Reviewed by Douglas C. Walker, University of Calgary

Rodney Sampson, already well known for his work in comparative Romance linguistics (see his 1999 book Nasal vowel evolution in romance), here turns his attention to one of the less studied, but nonetheless fascinating, areas in the phonological history of the Romance family.

Prosthesis (or prothesis), the insertion of a non-etymological word-initial vowel, occurs sporadically in Romance, but, as a result of S’s extensive compilation of data, less sporadically than one might have thought. Nor is the process without considerable theoretical interest, especially in the area of syllable structure.

The book is organized as follows. The introduction (1–35) provides background, including a definition of prosthesis, a dissection of the problems of identification, and a review of synchronic and diachronic developments as well as of the various vowels involved. This is followed by an exploration of the potential phonological, morphophonological, lexical, morpholexical, and sociolinguistic causes of prosthesis. The chapter closes with two short sections: a survey of previous studies, which notes that the fullest discussion, by Hugo Schuchardt, surprisingly dates from the middle of the nineteenth century; and a review of data sources.

This introductory material is followed by two brief chapters, ‘Categories of prosthesis in the History of Romance’ (36–40) and ‘The Latin background’ (41–52). In the former, we meet the three main prosthetic vowels: I-, A- and U-, with initial I- (ultimately surfacing most commonly as /e/) constituting the most frequent and widespread variant.  Concerning the Latin background, we learn that little prosthesis occurred prior to the breakup of the Republic, but that massive simplifications of complex syllable onsets during the later stages, with the exception of word-initial /s/ + consonant clusters, provided the initial impetus for its development.

The core of the book lies in the next three long chapters, ‘I-prosthesis’ (53–145), ‘A-prosthesis’ (146–93), and U-prosthesis (194–232). In each, we find, in varying degrees, a number of common themes of both descriptive and analytical import. S appropriately raises the issue of the identification of a vowel as prosthetic or not, before describing the geographical distribution of the three types (in most detail for the widespread I-prosthesis) and the chronology of their appearance. More theoretical discussions deal with the causation of the phenomenon, the structural conditions necessary (or at least favorable) for its occurrence, the trajectory followed, and the ultimate outcomes of the vowels—persistence, integration, or disappearance. Unsurprisingly, syllable structure, both at the beginning of words and at the junction between words, is seen as the key factor in the development of prosthetic vowels.

The concluding chapter outlines S’s arguments for considering prosthesis as a regular rather than sporadic sound change and is followed by a useful set of maps showing the distribution of the various types of prosthesis (239–50), a detailed bibliography (251–80), and a subject index (281–90).

In this book, S again demonstrates his interest in and mastery of a complex and fascinating Romance domain, a comparative purview rare, at least in English, within scholarship that concentrates on the specifics of individual languages. This work should serve to reinvigorate study of an often misunderstood and theoretically relevant domain at a time when the role of syllable structure and prosody is increasingly important for our understanding of phonological phenomena.

Reviewed by Irene Theodoropoulou, Qatar University

This book delves into one of the most important aspects of the social life of language, which involves attitudes about language. Ch. 1 contextualizes attitudes by suggesting that they can be examined at all levels of linguistic analysis and in different contexts, including in words, accents, grammar, language, standardization of language, and code-switching.

Ch. 2 discusses the notion and structure of linguistic attitudes, which can be viewed as comprising cognition, affect, and behavior. This chapter introduces some major debates on the durability and stability of attitudes along with their relationship to interconnected terms, such as habits, values, beliefs, opinions, social stereotypes, and ideologies. Ch. 3 considers both strengths and weaknesses of and similarities and differences between three major approaches to the study of language attitudes: direct approach, indirect approach, and societal treatment studies.

Chs. 4 and 5 delve into the indirect measure of matched and verbal guise techniques. Ch. 4 focuses on research conducted on native varieties of English, primarily in Anglo-speaking countries, while Ch. 5 reports on attitudes about other languages, including French, varieties of Arabic, Japanese, varieties of Spanish, and Welsh. The main argument put forward is that attitudes are not monolithic but rather vary among social groups, localities, accent strength, interactional contexts, and ethnolinguistic vitality.

