Google or other maps and in wikipedia. I found most of the sites, but it is good to have references.

Another interesting aspect is political choices and affiliations: for outside readers, it would be good to know more about the reason for fighting for the Free Democratic Greeks, etc. Which countries, governments and factions did people describe positively, and which negatively? This would give a little more interest to the different people described. Another way to do this would be to give quotes from written materials, especially from the poems or other writings of Dimitar. After the end of Jugoslavia, was he eager to publish his suppressed writings?

What were attitudes or experiences among Turks, Poles, Greeks, Americans, French, etc?

Also it would be good to be more specific about migration to Asian Minor: what did people do? How did they find out about work opportunities, etc?

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

There is a need of more careful checking of language and spelling, to make  sure everything is clear and consistent. E.g., Sipahi is sometimes spahi.

the abstract is not well written: temporal probably means temporary. "the man" means something like "people".

SmartMaches should probably be SmartMatches.

Lyl (place in France) is likely Lille.

Vrontero is what appears on Google maps, not Vrondero.

Wandoo is something only known in Australia: specify that it is a kind of Eucalyptus.

Vangel is spelled Vagel in the conclusion.

 

Author Response

I am assuming that this is a rewrite of Jonovski 2023, and thus this author is actually the same, because there is direct use of the same text. It should be made clear that this is a revised version of the other article.

JJ> Some of material is used, and it is now made clear.

The key feature of this article is that it shows a vast and diverse range of migrations, caused by the many conflicts and efforts to limit and transform ethnic groups in this Greek/Slavic borderland. It would be good to make a few comparisons to other studies: is this level of international movement common for most of Macedonia, or was this a particularly complex area?

JJ> A comparison is made with the rest of Macedonia and with Bogov family migration of the next Kostur region.

Since there is Miovski's description of Orovo families, is the Jonovski family similar or greater in the level of movement/migration? Can the Miovski volume be described in more detail: how many families and people are described?

JJ> The book gives general information and lists of families that lived in the village and where they immigrated, no specific family stories to follow.

There is a need for a little more background and presentation to people not familiar with the region: the renaming of places is mentioned, but it would be good to be clear about what appears on Google or other maps and in wikipedia. I found most of the sites, but it is good to have references.

JJ>Corrected

Another interesting aspect is political choices and affiliations: for outside readers, it would be good to know more about the reason for fighting for the Free Democratic Greeks, etc.

JJ> Explanation added

Which countries, governments and factions did people describe positively, and which negatively? This would give a little more interest to the different people described. Another way to do this would be to give quotes from written materials, especially from the poems or other writings of Dimitar. After the end of Jugoslavia, was he eager to publish his suppressed writings?

JJ> The following I do not know how to address.

What were attitudes or experiences among Turks, Poles, Greeks, Americans, French, etc?

Also it would be good to be more specific about migration to Asian Minor: what did people do? How did they find out about work opportunities, etc?

 

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

 

JJ> All fixed, once the new text and corrections are accepted, a further proofread would be done.

There is a need of more careful checking of language and spelling, to make  sure everything is clear and consistent. E.g., Sipahi is sometimes spahi.

the abstract is not well written: temporal probably means temporary. "the man" means something like "people".

SmartMaches should probably be SmartMatches.

Lyl (place in France) is likely Lille.

Vrontero is what appears on Google maps, not Vrondero.

Wandoo is something only known in Australia: specify that it is a kind of Eucalyptus.

Vangel is spelled Vagel in the conclusion.

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

To authors:

This paper has promise and contains many interesting family stories and historical facts. Thank you for your thorough family history discussion. It just needs to be heavily revised for English language understanding, and it needs to have a much better organization from the introduction to the conclusion.

From the outset you need to make sure that you underscore / emphasize the connection between the Jonovski family migration and what happened in the region as a whole. You need to state the significance of the family and their connection to the history and justify why the analysis of their migrations tells us something representative of what was occurring in the region in terms of migration that was influenced by war, economic challenges, and political issues.

If you restructure the paper, you can divide the different sets of family movements into tine periods and separate the historical context surrounding their migrations accordingly.

 

Some specific comments:

 

Abstract – Look at this as the outline for your paper as you have done, but rewrite for clarity.

 

Line 33 – What is the “Timarli-Siphasis principle?”

Line 37 - What are spahi? Be more specific on the definition.

Lines 41-45 - This whole section needs clarification for those who don't know the history of land tenure in this area.

 

Line 49 - "men" or "peasants" not man

Line 55 – When did this permanent migration occur and how are you defining a “permanent” migration?

Lines 56-124 – Good historical summary. Explain why this history is relevant.

Line 144-45 – Please explain why one cannot use genealogical records to connect a woman’s original name to their new married name.

Village of Orovo section – Can you summarize at the end of the section (line 237) the main characteristics of the village that relate to the Jonovski family? What is it about the town’s location in the historical context makes it very appropriate to study as a source of family outmigration? You say some reasons why it is important but tie those ideas to your family migration study.

Sections 4.1 – 4.8 -- These key stories of family history are interesting, yet they don’t seem to be connected together very well. Even though they are related it is as if you have eight different stories of almost separate families. How can you organize these sections with some statements at the very beginning (before 4.1) and end (after 4.8) to explain what you are hoping to prove or accomplish with the recitation of their lives work and movements. Lines 239-247 give an introduction of sorts, but it does not directly relate to the 4.1-4.8 family stories. Be up front about whose history you are going to analyze.

