Reviewed by Taras Shmiher, Ivan Franko National University, Ukraine

The manifestation of individual experience in the translation process is the focus of this volume by Birgitta Englund Dimitrova. Because translation is a cognitively complex process that involves both linguistic competence and sociocultural views and conceptions, the author elucidates various aspects of translation norms. Her objectives are to investigate the process of performing a translation task in participants with different experience in translating, to analyze explicitation as a translation phenomenon, and to elaborate a new research method.

Ch. 2 explores the interdisciplinary theoretical background, which incorporates translation studies, cognitive psychology, and contrastive linguistics. Although the pedagogical and research perspectives of the fundamental term explicitation vary, in this study, explicitation refers to the explicit expression in the target text of logical links that are implicit in the source text. Throughout the literature, translation ability, translation competence, and expertise also prove to be problematic concepts. Monolingual writing serves as a model for the translation process: its three components—planning, text generation, and revision—each include several strategies or phases. Translation norms can explain most questions connected with the impact on a product and process in different translation situations.

The method of the study, as presented in Ch. 3, is introspection-oriented. The data were obtained using think-aloud protocols from nine professional translators, translation students, and language students. The source text describes the life of Taras H. Shevchenko, the national poet of Ukraine.

Ch. 4 examines how differences in amount of translation experience correlate with planning, generating, and revising a translated text. Four factors are analyzed: temporal characteristics, initial planning, segmentation of the writing process, and revision patterns. The quantitative data make obvious the variation between the participants.

The author examines issues of explicitation in Ch. 5. A theoretical discussion of Russian and Swedish text connectives identifies three types of implicit links: asyndetic (or implicit) additive coordination within a sentence, implicit contrastive relations between sentences, and temporal and causal links.

Ch. 6 suggests further implications of the results as well as the problems of literal and nonliteral translation procedures, of norm-governed and strategic explications in translated texts, and of teaching translation.

Four appendices contain the Russian- and English-language texts, taken from an album of paintings by Taras Shevchenko (Kyiv, 1984) as well as the Swedish-language target texts of the participants and some excerpts from the analyzed translations.

This book presents ground-breaking research on translation process studies in terms of findings and the analytical methods employed.

Reviewed by William Salmon, Yale University

Yan Huang’s Pragmatics covers the core areas of Anglo-American pragmatics, such as implicature, presupposition, speech acts, and deixis, as well as the interface between pragmatics and areas such as semantics and syntax. H provides useful overviews of generally-agreed-upon concepts, and in those matters where there is less agreement, he adequately explores the debate. As such, H’s book often imparts the feel of a handbook as well as that of a textbook.

In the introductory chapter, H provides a history of Anglo-American pragmatics and explains the need for a theory of pragmatics within a larger, integrated linguistic theory. The book is then divided into two parts. Part 1, which contains Chs. 2–5, explores the central topics of pragmatics. Ch. 2 begins with conversational implicature, discussing H. P. Grice’s original arrangement of the cooperative principle and maxims as well as two neo-Gricean arrangements: Laurence Horn’s bipartite and Stephen Levinson’s tripartite reductions of Grice. Ch. 3 explores presupposition, the projection problem, and three approaches to the analysis of presupposition. Ch. 4 investigates speech acts, from the taxonomies of J. L. Austin and John Searle through indirect speech acts, politeness, and crosscultural variation. Ch. 5 covers deixis, from the basic categories of person, time, and space, to social and discourse deixis.

Part 2, which contains Chs. 6–8, considers pragmatics and its interfaces. Ch. 6 explores the interface of pragmatics and cognition, surveying relevance theory as well as Jerry Fodor’s theory of cognitive modularity. Ch. 7 discusses pragmatics and semantics; specifically, the idea of pragmatic intrusion into what is said. The comparison of Kent Bach’s implicature, relevance theory’s explicature, and François Recanati’s unarticulated constituents is particularly useful. In Ch. 8, H raises issues with Chomskian binding theory, arguing instead for a theory of anaphora in which pragmatics interacts with syntax. The book also contains an index and glossary as well as exercise sets (with solutions).

The manner in which H places the reader in the middle of the debates is one of the many strengths of this volume. Although this book seems to lack the range and depth of coverage of Stephen Levinson’s Pragmatics (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983), the volumes have different aims: Levinson’s book is an early and more comprehensive introduction to the field, covering a wide array of phenomena. Whereas, almost a quarter century later, H’s purpose is to explore the central problems of the field as well as the interface of pragmatics with related areas. This book is both timely and engaging and is well worth reading.

Reviewed by Agnieszka Pysz, Adam Mickiewicz University

The third edition of Chomsky’s universal grammar constitutes a refined and updated version of its two predecessors. Whereas the first edition (1988) drew on the mid-1980s version of Noam Chomsky’s theory and the second edition (1996) incorporated some of his 1990s advancements, the latest edition enriches the previous material with the Chomskyan enterprise of the 2000s. The book comprises eight chapters.

Ch. 1, ‘The nature of universal grammar’ (1–27), outlines the view based on universal grammar (UG), from the early model of Syntactic structures (1957) to its later incarnations in the form of the minimalist program. Ch. 2, ‘Principles, parameters and language acquisition’ (28–60), is divided into two parts: Part 1 is devoted to the idea of principles and parameters, whereas Part 2 covers issues related to language acquisition, such as the language acquisition device and the poverty-of-the-stimulus argument.

The focus of Chs. 3 and 4 is structure and movement, viewed through government and binding theory. Ch. 3, ‘Structure in the government/binding model’ (61–120), discusses modules of grammar relevant to deep (D)-structure—namely, theta theory, control theory, and X-bar theory. Ch. 4, ‘Movement in government/binding theory’ (121–84), discusses basic movement types (e.g. A-, A-‘, head-movement), their implementation (e.g. substitution vs. adjunction), and their restrictions (e.g. subjacency).

The next two chapters explore language acquisition. Ch. 5, ‘Chomskyan approaches to language acquisition’ (185–220), concentrates on first language acquisition; specifically, on the types of evidence available to language learners and the concept of language development (as distinct from acquisition proper). Ch. 6, ‘Second language acquisition and universal grammar’ (221–41), discusses UG in the context of second language acquisition. The authors explore the ways second language acquisition differs from first language acquisition and what implication this has for second language learners—for example, how it is possible for several grammars to coexist in the mind of one speaker.

The focus of Chs. 7 and 8 is minimalism. Ch. 7, ‘Structure in the minimalist program’ (242–70), presents the minimalist conception of phrase structure. It reviews Chomsky’s (1995) bare phrase structure and presents the minimalist approach towards adjunction and linearization. Ch. 8, ‘Movement in the minimalist program’ (271–309), provides the minimalist definition and motivation for movement and characterizes it in terms of direction and locality. The chapter ends with a summary of Chomsky’s (2001) phase system.

Cook and Newson’s work is a must for those who want to familiarize themselves with one of the most revolutionary theories of language. The book is not only well-written but also well-designed and is an excellent introduction to Chomskyan linguistics.

REFERENCES

CHOMSKY, NOAM. 1957. Syntactic structures. Berlin: Mouton.

CHOMSKY, NOAM. 1995. The minimalist program. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

CHOMSKY, NOAM. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Ken Hale: A life in language, ed. by Michael Kenstowicz, 1–52. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Reviewed by Agnieszka Pysz, Adam Mickiewicz University

As stated in the introduction, this Festschrift does not aspire to do full justice to the breadth of Günther Grewendorf’s interests. It does, however, aim to reflect his body of work as justly as possible. The volume, which includes twenty-three contributions by Grewendorf’s students, friends, and colleagues, is divided into three parts, each of which reflects a separate area of Grewendorf’s research. Part 1,‘Form’, revolves around the domains of morphology, lexical semantics, and their interface with syntax; Part 2, ‘Structure’, is dominated by issues concerning information structure (IS); and Part 3, ‘Grammar’, examines the language faculty as well as the interface of core grammar with the systems of interpretation and use.

Part 1, which contains six articles, opens with Werner Abraham’s discussion of the mechanics of underspecification, which is based on the differences between superficially identical participial forms. Manfred Bierwisch presents an analysis of German reflexives that captures their peculiar behavior. Sascha W. Felix considers learnability problems related to the acquisition of Japanese word structure. Tilman N. Höhle deals with the variation observed in three-verb clusters in German dialects. Manfred Krifka provides an account of the pronoun system and the predicate marker in Tok Pisin. An original treatment of pro-drop is offered by Gereon Müller, who builds his proposal on the key concept of impoverishment.