Ch. 6 reviews research on attitudes toward non-linguistic communicative features (e.g. lexical provenance, diversity, and speech rate), speaker variables (e.g. appearance, social class, sex, and age), hearer variables (e.g. ethnocentrism, mood, and expertise), and context (e.g. institutional, personal, and cultural). Ch. 7 discusses communication accommodation theory and takes the reader through its transformation from a sociopsychological model, aiming to analyze bilingual and accent shifts in interactions, to a more interdisciplinary model that can explain identity construction in interactions.

Ch. 8 considers research on language attitudes in legal, health, education, and employment contexts. Two important issues arising here are discrimination and social stereotyping being reproduced through these studies, coupled with issues of biased samples, which prevent researchers from getting an objective picture. Ch. 9 looks into societal treatment studies in consumer advertisements and linguistic landscapes, arguing that this type of study is far from being preliminary, contrary to what social psychological studies have claimed.

Ch. 10 discusses in detail three types of direct approaches: a discursive social constructionist approach, a comparative approach on language attitudes and issues of ethnicity in diasporic communities, and an online survey of language attitudes in the United Kingdom. Ch. 11 presents folk-linguistic attitudes to ‘inner circle’ English varieties, with a particular focus on keywords, illustrating how this research can provide useful insights into the stereotyping of attitudes. Ch. 12 argues for an integrated program of language attitudes research, encompassing a questionnaire and a verbal guise study, the combination of which can yield a fine-grained picture of language attitudes. Ch. 13 concludes the book by highlighting the pervasiveness of language attitudes in social life and the subsequent need to tackle them in the disambiguation of sociolinguistic complexity.

Despite some minor typos, the book is certainly a useful source for linguists and psychologists alike, who are interested in social aspects of language.

Reviewed by Siaw-Fong Chung, National Chengchi University

Philip Eubanks argues that the treatment of metaphor has not been given enough attention in writing, and this book calls attention to the importance of figurative language and thought in writing. In Ch. 1, E provides some examples of metaphors in writing. The kind of metaphors E refers to is conceptual, referring to the process or even to the conceptual manifestation of writing which may or may not reflect a particular linguistic phenomenon. For illustration, E explains that well-organized or well-structured are examples of metaphors used when describing the spatial organization of writing (20, citing Peter Elbow, The music of form: Rethinking organization in writing. College Composition and Communication, 57.4, 620–66, 2006).

In Chs. 2 and 3, E compares the meanings of writer versus to write. The prototype of writer, however, ‘is incompatible with and yet inseparable from the prototype of to write’ ( 40); that is, although writer and to write are both seen as basic-level categories, ‘writing cannot, in fact, occur at a general level’ (42). In Ch. 3, E further discusses the varying generality of writer and to write, which he calls ‘conflicting theories’ among ‘the general-ability view and the specific-expertise view’ (41). For example, prototypical writers usually possess non-prototypical writing ability.

In Ch. 4, E begins a discussion of metaphor and metonymy in writing. Three stories of writing are discussed, namely the literate-inscriber (e.g. lists, emails, notes), the good-writer (e.g. essays, workplace genres), and the author-writer (e.g. complex compelling texts) stories. These three stories generally ‘rely on two fundamental metonymies: Writing Is Thought and Writing Is Identity’ (63). In Ch. 5, E examines the figure of voice in writing. According to E, voice reflects a complex metonymy because writing involves not only the Writing Is Speech metonymy (e.g. personal voice, passive voice), but also can be broken down into Writing As Transcription (e.g. the text says, he or she says), Writing As Talk (i.e. to write like you talk), and the Discovered Voice (i.e. the underlying voice).

