IEnglish Language
Identifieur interne : 001676 ( Istex/Corpus ); précédent : 001675; suivant : 001677IEnglish Language
Auteurs : Evelien Keizer ; Mohammed Albakry ; Jeroen Van De Weijer ; Bettelou Los ; Wim Van Der Wurff ; Beáta Gyuris ; Julie Coleman ; Edward Callary ; Lieselotte Anderwald ; Andrea Sand ; Camilla Vasquez ; Laura HidalgoSource :
- The Year's Work in English Studies [ 0084-4144 ] ; 2006.
Abstract
This chapter has twelve sections: 1. General; 2. History of English Linguistics; 3. Phonetics and Phonology; 4. Morphology; 5. Syntax; 6. Semantics; 7. Lexicography, Lexicology and Lexical Semantics; 8. Onomastics; 9. Dialectology and Sociolinguistics; 10. New Englishes and Creolistics; 11. Pragmatics and Discourse Analysis; 12. Stylistics. Section 1 is by Evelien Keizer; section 2 is by Mohammed Albakry; section 3 is by Jeroen van de Weijer; sections 4 and 5 are by Bettelou Los and Wim van der Wurff; section 6 is by Beàta Gyuris; section 7 is by Julie Coleman; section 8 is by Edward Callary; section 9 is by Lieselotte Anderwald; section 10 is by Andrea Sand; section 11 is by Camilla Vasquez; section 12 is by Laura Hidalgo.
Url:
DOI: 10.1093/ywes/mal001
Links to Exploration step
ISTEX:A670BB1E867BF142D05FDC325B2FAF3F13136C0DLe document en format XML
<record><TEI wicri:istexFullTextTei="biblStruct"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title>IEnglish Language</title><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Keizer, Evelien" sort="Keizer, Evelien" uniqKey="Keizer E" first="Evelien" last="Keizer">Evelien Keizer</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Amsterdam</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Albakry, Mohammed" sort="Albakry, Mohammed" uniqKey="Albakry M" first="Mohammed" last="Albakry">Mohammed Albakry</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Middle Tennessee State University</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Van De Weijer, Jeroen" sort="Van De Weijer, Jeroen" uniqKey="Van De Weijer J" first="Jeroen" last="Van De Weijer">Jeroen Van De Weijer</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Leiden</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Los, Bettelou" sort="Los, Bettelou" uniqKey="Los B" first="Bettelou" last="Los">Bettelou Los</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Radboud University Nijmegen</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Van Der Wurff, Wim" sort="Van Der Wurff, Wim" uniqKey="Van Der Wurff W" first="Wim" last="Van Der Wurff">Wim Van Der Wurff</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Gyuris, Beata" sort="Gyuris, Beata" uniqKey="Gyuris B" first="Beáta" last="Gyuris">Beáta Gyuris</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Hungarian Academy of Science</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Coleman, Julie" sort="Coleman, Julie" uniqKey="Coleman J" first="Julie" last="Coleman">Julie Coleman</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Leicester</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Callary, Edward" sort="Callary, Edward" uniqKey="Callary E" first="Edward" last="Callary">Edward Callary</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Northern Illinois University</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Anderwald, Lieselotte" sort="Anderwald, Lieselotte" uniqKey="Anderwald L" first="Lieselotte" last="Anderwald">Lieselotte Anderwald</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Albert-Ludwigs University, Frieburg</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Sand, Andrea" sort="Sand, Andrea" uniqKey="Sand A" first="Andrea" last="Sand">Andrea Sand</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Albert-Ludwigs University, Freiburg</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Vasquez, Camilla" sort="Vasquez, Camilla" uniqKey="Vasquez C" first="Camilla" last="Vasquez">Camilla Vasquez</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of South Florida</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Hidalgo, Laura" sort="Hidalgo, Laura" uniqKey="Hidalgo L" first="Laura" last="Hidalgo">Laura Hidalgo</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Downing University Autonoma, Madrid</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></titleStmt><publicationStmt><idno type="wicri:source">ISTEX</idno><idno type="RBID">ISTEX:A670BB1E867BF142D05FDC325B2FAF3F13136C0D</idno><date when="2006" year="2006">2006</date><idno type="doi">10.1093/ywes/mal001</idno><idno type="url">https://api.istex.fr/document/A670BB1E867BF142D05FDC325B2FAF3F13136C0D/fulltext/pdf</idno><idno type="wicri:Area/Istex/Corpus">001676</idno><idno type="wicri:explorRef" wicri:stream="Istex" wicri:step="Corpus" wicri:corpus="ISTEX">001676</idno></publicationStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct><analytic><title level="a">IEnglish Language</title><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Keizer, Evelien" sort="Keizer, Evelien" uniqKey="Keizer E" first="Evelien" last="Keizer">Evelien Keizer</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Amsterdam</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Albakry, Mohammed" sort="Albakry, Mohammed" uniqKey="Albakry M" first="Mohammed" last="Albakry">Mohammed Albakry</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Middle Tennessee State University</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Van De Weijer, Jeroen" sort="Van De Weijer, Jeroen" uniqKey="Van De Weijer J" first="Jeroen" last="Van De Weijer">Jeroen Van De Weijer</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Leiden</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Los, Bettelou" sort="Los, Bettelou" uniqKey="Los B" first="Bettelou" last="Los">Bettelou Los</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Radboud University Nijmegen</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Van Der Wurff, Wim" sort="Van Der Wurff, Wim" uniqKey="Van Der Wurff W" first="Wim" last="Van Der Wurff">Wim Van Der Wurff</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Gyuris, Beata" sort="Gyuris, Beata" uniqKey="Gyuris B" first="Beáta" last="Gyuris">Beáta Gyuris</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Hungarian Academy of Science</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Coleman, Julie" sort="Coleman, Julie" uniqKey="Coleman J" first="Julie" last="Coleman">Julie Coleman</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of Leicester</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Callary, Edward" sort="Callary, Edward" uniqKey="Callary E" first="Edward" last="Callary">Edward Callary</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Northern Illinois University</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Anderwald, Lieselotte" sort="Anderwald, Lieselotte" uniqKey="Anderwald L" first="Lieselotte" last="Anderwald">Lieselotte Anderwald</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Albert-Ludwigs University, Frieburg</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Sand, Andrea" sort="Sand, Andrea" uniqKey="Sand A" first="Andrea" last="Sand">Andrea Sand</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Albert-Ludwigs University, Freiburg</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Vasquez, Camilla" sort="Vasquez, Camilla" uniqKey="Vasquez C" first="Camilla" last="Vasquez">Camilla Vasquez</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>University of South Florida</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author><author wicri:is="90%"><name sortKey="Hidalgo, Laura" sort="Hidalgo, Laura" uniqKey="Hidalgo L" first="Laura" last="Hidalgo">Laura Hidalgo</name><affiliation><mods:affiliation>Downing University Autonoma, Madrid</mods:affiliation></affiliation></author></analytic><monogr></monogr><series><title level="j">The Year's Work in English Studies</title><idno type="ISSN">0084-4144</idno><imprint><publisher>Oxford University Press</publisher><date type="published" when="2006">2006</date><biblScope unit="volume">85</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">1</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="1">1</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="128">128</biblScope></imprint><idno type="ISSN">0084-4144</idno></series></biblStruct></sourceDesc><seriesStmt><idno type="ISSN">0084-4144</idno></seriesStmt></fileDesc><profileDesc><textClass></textClass></profileDesc></teiHeader><front><div type="abstract">This chapter has twelve sections: 1. General; 2. History of English Linguistics; 3. Phonetics and Phonology; 4. Morphology; 5. Syntax; 6. Semantics; 7. Lexicography, Lexicology and Lexical Semantics; 8. Onomastics; 9. Dialectology and Sociolinguistics; 10. New Englishes and Creolistics; 11. Pragmatics and Discourse Analysis; 12. Stylistics. Section 1 is by Evelien Keizer; section 2 is by Mohammed Albakry; section 3 is by Jeroen van de Weijer; sections 4 and 5 are by Bettelou Los and Wim van der Wurff; section 6 is by Beàta Gyuris; section 7 is by Julie Coleman; section 8 is by Edward Callary; section 9 is by Lieselotte Anderwald; section 10 is by Andrea Sand; section 11 is by Camilla Vasquez; section 12 is by Laura Hidalgo.</div></front></TEI><istex><corpusName>oup</corpusName><author><json:item><name>Evelien Keizer</name><affiliations><json:string>University of Amsterdam</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Mohammed Albakry</name><affiliations><json:string>Middle Tennessee State University</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Jeroen van de Weijer</name><affiliations><json:string>University of Leiden</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Bettelou Los</name><affiliations><json:string>Radboud University Nijmegen</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Wim van der Wurff</name><affiliations><json:string>University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Beáta Gyuris</name><affiliations><json:string>Hungarian Academy of Science</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Julie Coleman</name><affiliations><json:string>University of Leicester</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Edward Callary</name><affiliations><json:string>Northern Illinois University</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Lieselotte Anderwald</name><affiliations><json:string>Albert-Ludwigs University, Frieburg</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Andrea Sand</name><affiliations><json:string>Albert-Ludwigs University, Freiburg</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Camilla Vasquez</name><affiliations><json:string>University of South Florida</json:string></affiliations></json:item><json:item><name>Laura Hidalgo</name><affiliations><json:string>Downing University Autonoma, Madrid</json:string></affiliations></json:item></author><arkIstex>ark:/67375/HXZ-GC5MMT2D-L</arkIstex><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><originalGenre><json:string>research-article</json:string></originalGenre><abstract>This chapter has twelve sections: 1. General; 2. History of English Linguistics; 3. Phonetics and Phonology; 4. Morphology; 5. Syntax; 6. Semantics; 7. Lexicography, Lexicology and Lexical Semantics; 8. Onomastics; 9. Dialectology and Sociolinguistics; 10. New Englishes and Creolistics; 11. Pragmatics and Discourse Analysis; 12. Stylistics. Section 1 is by Evelien Keizer; section 2 is by Mohammed Albakry; section 3 is by Jeroen van de Weijer; sections 4 and 5 are by Bettelou Los and Wim van der Wurff; section 6 is by Beàta Gyuris; section 7 is by Julie Coleman; section 8 is by Edward Callary; section 9 is by Lieselotte Anderwald; section 10 is by Andrea Sand; section 11 is by Camilla Vasquez; section 12 is by Laura Hidalgo.</abstract><qualityIndicators><score>8.44</score><pdfWordCount>60962</pdfWordCount><pdfCharCount>376791</pdfCharCount><pdfVersion>1.5</pdfVersion><pdfPageCount>128</pdfPageCount><pdfPageSize>391 x 612 pts</pdfPageSize><refBibsNative>true</refBibsNative><abstractWordCount>120</abstractWordCount><abstractCharCount>733</abstractCharCount><keywordCount>0</keywordCount></qualityIndicators><title>IEnglish Language</title><genre><json:string>research-article</json:string></genre><host><title>The Year's Work in English Studies</title><language><json:string>unknown</json:string></language><issn><json:string>0084-4144</json:string></issn><publisherId><json:string>ywes</json:string></publisherId><volume>85</volume><issue>1</issue><pages><first>1</first><last>128</last></pages><genre><json:string>journal</json:string></genre><subject><json:item><value>Articles</value></json:item></subject></host><namedEntities><unitex><date><json:string>in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries</json:string><json:string>during the first century</json:string><json:string>1882</json:string><json:string>2000</json:string><json:string>in the 16th and 17th Centuries</json:string><json:string>1979</json:string><json:string>1860</json:string><json:string>in the eighteenth century</json:string><json:string>Eighteenth Century</json:string><json:string>2005</json:string><json:string>1715</json:string><json:string>1997</json:string><json:string>1990s</json:string><json:string>the twentieth century</json:string><json:string>1692</json:string><json:string>2001</json:string><json:string>1789</json:string><json:string>1993</json:string><json:string>1859</json:string><json:string>in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries</json:string><json:string>before the nineteenth century</json:string><json:string>1960s</json:string><json:string>2006</json:string><json:string>1850s</json:string><json:string>1998</json:string><json:string>the nineteenth century</json:string><json:string>1960</json:string><json:string>1976</json:string><json:string>1804</json:string><json:string>Seventeenth Century</json:string><json:string>2002</json:string><json:string>twentieth century</json:string><json:string>1994</json:string><json:string>1792</json:string><json:string>1903</json:string><json:string>1983</json:string><json:string>in the twentieth century</json:string><json:string>1800</json:string><json:string>1600s</json:string><json:string>1880</json:string><json:string>in the nineteenth century</json:string><json:string>nineteenth century</json:string><json:string>1970s</json:string><json:string>during the eighteenth century</json:string><json:string>1775</json:string><json:string>1250</json:string><json:string>2003</json:string><json:string>from the eighteenth century</json:string><json:string>1881</json:string><json:string>1991</json:string><json:string>the Eighteenth Century</json:string><json:string>1980s</json:string><json:string>in the twenty-first century</json:string><json:string>1967</json:string><json:string>1500s</json:string><json:string>2004</json:string><json:string>in the Twenty-First Century</json:string></date><geogName><json:string>Palmerston Islands</json:string><json:string>Island English</json:string><json:string>Bonin Islands</json:string><json:string>Morava</json:string><json:string>Abaco Island</json:string><json:string>Sanna</json:string><json:string>Irish Sea</json:string><json:string>Islands English</json:string><json:string>Kankakee rivers</json:string><json:string>Beckett</json:string></geogName><orgName><json:string>Stewart’s American Place-Names</json:string><json:string>Foundation Statements</json:string><json:string>African American English</json:string><json:string>African American Vernacular English</json:string><json:string>National Biography</json:string><json:string>Nigerian English and Cameroon English</json:string><json:string>American Dialects</json:string><json:string>Cameroon English</json:string><json:string>Speech Systems</json:string><json:string>New Zealand Workplaces</json:string><json:string>Homebodies and Army Brats</json:string><json:string>Jamaican Syllable Structure</json:string><json:string>African American and European American Voices</json:string><json:string>Canada Dry</json:string><json:string>National, Ethnic, Religious</json:string><json:string>Hungary and Lithuania</json:string><json:string>North American English, Lisa Green</json:string><json:string>American English</json:string><json:string>A Research Guide</json:string><json:string>Botswana, Malawi, Mozambique and South Africa</json:string><json:string>European American Vernacular English</json:string><json:string>American Civil War</json:string><json:string>Jamaican Acrolect</json:string><json:string>Jamaican Creole</json:string><json:string>Colloquial Singapore English</json:string><json:string>American Midland Dialect Region</json:string><json:string>Urban African American Vernacular English</json:string><json:string>Cambridge University</json:string><json:string>India, the Philippines and Singapore</json:string><json:string>American Geographers</json:string><json:string>US South</json:string><json:string>American Speech</json:string><json:string>Brunei Darussalam</json:string><json:string>American, Australian, New Zealand and South African English</json:string><json:string>University of Strathclyde</json:string><json:string>A Foundation for Grammatical Theory</json:string><json:string>African American Civil War</json:string><json:string>American Midwest</json:string><json:string>Cambridge International Corpus</json:string><json:string>South African University</json:string><json:string>Every New Zealand Prison</json:string><json:string>United States and Canada</json:string><json:string>Singapore English</json:string><json:string>Anglo-American Narratology</json:string><json:string>New Zealand, Jamaica, Kenya, India, Singapore and a</json:string><json:string>The International Review</json:string><json:string>CSE</json:string><json:string>US Board on Geographic Names</json:string><json:string>Fiji Hindi</json:string><json:string>British and American Present-Day English</json:string><json:string>Southern American English</json:string><json:string>Native American Placenames of the United States</json:string><json:string>India Today</json:string><json:string>University Press of Southern Denmark</json:string><json:string>Nova Scotia–Sierra Leone Connection</json:string><json:string>Earlier African American English</json:string><json:string>Jamaican English</json:string><json:string>Jamaican Creole, Tok Pisin, Hawaiian Creole English</json:string><json:string>Native American Toponyms</json:string><json:string>National Standard and English Language</json:string><json:string>American South</json:string><json:string>GSSEC</json:string><json:string>Native American Sequoyah</json:string><json:string>English Language Research on Computerized Corpora</json:string><json:string>UK and the US</json:string><json:string>Portuguese Tense and Aspect Systems</json:string><json:string>American Name Society, Executive Secretary of the US Board on Geographic Names</json:string><json:string>Research on African American English</json:string><json:string>New Zealand English</json:string><json:string>Oxford University</json:string><json:string>Australian and New Zealand English</json:string><json:string>Northern Ireland Border</json:string><json:string>UK Census</json:string><json:string>Society for Pidgin and Creole Linguistics</json:string><json:string>Research of Ceri George</json:string><json:string>Canada, and Canadians</json:string><json:string>Carleton University</json:string><json:string>Malaysia, Singapore, Hong Kong</json:string><json:string>American Civil War Generals</json:string><json:string>Demographic Change and American Dialectology</json:string><json:string>British National Corpus</json:string><json:string>American Family Names</json:string><json:string>JC</json:string><json:string>ONZE</json:string><json:string>Edinburgh University</json:string><json:string>Niger–Congo Languages</json:string><json:string>Durham University</json:string><json:string>Sequence Organization</json:string><json:string>Why China English Should Stand Alongside British, American</json:string><json:string>Monaco, Monte Carlo</json:string><json:string>Botswana English</json:string><json:string>A National Survey of North American Dialects</json:string><json:string>English and American English</json:string><json:string>India, Hong Kong and Singapore</json:string><json:string>India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka</json:string><json:string>Canada, Charles Boberg</json:string><json:string>National Language</json:string><json:string>Yale University</json:string><json:string>Kenyan and Tanzanian</json:string><json:string>De La Salle University</json:string></orgName><orgName_funder></orgName_funder><orgName_provider></orgName_provider><persName><json:string>James A. Knapp</json:string><json:string>X. Couper-Kuhlen</json:string><json:string>Boberg</json:string><json:string>John Anderson</json:string><json:string>Elia Kazanjoglou</json:string><json:string>Anne O’Keeffe</json:string><json:string>John E. Language</json:string><json:string>Herman Parret</json:string><json:string>Cynthia Richards</json:string><json:string>Tony McEnery</json:string><json:string>Mariana Orozco</json:string><json:string>Pisoni</json:string><json:string>You Hear</json:string><json:string>Janna B. Oetting</json:string><json:string>Kimihiro Yoshimura</json:string><json:string>Abe Mark</json:string><json:string>John Wilkins</json:string><json:string>Douglas Biber</json:string><json:string>Samuel Johnson</json:string><json:string>Zeno Vendler</json:string><json:string>Nicole Rosen</json:string><json:string>Molly Andrews</json:string><json:string>Pieter de Haan</json:string><json:string>Vera Nunning</json:string><json:string>Jean Witherow</json:string><json:string>Joachim Jacobs</json:string><json:string>Barbara H. Partee</json:string><json:string>Pam Peters</json:string><json:string>Montserrat Civit</json:string><json:string>Watts</json:string><json:string>Angelina Nduku</json:string><json:string>Paul Kerswill</json:string><json:string>Arthur Merin</json:string><json:string>X. Butler</json:string><json:string>Colin J. Ewen</json:string><json:string>John M. Anderson</json:string><json:string>Charles Fillmore</json:string><json:string>Williamson</json:string><json:string>Darrel T. Tryon</json:string><json:string>Heinrich Ramisch</json:string><json:string>Becky Childs</json:string><json:string>Sarah D. Kenelly</json:string><json:string>Ensslin</json:string><json:string>Stephanie Moses</json:string><json:string>Complexity</json:string><json:string>Henry James</json:string><json:string>You Float</json:string><json:string>Ingrid Tieken</json:string><json:string>Francisco Mart</json:string><json:string>Penelope Eckert</json:string><json:string>John R. Taylor</json:string><json:string>Peter Gilliver</json:string><json:string>Irene Heim</json:string><json:string>Joshua Reynolds</json:string><json:string>Michel Foucault</json:string><json:string>Dennis Kurzon</json:string><json:string>Roger Bird</json:string><json:string>Edgar Radtke</json:string><json:string>Paola Beninca</json:string><json:string>Maria Stubbe</json:string><json:string>Elena Guerzoni</json:string><json:string>James Joyce</json:string><json:string>Basil Hatim</json:string><json:string>Karen Corrigan</json:string><json:string>Paul Goetsch</json:string><json:string>Millan Varela</json:string><json:string>Martha Jones</json:string><json:string>Catherine Claire</json:string><json:string>Jeanette Littlemore</json:string><json:string>Elena Semino</json:string><json:string>Daniel Gile</json:string><json:string>Claire Lefebvre</json:string><json:string>Robert S. Kirsner</json:string><json:string>Alan Bailin</json:string><json:string>Martin Joos</json:string><json:string>Valerie Youssef</json:string><json:string>Lesley Milroy</json:string><json:string>Narrative Structure</json:string><json:string>Kirsten Malmkjær</json:string><json:string>Monika Fludernik</json:string><json:string>Rosanna Keefe</json:string><json:string>Joanne Cantor</json:string><json:string>Jonathan Webster</json:string><json:string>Hans-Georg Wolf</json:string><json:string>Time Study</json:string><json:string>X. Simpson</json:string><json:string>Michel de Graff</json:string><json:string>John Hawkins</json:string><json:string>Joanna Gavins</json:string><json:string>Ray Jackendoff</json:string><json:string>Geoff Hall</json:string><json:string>Gail Jefferson</json:string><json:string>William Cooke</json:string><json:string>Jeroen Groenendijk</json:string><json:string>Sharon Ash</json:string><json:string>John Pier</json:string><json:string>Richard Coates</json:string><json:string>Richard W. Bailey</json:string><json:string>Peter Roach</json:string><json:string>Essegy</json:string><json:string>Anette Rosenbach</json:string><json:string>Laura A. Michaelis</json:string><json:string>Holloway King</json:string><json:string>Herbert Clark</json:string><json:string>Eleanor Rosh</json:string><json:string>Kees Hengeveld</json:string><json:string>John Sinclair</json:string><json:string>Anthony Warner</json:string><json:string>Ron White</json:string><json:string>Nancy Vazquez</json:string><json:string>Franz Dornseiff</json:string><json:string>An Analysis</json:string><json:string>Shana Poplack</json:string><json:string>Chris Jeffery</json:string><json:string>Fred Field</json:string><json:string>Beth Stapleton</json:string><json:string>Kenny Smith</json:string><json:string>Roger Lass</json:string><json:string>Frederick Newmeyer</json:string><json:string>Joseph Wright</json:string><json:string>Joseph A. Foley</json:string><json:string>R.N. Ashley</json:string><json:string>Peter</json:string><json:string>Variety</json:string><json:string>Paul Dekker</json:string><json:string>Caroline David</json:string><json:string>Fraser Sutherland</json:string><json:string>Walter F. Edwards</json:string><json:string>Gilles Fauconnier</json:string><json:string>James Murray</json:string><json:string>Irene Turner</json:string><json:string>E. Sean</json:string><json:string>Veronika Koller</json:string><json:string>Schmied</json:string><json:string>Guy Miege</json:string><json:string>Adriana Belletti</json:string><json:string>Reiko Takeda</json:string><json:string>Long Road</json:string><json:string>Identity</json:string><json:string>Kathryn Bartlett</json:string><json:string>May Paster</json:string><json:string>Shmuel Gelbfisz</json:string><json:string>Louise Ravelli</json:string><json:string>Dennis R. Preston</json:string><json:string>Iris Murdoch</json:string><json:string>Margaret A. Maclagan</json:string><json:string>Angel Garc</json:string><json:string>Jeanie Deans</json:string><json:string>Roland Kiessling</json:string><json:string>Roger Shuy</json:string><json:string>Jacques Derrida</json:string><json:string>Robert Eaglestone</json:string><json:string>Lionel Wee</json:string><json:string>Betty S. Phillips</json:string><json:string>Bo Pettersson</json:string><json:string>Elia Kazan</json:string><json:string>Hasselgard</json:string><json:string>Wolfgang Wildgen</json:string><json:string>Noah Webster</json:string><json:string>Johnathan Jackson</json:string><json:string>John A. Efficiency</json:string><json:string>Uri Margolin</json:string><json:string>Martin Maiden</json:string><json:string>Andy Curtis</json:string><json:string>Paul J. Hopper</json:string><json:string>Hans-Georg</json:string><json:string>Locher</json:string><json:string>Charlotte Bronte</json:string><json:string>John Straker</json:string><json:string>David I. Beaver</json:string><json:string>Peter Collins</json:string><json:string>H.J. Walker</json:string><json:string>Michael Montgomery</json:string><json:string>Shelley Sikora</json:string><json:string>Moriello</json:string><json:string>Zuzana Jettmarova</json:string><json:string>Creoles</json:string><json:string>Andrew Kehler</json:string><json:string>Joan Beal</json:string><json:string>Jacques Durand</json:string><json:string>Tucker</json:string><json:string>J.R.R. Tolkien</json:string><json:string>Jeremy Marshall</json:string><json:string>Margery Kempe</json:string><json:string>Emi Izumi</json:string><json:string>David Catterick</json:string><json:string>Monika Rathert</json:string><json:string>Hyams</json:string><json:string>Weinert</json:string><json:string>Kent Johnson</json:string><json:string>Catherine Snow</json:string><json:string>E. Olds</json:string><json:string>John E. Richardson</json:string><json:string>Metaphor Analysis</json:string><json:string>William Foley</json:string><json:string>John Taylor</json:string><json:string>Julie Coleman</json:string><json:string>John Newman</json:string><json:string>An Introduction</json:string><json:string>Tahir Wood</json:string><json:string>David Crystal</json:string><json:string>Barker</json:string><json:string>Peter Willemse</json:string><json:string>Jeremy Smith</json:string><json:string>Antonia Mart</json:string><json:string>Ronald Langacker</json:string><json:string>Kira Hall</json:string><json:string>Samuel Goldwyn</json:string><json:string>Kai von Fintel</json:string><json:string>Yul Han</json:string><json:string>Paul Simpson</json:string><json:string>Mike Davenport</json:string><json:string>Kirsten Malmkjaer</json:string><json:string>Oliver Mason</json:string><json:string>Patrick J. Duffley</json:string><json:string>An Investigation</json:string><json:string>Mary Gaskell</json:string><json:string>Any Evidence</json:string><json:string>Harry Lee</json:string><json:string>Donald Davidson</json:string><json:string>Hilde Hasselgard</json:string><json:string>M. Bhatt</json:string><json:string>Jo McDonough</json:string><json:string>Eddington</json:string><json:string>Timothy C. Frazer</json:string><json:string>Connie Eble</json:string><json:string>Thomas Ede</json:string><json:string>Gerry Knowles</json:string><json:string>Cohen</json:string><json:string>Kimihiro Yoshimua</json:string><json:string>Michael McCarthy</json:string><json:string>Dennis Potter</json:string><json:string>Walt Wolfram</json:string><json:string>Louis Malesherbes</json:string><json:string>Gordon</json:string><json:string>Bill Haddican</json:string><json:string>An Autodidact</json:string><json:string>Don Kuiken</json:string><json:string>Calvin Broadus</json:string><json:string>Vivian de Klerk</json:string><json:string>Jan Rijkhoff</json:string><json:string>Kees van Esch</json:string><json:string>Klaus von Heusinger</json:string><json:string>N.F. Blake</json:string><json:string>Armin Schwegler</json:string><json:string>Henry</json:string><json:string>Tom Koole</json:string><json:string>Ann Rigney</json:string><json:string>Lourdes G. Tayao</json:string><json:string>Barbara Fox</json:string><json:string>Migge</json:string><json:string>Adam Brown</json:string><json:string>An Integrated</json:string><json:string>Ray Milland</json:string><json:string>Charles Boberg</json:string><json:string>Sandra Clarke</json:string><json:string>Gerhard Jager</json:string><json:string>Alessandra Giorgi</json:string><json:string>Dury</json:string><json:string>Alexander Tulloch</json:string><json:string>Jaroslav Peregrin</json:string><json:string>Genesis Research</json:string><json:string>Gloria Poedjosoedarmo</json:string><json:string>Fox</json:string><json:string>Noam Chomsky</json:string><json:string>Michael Smith</json:string><json:string>Biber</json:string><json:string>Richard Gerrig</json:string><json:string>John Stevens</json:string><json:string>Penhallurick</json:string><json:string>Eva Engels</json:string><json:string>Rachel Nordlinger</json:string><json:string>Maribel Romero</json:string><json:string>Regis Denis</json:string><json:string>Nina</json:string><json:string>Carlo Cecchetto</json:string><json:string>Werner Hullen</json:string><json:string>Philip Baker</json:string><json:string>Granger</json:string><json:string>Eulalia Canals</json:string><json:string>Stefan Benus</json:string><json:string>Patrick Murphy</json:string><json:string>Lars Hinrichs</json:string><json:string>Jeannette Winterson</json:string><json:string>Lyric Narrative</json:string><json:string>Kim Basinger</json:string><json:string>St Helena</json:string><json:string>Stephen J. Barker</json:string><json:string>Bernd</json:string><json:string>Kiesling</json:string><json:string>Dieter Wunderlich</json:string><json:string>William Philip</json:string><json:string>Mikko Laitinen</json:string><json:string>Pacific Pidgins</json:string><json:string>Michele Prandi</json:string><json:string>David Mezquiriz</json:string><json:string>James Lantolf</json:string><json:string>Jesse Sheidlower</json:string><json:string>Tania Styles</json:string><json:string>David Denison</json:string><json:string>William E. Henley</json:string><json:string>Geoffrey Leech</json:string><json:string>Elizabeth Closs</json:string><json:string>Stefan Th</json:string><json:string>Ellen Fluharty</json:string><json:string>Douglas W. Maynard</json:string><json:string>Emerald Isle</json:string><json:string>Thomas Upton</json:string><json:string>John Holm</json:string><json:string>Diana M. Lewis</json:string><json:string>Rafael C. Monroy</json:string><json:string>Nikolas