Part 2 consists of ten papers. Josef Bayer deals with A’-movement in the left periphery of German sentences. He reconsiders some aspects of operator status and weak crossover. Adriana Belletti advances a uniform analysis of Italian constructions that involve clitic left dislocation and relative clauses with resumption. Werner Frey gives an account of the German object pronoun es appearing in clause-initial position. Gisbert Fanselow furnishes conceptual and empirical arguments against the idea of encoding IS directly in the syntax. IS phenomena are also discussed by Katharina Hartmann and Malte Zimmermann, who draw on the Chadic language Dghweɗe. The focus of Cecilia Poletto’s contribution is scrambling in Old Italian. Luigi Rizzi puts forward an analysis of inversion phenomena in Romance (in general) and Italian (in particular). Joachim Sabel argues for a link between the morphological properties of the C-system and the (non-)availability of nonfinite interrogatives and relatives. Mamoru Saito, referring to data from Japanese, supports an analysis of there-sentences via associate raising or expletive replacement. Jochen Zeller investigates applicatives in the Bantu language Kinyarwanda, which he proposes are best analyzed in terms of preposition incorporation.

Part 3 includes seven contributions. Rainer Dietrich addresses the question of whether the language faculty obeys its own rhythm or whether it is clocked along with other cognitive abilities. Hans-Martin Gärtner and Markus Steinbach argue against employing exclusively syntactic tools to handle phenomena related to speech acts and point of view. Georg Meggle offers a philosophical discussion of the evolution of human language in the context of Charles Darwin’s package hypothesis. Monika Rathert looks at the issue of comprehensibility in forensic linguistics through the prism of frame semantics. Tom Roeper’s contribution is devoted to the syntax of focus binding. Dietmar Zaefferer reconsiders some of his and Grewendorf’s ideas about the conceptualization of sentence mood. Finally, Thomas Ede Zimmermann examines the status of semantic values assigned to linguistic expressions by ‘realistic’ semantic theories.

One of the major strengths of this volume lies in its broad spectrum of topics. The book is, undoubtedly, a worthy tribute to Grewendorf. It is also a valuable publication that documents a range of important strands in theoretical linguistics.

Reviewed by Carolin Patzelt, University of Hamburg

Two questions take precedence in the field of bilingual language acquisition: first, whether or not children are capable of separating languages, and second, what role language dominance plays. Here, Tanja Kupisch explores both of these questions in her study of the development of determiners in eight bilingual children. Her primary goal is to gain insight into the interplay of language influence and language dominance. Prenominal determiners are ideal for testing this issue because they constitute a grammatical domain in which German and Romance languages differ.

In Ch. 1, ‘Approaches to the study of child language acquisition’ (12–32), K introduces the theoretical models that will be tested. Ch. 2, ‘Language influence, language separation and language dominance’ (33–47), is an overview of previous research. Crucially, K stresses that there can be language influence despite separation. Ch. 3, ‘The bilingual database’ (48–55), details the database and the language balance of the bilingual children.

In Ch. 4, ‘The forms and the distribution of determiners in French, German and Italian’ (56–75), K compares determiner use in French, Italian, and German and explains why determiner acquisition is more difficult in German than in Romance languages. In Ch. 5, ‘The syntactic representation of noun phrases’ (76–99), K discusses two competing models, the uniformity hypothesis and the variability hypothesis, arguing in favor of the variability hypothesis. She presents Thomas Roeper’s model of semantically motivated nodes in the noun phrase, which assumes that children build a syntactic tree  from the bottom up: they start from the least specific type of noun phrase (i.e. a bare noun) and progress toward the most specific (i.e. a determiner phrase). K suggests that acquisition data may be useful to test Roeper’s theoretical proposal.

After a presentation of the literature on determiner omission in language acquisition (Ch. 6), K explores longitudinal data in Ch. 7, ‘Bare nouns in bilingual children acquiring French, German and Italian’ (123–45). She demonstrates that although the languages of bilingual children may influence each other, this influence cannot be attributed to language dominance alone. Rather, the combination of languages plays a decisive role.

Ch. 8, ‘Determiner functions in previous acquisition studies’ (146–56), presents an overview of the literature on semantic and pragmatic distinctions encoded by determiners. Early on, determiners appear to be used for deictic and naming functions as well as to express specificity.

In Ch. 9, ‘Article functions in two bilingual children acquiring German and French/Italian’ (157–205), K concludes that, contrary to what previous studies suggest, semantic and pragmatic distinctions develop very early in children. Syntactic acquisition is completed more abruptly than semantic acquisition, and no correlation between language dominance and language influence can be found. Finally, K suggests a modification of Roeper’s model on the basis of her results.

Based on a large, meticulously collected database, this book provides interesting insight into bilingual language acquisition.