Line 275 - with HIS daughters–in–law,

Lines 478-9 – Put in this extra info about Spasa before you discuss Alexander’s death.

 

Conclusions: Your conclusions give the reader an idea of the Jonovski’s family’s place within the turbulent history of the region, and you might want to mirror those summary comments in your introduction so the paper flows from beginning to end. However, it is hard to always see how this summary relates back to the people of sections 4.1-4.8. Could you better organize the summary, so it matches the order of discussion of the individuals of sections 4.1-4.8? I do not recommend ending the paper with just a summary of where all of the family migrated to over the years. It would be better to explain the significance of the family diaspora and how your study has added to the literature regarding family migrations, and what it means to understanding the history of this region.

 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

See comments above. You need to have someone help you revise the paper for English readability, from start to finish. Please consider asking a native English speaker to help you edit the paper. 

Author Response

This paper has promise and contains many interesting family stories and historical facts. Thank you for your thorough family history discussion. It just needs to be heavily revised for English language understanding, and it needs to have a much better organization from the introduction to the conclusion.

JJ> There is a reorganization done, once the new text and corrections are accepted, a further proofread would be done.

From the outset you need to make sure that you underscore / emphasize the connection between the Jonovski family migration and what happened in the region as a whole. You need to state the significance of the family and their connection to the history and justify why the analysis of their migrations tells us something representative of what was occurring in the region in terms of migration that was influenced by war, economic challenges, and political issues.

JJ> The genealogy in Macedonia is in it naissance, so we used what we have, it was not a choice out of many according it significance

If you restructure the paper, you can divide the different sets of family movements into tine periods and separate the historical context surrounding their migrations accordingly.

 

Some specific comments:

 

Abstract – Look at this as the outline for your paper as you have done, but rewrite for clarity.

 JJ> done

Line 33 – What is the “Timarli-Siphasis principle?”

Line 37 - What are spahi? Be more specific on the definition.

Lines 41-45 - This whole section needs clarification for those who don't know the history of land tenure in this area.

JJ> done

 Line 49 - "men" or "peasants" not man

Line 55 – When did this permanent migration occur and how are you defining a “permanent” migration?

Lines 56-124 – Good historical summary. Explain why this history is relevant.

Line 144-45 – Please explain why one cannot use genealogical records to connect a woman’s original name to their new married name.

JJ> done

Village of Orovo section – Can you summarize at the end of the section (line 237) the main characteristics of the village that relate to the Jonovski family? What is it about the town’s location in the historical context makes it very appropriate to study as a source of family outmigration? You say some reasons why it is important but tie those ideas to your family migration study.

JJ> done

Sections 4.1 – 4.8 -- These key stories of family history are interesting, yet they don’t seem to be connected together very well. Even though they are related it is as if you have eight different stories of almost separate families. How can you organize these sections with some statements at the very beginning (before 4.1) and end (after 4.8) to explain what you are hoping to prove or accomplish with the recitation of their lives work and movements. Lines 239-247 give an introduction of sorts, but it does not directly relate to the 4.1-4.8 family stories. Be up front about whose history you are going to analyze.

JJ> I tried something

Line 275 - with HIS daughters–in–law,

Lines 478-9 – Put in this extra info about Spasa before you discuss Alexander’s death.

JJ> done

Conclusions: Your conclusions give the reader an idea of the Jonovski’s family’s place within the turbulent history of the region, and you might want to mirror those summary comments in your introduction so the paper flows from beginning to end. However, it is hard to always see how this summary relates back to the people of sections 4.1-4.8. Could you better organize the summary, so it matches the order of discussion of the individuals of sections 4.1-4.8? I do not recommend ending the paper with just a summary of where all of the family migrated to over the years. It would be better to explain the significance of the family diaspora and how your study has added to the literature regarding family migrations, and what it means to understanding the history of this region.

JJ> I tried to reorganize

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Thank you for your concerted effort to revise the paper. You have made many improvements and I appreciate the way that you addressed my recommendations for revision. 

Once you have a clean version of the paper, I would reread it for typos and for consistency throughout because of all the edits you have made.

I would encourage you to compare the abstract, introduction, and conclusion to see how well they match up. As you do this, I would suggest you add a sentence or two at the end to emphasize the contribution that you have made and how it relates to the study of family migration and this region of the world. 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Improved from last version, but could still use a final readthrough and editing by a native English speaker.

Author Response

Thank you for your concerted effort to revise the paper. You have made many improvements and I appreciate the way that you addressed my recommendations for revision. 

JJ> Thank you

Once you have a clean version of the paper, I would reread it for typos and for consistency throughout because of all the edits you have made.

JJ> Here it is, I sent the final version, without markups, with an English speaker proofreading included

I would encourage you to compare the abstract, introduction, and conclusion to see how well they match up. As you do this, I would suggest you add a sentence or two at the end to emphasize the contribution that you have made and how it relates to the study of family migration and this region of the world.

JJ> The abstract is rewritten to have a better flow of the story. Also, two sentences are added to the conclusion.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Improved from last version, but could still use a final readthrough and editing by a native English speaker.

JJ> already done by a US university librarian with PhD

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf