The period from 2007 to 2011 was a period of expansion for JIPA. Every issue appeared on time; the copy-editing, typesetting, and web-posting processes through Cambridge University Press ran efficiently; and electronic postings on the Cambridge Journals Online site (generally the month before the cover date) have become more sophisticated in formats and capabilities. An overview of each issue beginning with vol. 38 through the end of the current volume is as follows:
Vol. 38.1 (April 2008) – 4 articles, 4 reviews, 1 illustration, 128 pp.
Vol. 38.2 (August 2008) – 4 articles, 1 review, 3 illustrations, 128 pp.
Vol. 38.3 (December 2008) – 3 articles, 1 review, 1 illustration, 144 pp.
Vol. 39.1 (April 2009) – 4 articles, 4 reviews, 2 illustrations, 140 pp.
Vol. 39.2 (August 2009) – 6 articles, 2 reviews, 2 illustrations, 144 pp.
Vol. 39.3 (December 2009) – 5 articles, no reviews, 3 illustrations, 136 pp.
Vol. 40.1 (April 2010) – 4 articles, no reviews, 1 illustration, 144 pp.
Vol. 40.2 (August 2010) – 4 articles, 2 reviews, 4 illustrations, 136 pp.
Vol. 40.3 (December 2010) – 8 articles, 2 reviews, 2 illustrations, 128 pp.
Vol. 41.1 (April 2011) – 4 articles, 2 reviews, 2 illustrations, 144 pp.
Vol. 41.2 (August 2011) – 8 articles, 1 review, 2 illustrations, 144 pp.
Vol. 41.3 (December 2011) – 4 articles, 2 reviews, 2 illustrations, 144 pp.
Since 2007, JIPA has been published in three issues a year, averaging 415 pages per volume. This represents an increase in page extent from 256 or 288 pp. per annum before 2007 and from 384 pp. per annum in 2007. The intent has been to accommodate the growing number and size of submissions, ensuring that authors will see their papers published in a timely manner. At the same time, it exerts some pressure on how much material can be included in a given issue. A distinct benefit of publishing three issues of JIPA per year, aside from the increased revenue generated by CUP for the IPA, is that CUP were able to secure listings for JIPA with the major abstracting services. JIPA remains an ‘A’ journal, and JIPA is now listed in the European Reference Index for the Humanities (ERIH) of the European Science Foundation (ESF) as well as in the Thomson Reuters Arts & Humanities Citation Index.
CUP are now regularly posting the audio files that accompany each Illustration of the IPA on the CJO JIPA website as ‘Supplementary Materials’ that can be downloaded by JIPA subscribers in the same way as the PDFs of text items. IPA members who do not have access to the CJO site from their institutions can access parallel audio files from our editorial site by procuring the username and password from the Secretary of the IPA.
Having received during 2006–2007 paper copies of all back issues of JIPA from 1971 onwards, CUP have now completed electronic archiving of all JIPA back issues, making them available online in the same way that current issues are made available. CUP will also integrate into their database Michael MacMahon's full searchable JIPA Index, which includes information from Le Maître Phonétique since 1886 and from JIPA since 1971.
Since 2008, JIPA has adopted a version of the Unified Style Sheet for Linguistics Journals, proposed by the Committee of Editors of Linguistics Journals as a standard style sheet that will be more or less the same for authors submitting manuscripts to any linguistics journal. In January 2007, the Unified Style Sheet was approved in final form, posted at: http://linguistlist.org/pubs/tocs/JournalUnifiedStyleSheet2007.pdf. The Instructions for Contributors to JIPA are posted on the CJO site for JIPA and a condensed version can be found in the back inside cover of each issue.
Throughout 2007–2011, the stated goals of the Journal have remained the same:
The Journal of the International Phonetic Association (JIPA) is a forum for work in the fields of phonetic theory and description. As well as including papers on theoretical phonetic issues, JIPA encourages submissions on experimental phonetics, phonetic data-based phonology, and the applications of phonetics to areas such as computer speech processing, language and phonetics teaching, and speech science. In addition, JIPA tries to review a good selection of books on phonetics. While seeking to advance new views of phonetics, JIPA also recognizes its special responsibilities with regard to the Association's alphabet, the IPA. It publishes discussions of IPA symbols, short accounts of the phonetic structures of a wide variety of languages, illustrating the use of these symbols, and charts. These accounts initially became part of the Handbook of the IPA, and those appearing since 2000 have become available through CJO. In this way JIPA, the Handbook and the CJO JIPA site are useful sources to which people may turn to find brief accounts of the sounds and the phonetic structure of the world's languages.
