"Replace" versus "Substitute" - Sentence structure

I have a question about the words order and their effect on the meaning of a sentence when it comes to use the verbs "replace" and "substitute"!

As far as I know, "to replace someone / something with someone / something else" means "to substitute someone / something for someone / something else".

Additionally, as far as I am concerned, if you are replacing A with B, then you are substituting B for A.

But problem is that if changing the words' places in each structure makes any difference in meaning?

For instance, does it make any difference if I say:

• 
  

  
  

  
  
  1. Yesterday, I had a terrible quarrel with the company's directing manager and they are going to replace me with Sam Or substitute Sam for me.
  
  

  
  

  
  


• 
  
  

  
  

  
  
  2. Yesterday, I had a terrible quarrel with the company's directing manager and they are going to replace Sam with me Or substitute me for Sam.
  
  

  
  

  
  

Let me simplify it! The inly thing that is important in the meaning of the two is that:

(Replace X with Y = Substitute Y for X)

But I need to know if replacing X and Y has a specific connotation in English? For example, in:

• 
  

  
  

  1.a. They are going to replace Sam with me.
  1.b. They are going to substitute me for Sam.
  

  
  

  
  

..........................

• 
  

  
  

  2.a. They are going to replace me with Sam.
  2.b. They are going to substitute Sam for me.
  

  
  

  
  

I was wondering which set implies that I was the first employee and Sam is taking my place?

Also which set implies that I as a new employee am taking Sam's place?

I hope I could make myself understood.

Thank you.

Answer

You are correct that "replacing A with B" and "substituting B for A" have essentially the same meaning. In both cases A was there first, A was removed, and B was put in its place. If we said "replacing B with A" then B was there first.

When dealing with people, particularly in an employment context, "substitute" tends to suggest a temporary change, while "replace" tends to indicate a permanent change.

• Jane is having an operation, and will be out for two months, so Bill will substitute for her.


• Martha got a poor review and has left the company, so she will be replaced by Fred.

The difference is subtle, but significant. However, it cannot be relied on -- "substitute" can be used for a permanent change, and "replace" for a temporary change, althoguh this is unusual in my experience.

Now let's look at the examples from the question:

• 1A. Yesterday, I had a terrible quarrel with the company's directing manager and they are going to replace me with Sam.


• 1B. Yesterday, I had a terrible quarrel with the company's directing manager and they are going to substitute Sam for me.

These are both grammatical, and carry much the same meaning, aside from the nuance I mentioned above, which would favor 1A over 1B.

• 2A. Yesterday, I had a terrible quarrel with the company's directing manager and they are going to replace Sam with me.


• 2B. Yesterday, I had a terrible quarrel with the company's directing manager and they are going to substitute me for Sam.

2A and 2B also have very similar meanings to each other, but quite different from (indeed opposite to) 1A and 1B. However 2a/2B seem internally inconsistent. They say that Sam is going out and "me" is going in, but that doesn't seem consistent with "I had a terrible quarrel". I suppose these might be possible if Sam's position was of lower rank or status, and "replace Sam with me" means a demotion fro the speaker. They would make better sense if they said "Sam had a terrible quarrel", then the two clauses would be consistent.