In Ch. 6, E discusses the conceptual blends among writing, speech, and the different selves (multiple voices), be they a singular self, multiple selves, or the core self (the real me). Nobody, however, is able to tell whether any of these selves are the writer’s true self as ‘all constructions of self potentially have sophisticated rhetorical motivations’ (141) and this explains why a complex conceptual blend is present. In Ch. 7, the conduit metaphor is discussed (e.g. putting thoughts into words, getting the message across). Although E mentions many weaknesses of the conduit metaphor, he claims that this type of metaphor reflects the Language is Power metonymy. One of the alignments between these two is that the latter involves a force model (direct force model) and a model which ‘retrains or moves any object in its field’ (159).

Ch. 8 provides examples that help to explain the conduit metaphor. E also discusses the conduit metaphor with regard to the three stories of writing. Ch. 9 contains a final note about other possible metaphors, such as Argument Is War, which may also exist in writing, and the book ends with a reminder to the readers that in writing the writer needs to determine which ‘choice of figures’ (197) one has to employ.

Reviewed by Lynn D. Sims, Austin Peay State University

This book successfully demonstrates how collaboration between linguists and educators helps shift the teaching of language in primary and secondary (K-12) classrooms from a traditional to a linguistically informed approach. The projects discussed are informative and, as a linguist who teaches linguistics to English education majors, I consider this book a must-read.

The book contains twenty-three chapters divided into three parts. Part 1, ‘Linguistics from the top down: Encouraging institutional change’, includes eight chapters highlighting projects that have integrated linguistics into K-12 education through changes to curricula and standards, teacher education, and linguist-teacher collaboration. Chs. 3, 4, and 5 address projects in England, Scotland, and Australia, respectively. The remaining chapters address projects in the United States. Each chapter is useful, three of them in particular. In his chapter, Wayne O’Neil summarizes the different outcomes of three separate linguistics integration projects, demonstrating why continued collaboration between linguists and teachers is crucial to curricular change. Richard Hudson outlines the process of integrating linguistics into the national curriculum and explains the successful outcomes of connecting knowledge about language to the teaching of literature, creative writing, and foreign languages. Jeffrey Reaser details the development of a high-school curriculum based around Do you speak American?, a Public Broadcasting System (PBS) series, and an eighth-grade social studies curriculum based on sociocultural and dialect patterns in North Carolina.

Part 2, ‘Linguistics from the bottom up: Encouraging classroom change’, contains seven chapters that include the insights gained by linguists working directly with K-12 students and teachers. One theme that emerges is the importance of connecting linguistics to the scientific method of discovery when working inside the K-12 classroom. Rebecca S. Wheeler discusses the use of contrastive analysis, the scientific method, and code-switching as metacognition when teaching academic writing. Maya Honda, Wayne O’Neil, and David Pippin provide a detailed explanation of how one fifth-grade English class approaches and solves morphophonological problem sets. Kristin Denham discusses the importance of integrating linguistics at the primary school level, of working closely with primary teachers and students, and of teaching future K-12 teachers how to incorporate their linguistics knowledge into their classrooms.

Part 3, ‘Vignettes: Voices from the classroom’, is an excellent conclusion to this text, containing eight chapters that relate strategies used by K-12 teachers to bring linguistics into their classrooms. Topics include using dialect/register and grammar/stylistic choice to analyze literature (Angela Roh), using code-switching to teach formal writing (Karren Mayer and Kirstin New), and using contrastive analysis to teach grammar (Deidre Carlson). Caroline Thomas and Sara Wawer discuss the integration of linguistics into an Australian curriculum, and Athena McNulty discusses collaborating with a linguist to produce successful, linguistically informed lessons. David Pippin explains the use of a unique literary text to illustrate the rhetorical effects of grammatical choices. Leatha Fields-Carey and Suzanne Sweat discuss the use of the Voices of North Carolina curriculum to teach dialect awareness. Dan Clayton discusses innovative ways to use slang as a springboard for teaching grammar, variation, and change.

By Nadia Mifka Profozic, University of Auckland

This book is a collection of state-of-the-art articles that aim to promote insights from cognitive linguistics (CL) in language teaching. As emphasized in the introduction, the focus of the volume is on instructed language learning which differs substantially from incidental learning in immersion situations. The book consists of three parts, each dealing with an aspect of the relationship between CL and language instruction. The first part points to the relevance and significance of teaching approaches informed by CL. The second part focuses on the content of teaching from CL perspective, and the third part considers methods of teaching that use insights from CL.