Reviewed by Ana R. Luís, University of Coimbra

This handy pocket-size book, with roughly 400 entries, defines both the standard descriptive terminology and theory-internal concepts of morphology using clear and simple language. The entries range from affix-typology and word-formation processes to morphosyntactic categories and meaning-form correspondences, including entries on theoretical models of morphology (e.g. word-and-paradigm, distributed morphology, natural morphology) and theory-internal concepts (e.g. moneme by André Martinet, constructional iconicity from natural morphology, morphome by Mark Aronoff, f-morpheme and l-morpheme by Morris Halle and Alec Marantz). Other entries focus on the place of morphology in grammar (e.g. separation hypothesis, level-ordering, checking theory, mirror principle) and on the psycholinguistic processing of morphology (e.g. connectionism,dual-route model). A praiseworthy feature of the glossary is the extensive cross-referencing between entries.

This book consists of six parts. The glossary (12–115) is preceded by a preface (i–viii) and an introduction (1–9). The preface gives brief instructions on how to use the glossary. The introduction offers a broad survey of the field, giving special attention to the history of morphology and to the development of its terminology. Then, following the glossary, there is a listing of fundamental works (116), a select bibliography of books on morphology (117–22), and an index (123–24). Both the fundamental works and the select bibliography are intentionally short and restricted to authors who, according to Laurie Bauer, occupy a privileged position in the history of morphology.

Although the glossary and the bibliography provide a vast array of fundamental information, some terms are nevertheless missing: morphology is perhaps the most striking absence, although B provides a short definition in the opening paragraph of the introduction. There are no entries for allostem, mobile affix, or ambifix, even though these are by now familiar terms. Contemporary models of morphology, such as realisation-inferential morphology, stratal morphology, and prosodic morphology would have reinforced the author’s claim that ‘morphology is a developing science’ (9). Additionally, important figures in the field, such as Paul Kiparsky, Gregory Stump, John McCarthy, and Alan Prince might have been added to the select bibliography. These gaps, however, are not serious.

Overall, this book clearly succeeds in offering an overview of morphology as a research field ‘at the centre of theoretical attention’ (9). Compared to other morphology glossaries that are available in textbooks (e.g. Aronoff & Fudeman 2005; Bauer 1988; Haspelmath 2002) this book covers a wider range of terms from various branches of morphology and theoretical traditions. As the first glossary of morphology to have ever appeared as a separate publication, it constitutes an excellent reference for any new student of the field, both undergraduate and graduate, as well for nonspecialists who occasionally need fundamental information about morphology.

Reviewed by Joanna Nykiel, University of Silesia

In the introduction to this volume, the editors discuss the use of the terms fragment and nonsentential. Ultimately, they note that the choice of term is determined by which framework is adopted. Because the goal of this volume is to set the stage for an independent analysis of nonsententials, it contains chapters written from the perspective of several related disciplines. Six of the twelve chapters revolve around the notion of a formal framework of nonsententials. Among these, only one—by Jason Merchant (‘“Small structures”: A sententialist perspective’)—provides an explanation for the syntax of nonsententials along derivational (or sentential) lines. Merchant’s account integrates sentence fragments into their full underlying versions.

In ‘Toward a nonsentential analysis in generative grammar’, Ellen Barton examines the strengths and weaknesses of sentential and nonsentential proposals as well as a proposal that is mixture of the two. Her chapter is an excellent theoretical background for those that follow. Ljiljana Progovac’s nonsentential proposal (‘The syntax of nonsententials: Small clauses and phrases at the root’) systematically relates the special features of nonsententials (i.e. lack of tense node, bare nouns, default case, frequent nonassertive readings) to their direct generation, couched within the minimalist framework.

In ‘Neither fragments nor ellipsis’, Robert J. Stainton presents a critical assessment of Merchant’s theory. He claims that Merchant provides an overly complicated architecture to handle fragments. However, Stainton does not offer any answers; he merely indicates that a sentential approach, which does not account for all of the data, leaves a great deal unexplained. Eugenia Casielles—somewhat unnecessarily—reiterates Barton’s overview of sentential and nonsentential analyses in ‘Big questions, small answers’. She suggests a mixed account, with greater emphasis on the nonsentential dimension. In ‘Extending the nonsentential analysis: The case of special registers’, Kate Paesani contributes evidence from special registers that easily embeds within Progovac’s program.

In ‘The narrowing acquisition path: From expressive small clauses to declaratives’, Christopher Potts and Thomas Roeper sketch the development from a small-clause grammar to an adult grammar in first language acquisition, in which some small clauses (i.e. those expressive in content) are kept, whereas others are gradually lost as more sophisticated structures are acquired. Nicola Work addresses second language acquisition effects that support an initial nonsentential grammar in ‘Nonsententials in second language acquisition’. These effects demonstrate features identified by Progovac.

