LINGUIST List 15.3523

Sat Dec 18 2004

Qs: IPA in Textbooks; Use of 'Substitute'

Editor for this issue: Steven Moran <>

We'd like to remind readers that the responses to queries are usually best posted to the individual asking the question. That individual is then strongly encouraged to post a summary to the list. This policy was instituted to help control the huge volume of mail on LINGUIST; so we would appreciate your cooperating with it whenever it seems appropriate.

In addition to posting a summary, we'd like to remind people that it is usually a good idea to personally thank those individuals who have taken the trouble to respond to the query.

To post to LINGUIST, use our convenient web form at


        1.    Caitlin McIntyre, IPA in Textbooks
        2.    David Denison, Use of 'Substitute'

Message 1: IPA in Textbooks

Date: 17-Dec-2004
From: Caitlin McIntyre <>
Subject: IPA in Textbooks

For professors and teachers of Spanish Phonetics and Phonology: I work in
 Spanish textbook editorial and currently am focusing on a Spanish Phonetics
 and Phonology that does not introduce IPA until more than halfway through
 the book - leaving explanations on word structure, syllable structure, and
 tone (not to mention all preliminary/introductory and general overview
 chapters) written in standard orthography.  Particularly for syllable work,
 I find this odd.  Would any professor feel comfortable with or desire to
 teach from a text that approached topics in this sequence, also allowing
 students to complete exercises and activities for tones and syllables not
 using IPA?  As a linguist, it strikes me as different and I was seeking an
 academic opinion on this.  Thank you. 
 Linguistic Field(s): Phonetics

Message 2: Use of 'Substitute'

Date: 17-Dec-2004
From: David Denison <>
Subject: Use of 'Substitute'

I'm just tidying up a paper (draft available on on the reversal of _substitute_,
which in British English is moving rapidly from the subcategorisation

(1) substitute new for old


(2) substitute old for new

- a switch which raises some interesting questions. I've got one passive
example from the American National Corpus whose interpretation isn't 100%
clear to me. Could a native speaker of American football English give me
the sports-language-for-dummies version, assuming complete ignorance of the
setup and the jargon?

(3) Non-specialists only can be substituted out of the lineup once per
quarter, meaning two-way players can expect to be on the field upward of 45
to 50 minutes of a 60-minute game. (ANC, NYTimes)

In particular, what does ''out of the lineup'' mean? - that the coach can
take non-specialist players off the bench and send them out onto the field,
or that he can bring them off the field, or perhaps that he can bring them
off the field and replace them by others waiting to come on?  And whatever
it means, does example (3) represent normal usage in context?  Many thanks. 

Linguistic Field(s): Historical Linguistics
Respond to list|Read more issues|LINGUIST home page|Top of issue