Part 1 begins with an article by John Taylor, addressing the issue of I(internal)-language and E(external)-language and exploring the differences between the generative and usage-based approaches. The following article by Rafael Alejo Gonzales, Ana Piquer Piriz, and Guadalupe Reveriego, examines the treatment of English phrasal verbs in Spanish course books, demonstrating that these books do not reflect the actual use of phrasal verbs as evident from corpus analysis. Xiaoyan Xia and Hans-Georg Wolf explore the psychological phenomenon in first language (L1) acquisition that a basic level of categorization is learned prior to higher levels of learning, and show that this finding is equally valid in second language (L2) acquisition. Helene Stengers, Frank Boers, Alex Housen, and June Eyckmans investigate the effects of pedagogically directed awareness of multi-word lexical ‘chunks’ in English and Spanish L2 classrooms. Their results indicate that activities that raise awareness alone may not be sufficient for acquisition.

In Part 2, JoAnne Neff-van Aertselaer, and Caroline Bunce report on a comparative crosslinguistic corpus analysis of the use of the verb have in advanced English as a foreign language (EFL) writing classes. Zhuo Jing-Schmidt argues for the use of concept explication in foreign language teaching, comparing three languages: Mandarin, German, and English. In their analysis of business press headlines, Honesto Herrera and Michael White argue for more efficient use of idioms in language courses. The article by Jeannette Littlemore, Phyllis Chen, Polly Liyen Tang, Almut Koester, and John Barnden examines the use of metaphor and metonymy in English discourse communities, and their relevance for English for specific purposes (ESP) teaching courses. David Eddington and Francisco Ruiz de Mendoza explore the relationship between argument construction and language processing, based on a priming experiment. The following article by Frank Boers, Julie Deconinck, and Seth Lindstromberg is concerned with the nature of ‘chunks’ and the phonological motivation they can have in assisting L2 instruction.

In Part 3, Kanako Cho reports the results of two studies that applied a cognitive approach in teaching English prepositions to Japanese learners. Phillip Hamrick and Salvatore Attardo focus on auxiliary selection in teaching the Italian passato prossimo. Based on their experiment, they discuss the pros and cons of CL and the traditional grammar approach. Ying-Hsueh Hu and Yu-Ying Fong explore obstacles that L2 learners may encounter when interpreting idioms based on conceptual metaphors. An article by Constanze Juchem-Grundmann and Tina Krennmayr looks at the ways of corpus analysis–based integration of metaphor into the business teaching materials. Christina Sanchez-Stockhammer explores the potential of lexical decomposition in teaching and learning English and German, and the final article of the book, by Helen Fraser, examines the application of CL in teaching pronunciation.

Reviewed by Edward Vajda, Western Washington University

Burushaski is a language spoken in three closely related dialectal forms in the valleys of Northern Pakistan. It is generally regarded as an isolate, despite many attempts to link it with other Eurasian language families. The present monograph, unfortunately, does not evaluate these earlier hypotheses. It analyzes 150 Burushaski lexical items and their derivatives to argue that the velar consonants in these words show systematic sound correspondences with the reflexes of proto–Indo-European (PIE) velars, labiovelars, and palatovelars found in non-satem Indo-European languages. Burushaski vocabulary items with obvious Indo-Aryan parallels that likely arose through borrowing are omitted from the investigation. The conclusion argued for is that Burushaski shows a genealogical relationship with kentum Indo-European languages such as Albanian, ancient Thracian, and Phrygian, as well as Balto-Slavic. Because the book focuses on a single group of putative sound correspondences (the dorsal plosives), its claims should be evaluated together with the author’s previous investigations of Burushaski/Indo-European lexical relations (particularly, Basic Burushaski etymologies, 1998), where a total of nearly 600 cognates are proposed involving proposed sound correspondences in vowels as well as non-guttural consonants (69).