The next two chapters offer insight into agrammatic speech. Herman Kolk discusses aphasic patients’ preference for nonsententials as a result of reduced competence in ‘How language adapts to the brain: An analysis of agrammatic aphasia’, and in ‘Nonsententials and agrammatism’, Patricia Siple examines how patients alternate between sentential and nonsentential grammars, while consistently preserving each grammars’ respective principles.

The last two chapters add pidgin (Donald Winford, ‘Reduced syntax in (prototypical) pidgins’) and creole (Walter F. Edwards, ‘Copula variation in Guyanese Creole and AAVE: Implications for nonsentential grammar’) data that strengthen Progovac’s proposal. The volume concludes with an epilogue, which weighs the merits of nonsentential and sentential approaches in addition to identifying new directions for research.

These contributions will either persuade linguists to await more development in the analyses of nonsententials or to take up an interest in them. However, the text deserves one overall criticism: by underrepresenting sentential and mixed analyses, it suffers from an imbalance of interests. Although this volume successfully defends a nonsentential analysis, certainly, there must be more to nonsententials than just independent syntax.

Reviewed by Marc Pierce, University of Texas at Austin

In many respects, Frisian has often been the Cinderella, so to speak, of Germanic linguistics. Very few universities, especially in North America, offer courses on Frisian (whether Old or Modern), and in most courses on Germanic linguistics, data from Frisian is often only touched on lightly or brushed aside entirely. One of the reasons for this relative neglect has been the lack of suitable handbooks. For Old Frisian, for instance, while the handbooks by Willem L van Helten (Altostfriesische Grammatik, Leeuwarden, A. Meijer, 1890, reprinted 1970) and Walther Steller (Abriss der altfriesischen Grammatik, Halle: Niemeyer, 1928) are certainly still valuable, there has long been a need for an up-to-date handbook of the language written in English. This need has now been met with this book.

Written by a recognized expert in Frisian, the book is divided into two parts. The first part consists of seven main chapters: ‘History: The when, where, and what of Old Frisian’ (1–19), ‘Phonology: The sounds of Old Frisian’ (21–51), ‘Morphology: The inflections of Old Frisian’ (53–86), ‘Lexicology: Word formation and loan words in Old Frisian’ (87–96), ‘Syntax: The sentence elements of Old Frisian’ (97–108), ‘Dialectology: The faces of Old Frisian’ (109–18), and ‘Two long-standing problems: The periodization of Frisian and the Anglo-Frisian complex’ (119–28). The second part of the volume is a reader (129–86), containing a wide range of Old Frisian texts with accompanying notes and commentary. The volume concludes with two glossaries (for words and names, respectively), an extensive bibliography, and an index.

While one should normally be cautious about evaluating a textbook before one has taught with it, this work seems eminently suitable as a textbook. The grammatical descriptions are clear, concise, and, to the best of my knowledge, accurate. The explanatory notes are also praiseworthy, as they will help clarify tricky passages, and the sizable glossaries only enhance this book’s value. I have also consulted it on a number of occasions to answer questions about Old Frisian. I would not hesitate to use this book to teach Old Frisian to graduate students or advanced undergraduates, and the author is to be lauded for his significant contribution to Frisian studies.

Reviewed by Silvia Kouwenberg and Jodianne Scott, University of the West Indies

Is codeswitching (CS) subject to constraints on grammar? This question is several decades old, and attempts to answer it have been frustrated by large numbers of ill-behaved utterances. Typically, responses take two forms: typological, in which different types of intrasentential CS are distinguished and constraints are proposed for each type; and model-internal, in which constraints are relaxed to bring all instances of CS within the same fold. Pieter Muysken takes the first approach in Bilingual speech: A typology of code-mixing (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000). In this volume, Carol Myers-Scotton’s solution is of the second kind. In fact, her model is intended to account for language contact phenomena more generally, witness the volume’s title as well as the chapters on ‘Convergence and attrition’ and ‘Lexical borrowing, split (mixed) languages, and creole formation’.