Since 2007, we have accepted and published:
• 25 articles on segmental properties (labialization in Nuuchahnulth, spirant approximants in Galician, vowel reduction in German, consonant sequence duration in Russian, length in Japanese stops, English and Thai stop discrimination, lengthened affricates, jaw movement in Arrernte, coronal contrasts in Anong, articulation of N|uu clicks, fricated /t/ in Australian English, stop voicing in American English, VOT of Persian stops, vowels in 13 British Isles accents, Georgian stop consonants, vocalic front rounding in South Wales English, interdental approximants, voicing in European Portuguese stops, monophthongs and diphthongs in dialects of Welsh, the consonant cluster /str/ in English, affricating ejective fricatives in Tigrinya, high back vowels in Standard Southern British English, Upper Tanana Athabascan vowels, coronal contrasts in Argentine and Cuban Spanish, palatography data for Central Arrernte);
• 7 articles on general phonetic issues (the 40th anniversary of JIPA, joining the IPA 100 years ago, a retrospective on Le Maître Phonétique, sample articles from Le Maître Phonétique by Catford and by Fischer-Jørgensen & Schilthuis, a commentary on the Principles of the IPA, a reprint of the full 1949 Principles of the IPA);
• 17 articles on prosodic aspects of various languages and populations and supralinguistic phenomena (lexical tone and stress in Basque, whistled languages, locality and prominence in phrasal lengthening, pulmonic ingressive phonation, register in Takhian Thong Chong, vocal tract steadiness in Mandarin English, pitch accents in Persian intonation, Cusco Quechua intonation, stress in Turkish Kabardian, change in articulation with change in functional word usage, regressive voicing assimilation, phonation in Santa Ana Del Valle Zapotec, stress and prominence in English and French, intonation in Catalan-Spanish early bilinguals, phonation and tone interaction in Jalapa Mazatec, clicks in English talk-in-interaction, the temporal reliability of rhythm metrics);
• 9 articles concerned with the revision of the International Phonetic Alphabet (the symbol for a central open vowel, 2 responses on the central open vowel, 1 reply on the central open vowel, the IPA chart in Braille, the symbolization of central approximants, 1 reply on the symbolization of central approximants, background on the IPA chart in Chinese, and the IPA chart in Chinese);
• 25 illustrations of the sounds of individual languages (Tilquiapan Zapotec, Indonesian, Kabiye, Salasaca Quichua, Yine, Hakka Chinese, Luanyjang Dinka, Mah Meri, Mavea, Estonian, Nepali, Palula, Goizueta Basque, Bengali (Bangladeshi Standard), Itunyoso Trique, the Flemish-Brabant dialect of Orsmaal-Gussenhoven, Temne, Isthmus (Juchitán) Zapotec, Slovak, Istanbul Judeo-Spanish, Shilluk, Kera, Standard Malay (Brunei), Kumzari, Vietnamese (Hanoi)).
There have also been reviews of 21 publications, reports on IPA News matters and announcements, and obituaries. This diversity, range of content, and quality of material is due to the energy and commitment of the many authors who have made submissions. We thank them for entrusting their scholarship to the Journal, thereby enhancing the Journal's reputation and standing.
Overview of the editorial process
Submissions are received and disseminated to reviewers as e-mail attachments in PDF format. Some reviewers prefer to remit PDF documents, especially when phonetic symbols are involved, and some annotate the original PDF submissions, but in many cases, reviews can be provided quite efficiently in the body of an e-mail message. Illustrations of the IPA must be accompanied at the time of submission by audio recordings of all words and narrative material cited in the text. Authors often provide .wav files in zipped attachments, or a URL for downloading, at the same time as submission of PDF text. All audio material is processed in the editorial office and posted on a site for the reviewers of the Illustration. If audio material is sent in as a single long .wav file or provided in analog form, it is broken up into individual word and text files by an editorial assistant. Ultimately, the supplementary audio materials will receive filenames that are grouped together by section heading and numbered in linear text order as well as being glossed with the English translation given in the text so that readers can easily locate each recorded item in its appropriate folder. Reviewers who are the most appropriate people in the field are selected by the editor. Often, one reviewer will be a specialist in the language area, and at least one other reviewer will be a specialist in the experimental approach. Members of the Editorial Board often act as reviewers, but not exclusively. Usually there are three reviewers; in some cases there may be two; and in some cases there are four. Occasionally, a manuscript will be referred to the Editorial Board for supplementary adjudication. We do not conceal authors’ names from reviewers, as we believe that a submission should be judged with reference to its background. Reviewers can make more helpful comments if they know the author they are trying to advise. We assume that reviewers will remain anonymous, but if they wish to sign their reviews we will communicate this to the authors. Papers are usually considerably improved by the collaborative interaction between reviewers and authors. The normal object of a review is to help improve a paper within its own framework with the best advice available. When a revised manuscript is received from an author after rewriting, it is forwarded to the original reviewers for their further evaluation, comments, and suggestions. Once a paper is deemed acceptable by the reviewers, the editor reviews the final revision of the paper and makes extensive added comment primarily on format, structure and symbolization but also on content. After that, final revised manuscripts in the various required formats are forwarded through the editor to the copy-editor as electronic files, with hard copy being sent by post directly by authors to the copy-editor. From that point, the copy-editor deals directly with authors on the technical details of copy preparation, verifying fonts and figures and noting particular items for the typesetters, and then working with authors on first proofs and mediating corrections to the typesetters through second (revised) proofs.