While the book represents a conscientious attempt to apply the traditional comparative method to a language whose position among the world’s language families remains without consensus, the data assembled do not support the conclusion that Burushaski belongs within a sub-branch of Indo-European. The core thesis is summarized in a chart (64), illustrating how PIE plain velars, labiovelars, and palatovelars have fallen together to yield plain velars in Burushaski. While the 150 stems investigated here would appear to support this correlation, most of these items also contain exceptions to other aspects of the broader system of sound correspondences argued for. Comparanda show unique segment deletions or additions of various kinds. One example is PIE *dṇĝhuh_a ‘tongue’, which is compared to Yasin Burushaski –yúṅus ‘tongue’ (58), though only the nasal segment appears to be shared. Another is PIE *h₁ogʷis- ‘snake’ and Burushaski –ġusánus ‘snake’ (39), where only the PIE second syllable gʷis and the Burushaski initial syllable ġus appear directly comparable. Most of the 150 lexical correspondences have been supplied with copious additional commentary to explain significant phonological, morphological, or semantic incongruities.

This study is, nevertheless, valuable for its careful consideration of Burushaski-internal phonological variation and morphological processes, based on the author’s familiarity with earlier sources, notably Hermann Berger’s three-volume Die Burushaski-Sprache von Hunza und Nager (1998). Certain lexical parallels, notably those dealing with Neolithic farming or herding, should be reexamined in light of potential language contact, a possibility the author himself seriously considered in his earlier work (Basic Burushaski etymologies, 1998) but has now abandoned in favor of a genealogical explanation. Future investigations of Burushaski historical linguistics might benefit most from an etymological dictionary that more fundamentally treats the divergences between Yasin (Werchikwar) Burushaski and the more closely related Hunza and Nager dialects.

Reviewed by Susanne Wagner, Chemnitz University of Technology

This short volume serves as an excellent introduction to dialect variation in England. Given the wide range of variation in the English-speaking world as well as in the accompanying research, such a narrow focus is almost inevitable in the field today. Joan C. Beal states on the very first page that the book will be limited to variation in England and elaborates later on her major reason for doing so.  In the context of the United Kingdom, issues of national identity, which often play a role in language variation, differ vastly.

The first chapter offers a comprehensive introduction to the topic, including a historical overview of dialectology and treatment of dialects. B focuses on such popular issues as the question of whether regional dialects are disappearing, emphasizing that while change is more rapid than ever before, new differences are emerging at the same time.

Chs. 2 through 4 follow a typical order of discussion in a book on regional variation, beginning with accent variation (Ch. 2), followed by a chapter on dialect variation (i.e. variation in morphology and syntax) and a chapter on lexical variation. All chapters focus not only on ‘old’ variables but also on current trends such as happy-tensing and l-vocalization, which—in terms of their regional distribution—defy traditional beliefs of language change and spread of features. The chapter on morphosyntax contains two main subsections, each focusing on one main constituent of the clause: the noun phrase and the verb phrase. While the restriction to England has been made explicit from the start, an occasional reference to parallels in other varieties of English—particularly to features that American English ‘inherited’ from English dialects—would have been helpful.

The hallmarks of the book are Chs. 5 and 6. In Ch. 5, two major patterns of language change, levelling and diffusion, are discussed. Importantly, B also includes a discussion on resistance and divergence, showing that levelling is not the only possibility. Ch. 6 introduces one of the current trends in studies on variation, namely its relation to identity. A theoretical introduction helps inexperienced readers in particular to put things into perspective and includes a discussion of William Labov’s Martha’s Vineyard study, today widely regarded as the first study to show the construction of identity through language. With the help of three case studies, B further elaborates on possible effects that identity can have on language (variation and change). Each of the three studies uses different methods and arrives at different conclusions, which nicely exemplifies the broad range of research conducted in the field.

Overall, this book is highly recommended for undergraduate students who want a quick overview of a small part of a large field. The book includes numerous ideas for further research and reading, and the exercises offer additional food for thought.