The foundation of M-S’s approach, which she first developed in Duelling languages: Grammatical structure in codeswitching (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1993), is provided by the matrix language frame (MLF) model. The basic idea of the MLF model is that languages never participate equally in CS. Instead, one language provides the MLF into which elements of the embedded language(s) (EL) are inserted. It follows that there is also asymmetry in the imposition of grammatical constraints: EL elements must comply with the ML’s structural constraints. This is captured in the abstract level model, which requires congruence at different levels of analysis between ML and EL material to facilitate insertion of the EL. The 4-M model, which makes a distinction between content morphemes and different system morphemes (i.e. roughly, functional morphemes), accounts for the possible combinations of morphemes from the participating languages in a given frame, predicting that late system morphemes, whose functions are external to their head’s projection, are ML morphemes.

All this seems pretty straightforward and promising as a testable model—until composite CS is brought up to deal with CS of the ‘ill-behaved’ kind. M-S brings these data within the reach of the model by relaxing the constraints on the determination of constituent structure and the selection of late system morphemes. This allows a composite ML to be formed and provides ‘an abstract frame composed of grammatical projections from more than one variety’ (22). M-S considers composite CS to be produced by codeswitchers whose proficiency in both participating languages is insufficient (8)—as compared to classic codeswitchers who are at least fluent in the ML—and describes composite CS in the context of language loss and language shift. In other words, instances of CS that fail to conform to the predictions of the MLF model can be thrust aside as aberrations. But who is to say that the speaker who inserted an Italian auxiliary into a French frame in No, parce que hanno donné des cours ‘No, because they have taught courses’ (Muysken 2000:23) is nonfluent in French and Italian? Or that the speaker who felt obliged to use a Spanish case-marker in They invite a El Boss ‘They invite El Boss’ (Muysken 2000:39) is nonfluent in English and Spanish? Both these cases involve the insertion of late system morphemes.

M-S has developed a model that accounts for ‘the good, the bad, and the ugly’. But it may just be that its price is the loss of the hallmark of scientific models: falsifiability.

Reviewed by Thomas Hoffmann, University of Regensburg

Comprising more than 900,000 words, the Hong Kong corpus of spoken English (prosodic; HKCSE) is the first major corpus of authentic, naturally-occurring speech in which all utterances have been analysed within David Brazil’s discourse intonation system. Now Winnie Cheng, Chris Greaves, and Martin Warren provide an in-depth introduction to the corpus and present a great number of preliminary findings. Additionally, the accompanying CD contains the prosodically transcribed corpus together with iConc, a special software program for querying the corpus.

Ch. 1 (1–10) begins with information on the composition of the HKCSE (including the text types sampled as well as information on the first language (L1) status of the recorded speakers—namely, Hong Kong second language [L2] vs. native L1 speakers). Then, in Ch. 2 (11–30), an overview of discourse intonation theory is provided that discusses the four levels of analysis of Brazil’s approach: (i) prominence (i.e. prominent vs. nonprominent syllables), (ii) tone (i.e. rise-fall, fall, rise, fall-rise, level), (iii) key, and (iv) termination (both key and termination are characterized by the parameters high, mid, and low). Ch. 3 (31–39) outlines the orthographic and prosodic transcription methodology adopted for the corpus, while Ch. 4 (41–60) is a short manual to the iConc concordancing program.

After these background chapters, the remainder of the book provides more detailed analyses of the realization of the various discourse intonation levels in the corpus. First Ch. 5 (61–83) deals with size of tone units, then Ch. 6 (85–123) outlines the distribution of prominent syllables in tone units across text types and speakers (e.g. there is a tendency for Hong Kong L2 speakers to use more single prominence tone units than native speakers). Next, Ch. 7 (125–59) focuses on tone choice in the HKCSE (prosodic). Among the many findings discussed, C, G,&W stress, for example, the prevalence of level tones in all of the subcorpora (with L2 speakers employing this tone choice even more often than native speakers). Finally, the referring and proclaiming use of tones as well as the assertion of dominance and control in discourse via tone choice are examined in this chapter.

Ch. 8 (161–91) looks at the distribution of key and termination in the HKCSE (prosodic), investigating issues such as the contrastive and particularizing use of high selections or the phenomenon of pitch concord. Finally, Ch. 9 (193–97) provides a brief summary of the main findings as well implications for future research and language teaching. Additionally, there is an appendix (207–318) that contains references to all of the previous publications on the HKCSE (prosodic) as well as several tables with descriptive statistical information on the quantitative occurrence of the various discourse intonation elements.

This well-written volume provides an accessible introduction to discourse intonation and discusses a wealth of prosodic data from the HKCSE (prosodic). However, it is hoped that future releases of the corpus will not only contain orthographically annotated transcriptions but will also allow researchers access to the original sound files.