The time it takes for papers to be reviewed and to be returned by authors varies greatly, and the number of revisions required also varies considerably. Generally, the larger volume of copy flow since 2007, including the fact that most papers are read by three reviewers, means that manuscripts are taking slightly longer than before to appear in print. Some manuscripts may take two years to appear; some more; but others only one. Statements of acceptance/rejection rates cannot be given exactly because of the variation in each paper's individual history. Some papers that are accepted subject to revision may not be resubmitted, and the number of revisions a paper goes through is an incalculable variable. Probably about 40–50% of article submissions are accepted. Illustrations have a slightly better acceptance rate but usually entail a longer turn-around time for their revision and to appear in print, because of the time required to process and update audio files. Quite a few books are regularly sent out for review. We are appointing two Reviews Editors to follow up on reviews and ensure that reviewers respond in a timely manner.
Production issues
As a brief update on the editorial report of 2007, it can be reported that:
• The copy-editor prepares the electronic files for typesetting, ensuring font compatibility and specifying how the detailed phonetic representations peculiar to a phonetics journal are to be typeset. The copy-editor deals with authors at first proofs and with the editor at second proofs to clear up errors of formatting. Many of these errors continue to involve phonetic symbol shapes/sizes.
• We are working to ensure that the phonetic fonts specified in the Instructions for Contributors are familiar to and useable by the typesetters (the typesetters’ preference for free SIL fonts notwithstanding). There have been problems processing copy produced in LaTeX, but Word has not been a problem. The (non-)embedding of fonts in a file has sometimes been an issue.
• The production editor at the Press deals with front/back matter and covers. Proofs of these pages are sent to the editor for proofreading. Changes are queried well in advance: for example, JIPA 41.3 contains the new list of IPA Council members; the new Editors and new Editorial Board will appear in JIPA 42.1. The production editor is also in close contact with the copy-editor to match the Table of Contents with prepared copy and to coordinate CJO/JIPA layout.
• Illustrations are submitted in various formats with varying styles of charts and font usage. All of these are now easily handled by the copy-editor who either reformats and/or reworks the artwork or requests different formats, if necessary. We are extremely indebted to Ewa Jaworska, our copy-editor, for her continuing diligent efforts on behalf of JIPA.
• Cambridge University Press continues to produce JIPA at a reasonable cost to members (who pay nothing other than their annual dues) and institutions (for whom the subscription in 2011 is £156 or US$248 per year in print and online form) or individual CUP subscribers (at £48 or US$80 in print form). We have been using a revenue-sharing formula that subtracts expenditure from revenue and then splits 50/50 CUP's surplus for JIPA, which is an arrangement that earned the IPA an income of £18,848 out of the total revenue of £48,880 in 2009. The new agreement as of 2012 is based on a royalty on revenue of 40%. Using the 2009 figures, that would have amounted to a royalty payment to the IPA of £19,552. Our subscription rates have remained competitive. In the case of the IPA, it is important to remember that the cheapest way to receive the Journal in paper form is to join the Association for €45. Some thought needs to be devoted to how students can be persuaded to join the IPA.
Finally, we are continually reminded of our debt to our reviewers and Editorial Board members for their conscientious and prompt responses, especially when they are under editorial pressure and their reviews are needed urgently. Reviewers produced some 368 evaluations for JIPA over the past four years (some colleagues contributing more than one review), compared to 236 reviews in the previous four years. Careful and thoughtful reviews have been provided consistently, whether a submission has needed only minor revision, whether substantial changes have been necessary, and even where a paper could not be accepted. In the latter cases, the task is even more arduous, and the reviewers deserve our praise and thanks for their exceptional service.
From volume 42 (2012), JIPA will be edited by Adrian Simpson, with Linda Shockey and Anne Wichmann as Reviews Editors.