Reviewed by Katrin Hiietam, Manchester, United Kingdom

This volume contains a collection of articles investigating the linguistic expressions of benefaction and malefaction, both typologically and in detailed language-specific studies. The introduction by the editors provides a thorough overview of the phenomena of benefaction and malefaction and discusses the different definitions of ‘beneficiary’ and ‘maleficiary’ offered by various researchers. For their purposes, the editors define the beneficiary as a ‘participant that is advantageously affected by an event without being its obligatory participant’ (2). They add that beneficiaries are typically animate, as ‘normally only animate participants are capable of making use of the benefit bestowed upon them’ (2).

The editors argue that a relatively loose definition, such as that given above, allows for a better descriptive crosslinguistic comparison. They conclude that beneficiaries are typically optional, unlike recipients, despite the fact that they are often coded alike; they are not agents but beneficiaries of the events, or primary targets of events that they benefit from. For this reason, they are often coded differently from patients and take oblique marking. Furthermore, the effect of the event is beneficial to beneficiaries, and this is a feature that separates them from maleficiaries and the ‘affectees’ (a cover term for both beneficiaries and maleficiaries), if we use the editors’ terminology. However, the editors note that some languages do not differentiate between benefaction and malefaction and treat them both as affectees of the event. Finally, the beneficiaries are usually animate, and this feature distinguishes them from several other non-core participants, such as instruments and locatives.

The introduction lists the formal mechanisms that are used to code beneficiaries. These are case morphology, with dative being a commonly used marker crosslinguistically; adpositions; serial verb constructions if a language possesses no case morphology; and applicativization, whereby a verb takes the applicative affix and the affectee, either beneficiary or maleficiary, takes the direct object morphology and position in a clause. In addition to these, when thinking about the semantics of the beneficiary coding, the said markers can be either specific and occur only in certain types of constructions, or they can be generic and occur in several types of construction expressing benefaction or even malefaction. The editors also discuss the polysemy of beneficiary marking and list the semantic roles that may receive identical marking across languages: recipient, possessor, maleficiary, experiencer, reason/(indirect) cause, goal, and causee.

This book contains seventeen articles, and the majority of them present studies on individual languages. However, four contributions address crosslinguistic issues, such as benefactive applicative periphrases in Eurasia, the semantics of benefactives, morpho-syntactic division of benefactives and malefactives, and the typology of purposive constructions and benefactives. The remaining articles investigate various types of benefactive constructions in a vast variety of languages, such as Salish, Toba, Mapdungun, English, Dutch, French, German, Finnish, Laz, Koalib, Gumer, Chamba-Daka, Tashelhiyt, Thai, Korean, and Japanese.

In sum, this book offers valuable insight into the questions dealing with benefaction and malefaction in languages around the world.

Reviewed by Anthony DeFazio, New York University

Few texts for language teachers show how theoretical linguistics can clarify language teaching practices. Vivian Cook’s work demonstrates how the complexities of language learning can be understood in the context of linguistic theory. Melinda Whong’s text, which attempts, mostly successfully, to do the same, can be added to this body of work. Most of the book is written within a mentalist/generative framework, although other approaches to language are also explored.

The book is divided into eight succinct chapters, each focusing on an aspect of language related to language teaching, and each chapter concludes with questions for analysis and reflection. The introductory chapter briefly focuses on language from generative, cognitive, functionalist perspectives, and concludes with a brief survey of language acquisition. Ch. 2 offers a fast-paced historical overview of language teaching and shows how approaches are grounded in history. This chapter is unique in its inclusion of a discussion of both structure dependency and the markedness differential hypothesis within the context of second-language teaching, topics not usually found in a chapter on pedagogy.

Ch. 3 looks at language as a biological property, with an emphasis on the Chomskyan tradition. Universal grammar (UG)-constrained development and the critical period hypothesis are discussed as is second language (L2) instruction. This chapter also references the gap between theoretical linguistics and classroom applications, and once again iterates that the aim of the text is to provide these connections.

The following two chapters explore language and communication (Ch. 4) and implications for teaching (Ch. 5). Ch. 4 touches on sociocultural, functional, and cognitive approaches to language in more detail and emphasizes that the essential differences between these approaches and the generative one is emphasis on meaning. The author also explains John Truscott and Michael Sharwood Smith’s modular on-line growth and use of language (MOGUL) framework in some detail. Ch. 5 takes as its starting point Bill Van Patten and Jessica Williams’s observations about what the theory of second language acquisition (SLA) needs to explain and unpacks each observation for the reader, drawing out implications for language teaching in the process. This chapter will prove especially useful to in- and pre-services teachers.

Ch. 6 focuses on methods and techniques often found in second-language classrooms. These include the natural approach, silent way, suggestopedia, and community language teaching. The chapter ends with a discussion on task-based teaching and the lexical approach as complementary communicative methods.

The author turns more directly toward practice in her last two chapters, presenting the reader with a lesson plan and explaining how it works from both a pedagogical and a theoretical perspective. The final chapter shows how the same topic can be used for different linguistic levels and age groups and explores how a teacher might adapt a lesson plan in this way, providing explanation for such adaptation. A helpful glossary ends the book.

Instructors looking for a text that is well-organized and that demonstrates how practice can be clarified by theory will welcome this text. Readers without any previous knowledge of formal linguistics may find the text daunting at first but the clear writing style, abundant examples, and strategic repetition of key ideas help the reader overcome any initial difficulties.

Reviewed by José Mateo, University of Alicante

In 1997, Joseph H. Danks, Gregory M. Shreve, Stephen B. Fountain, and Michael K. McBeath published a volume devoted to the cognitive processes involved in translation and interpreting. In those years, translation studies had started to diversify and address new theoretical and methodological approaches, crossing the threshold of language and addressing new perspectives such as communication, interculturality, or, as was the case at hand, cognition.

Thirteen years later, Gregory M. Shreve and Erik Angelone have published this new work which, as they claim, reviews what seems to have been an explosion of cognition-based translation studies. Although certain lines of research that looked promising in 1997 have led to an impasse today, others which were incipient then are now thriving, as this book shows well. The book is divided into three parts: methodological innovation, research design and research issues, and integration of the translation process and cognitive sciences research.

The first part opens with Erik Angelone’s study on screen-recording and think-aloud protocols to understand translators’ problem-solving behaviors. Contributions by Barbara Dragsted; by Gregory M. Shreve, Elizabeth Lacruz, and Erik Angelone; and by Antin Fougner Rydning and Christian Lachaud approach the issue of keystroke-logging and eye-tracking from three different pespectives: (i) the way translators coordinate source language comprehension and target language production; (ii) the effects of syntactic difficulty on cognitive effort in sight translation; and (iii) the impact of context and translating skills on the comprehension and reformulation of polysemous words. Fabio Alves, Erich Steiner, Stella Neumann, Silvia Hansen-Schirra, and Adriana Pagano’s work integrates product-and process-based translation with the use of annotated translation corpora, keystroke-logging and eye-tracking, and retrospective verbalizations. Finally, Sharon O’Brien investigates the use of eye-tracking in controlled language and readability applied to machine translation and computer-assisted translation tool design.

The second part of the book opens with Ricardo Muñoz Martín’s description of a functionalist, cognitive translatology framework, and a set of principles necessary for translation process research. Gyde Hansen offers a cautious view of the application of empirical models to research process and advocates for combining empirical science and the liberal arts methodologies to the different translation processes. Finally, Riitta Jääskeläinen approaches the issue of expertise in professional and amateur translators.

In the final part of the book, K. Anders Ericsson advocates the integration of cognitive science concepts into translation and interpretation research. Barbara Moser-Mercer focuses on the cognitive processes involved in the acquisition of interpreting expertise. Bruce J. Diamond and Gregory M. Shreve aim to integrate translation process research and recent neurological and physiological findings. Erik Angelone’s chapter on uncertainty management nurtures on the concept of metacognition originally used in previous studies of cognition and learning. The interdisciplinary approach of Maxim I. Stamenov, Alexander Gerganov, and Ivo D. Popivanov applies psychological priming techniques to the bilingual lexicons accessed in translation. The book closes with Sandra L. Halverson’s defense of the relationship between translation process research and advances in cognitive science.