Coupland</json:string><json:string>Carol Bellard-Thomson</json:string><json:string>Jurgen Bohnemeyer</json:string><json:string>Bernard De Clerck</json:string><json:string>Bertrand Russell</json:string><json:string>Sarah J. Roberts</json:string><json:string>Norman Fairclough</json:string><json:string>Jennifer Smith</json:string><json:string>John Insley</json:string><json:string>Anthony McEnery</json:string><json:string>April McMahon</json:string><json:string>Fran Colman</json:string><json:string>Gabriel Girard</json:string><json:string>Eric Stanley</json:string><json:string>Francisco Ballesteros</json:string><json:string>Miriam Taverniers</json:string><json:string>Cecilia Poletto</json:string><json:string>Eric Hyman</json:string><json:string>Elinor Ochs</json:string><json:string>D.H. Lawrence</json:string><json:string>Fabio Pianesi</json:string><json:string>David Rapp</json:string><json:string>Nick Humez</json:string><json:string>R.W. Holder</json:string><json:string>James K. Jones</json:string><json:string>Anna Szabolcsi</json:string><json:string>Elly van Gelderen</json:string><json:string>John Lyons</json:string><json:string>Aline Francœur</json:string><json:string>Clive</json:string><json:string>Peter Hohenhaus</json:string><json:string>Roger Schwarzschild</json:string><json:string>Josepha Koester</json:string><json:string>Jan Renkema</json:string><json:string>Naomi Nagi</json:string><json:string>Andrei A. Avram</json:string><json:string>Hilary Hillier</json:string><json:string>C. Texts</json:string><json:string>Reginald Truscott-Jones</json:string><json:string>Sidney Greenbaum</json:string><json:string>Silvia Kouwenberg</json:string><json:string>F. K. Lee</json:string><json:string>Jeffrey Pence</json:string><json:string>Ronald Carter</json:string><json:string>George Smith</json:string><json:string>Peeters</json:string><json:string>Christian Andersen</json:string><json:string>Louisa Sadler</json:string><json:string>Werner Abraham</json:string><json:string>Tristan da Cunha</json:string><json:string>Eble</json:string><json:string>Robert B. Kaplan</json:string><json:string>Michael Newman</json:string><json:string>David</json:string><json:string>Kenneth Anderson</json:string><json:string>Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen</json:string><json:string>Michael Grabski</json:string><json:string>Dunstan</json:string><json:string>Jeffrey Reaser</json:string><json:string>Bernadette Vine</json:string><json:string>Andrea R. Nagy</json:string><json:string>Gilliver</json:string><json:string>M.A.K. Halliday</json:string><json:string>Erik R. Thomas</json:string><json:string>Hugo Cardoso</json:string><json:string>Robert E. Lewis</json:string><json:string>Eivind Torgersen</json:string><json:string>Heberto</json:string><json:string>Beckie</json:string><json:string>Shoshana Blum-Kulka</json:string><json:string>J.M. Coetzee</json:string><json:string>William Frawley</json:string><json:string>Maria Gonzalez</json:string><json:string>Jennifer Nycz</json:string><json:string>Jose Luis</json:string><json:string>Tagliamonte</json:string><json:string>Ludwig Wittgenstein</json:string><json:string>Jason Merchant</json:string><json:string>Andrea Sand</json:string><json:string>John Walker</json:string><json:string>Molly Diesing</json:string><json:string>Konstantin Mantzouranis</json:string><json:string>Eric Partridge</json:string><json:string>Natalie Schilling-Estes</json:string><json:string>Carson T. Schutze</json:string><json:string>Marina Chumakina</json:string><json:string>Nancy Stern</json:string><json:string>Alicia Beckford</json:string><json:string>Giuseppe Longobardi</json:string><json:string>Helen Fallon</json:string><json:string>Saul Kripke</json:string><json:string>Jon Barwise</json:string><json:string>Paula Lopez</json:string><json:string>Eric Mathieu</json:string><json:string>Judith Robertson</json:string><json:string>Charles F. Meyer</json:string><json:string>Jean-Michel Charpentier</json:string><json:string>Chung-Hye</json:string><json:string>Irene Wotherspoon</json:string><json:string>Francis Grose</json:string><json:string>Davis</json:string><json:string>Ernesto Suarez</json:string><json:string>Goran Kjellmer</json:string><json:string>Enric Vallduv</json:string><json:string>Barbara Johnstone</json:string><json:string>Randolph Quirk</json:string><json:string>Simon Horobin</json:string><json:string>Sean Combs</json:string><json:string>Tony Dudley-Evans</json:string><json:string>N. Katherine</json:string><json:string>Michael B. Montgomery</json:string><json:string>Daniel Buring</json:string><json:string>Peter Cosgrove</json:string><json:string>Day Problems</json:string><json:string>An Old</json:string><json:string>Jonathan Marshall</json:string><json:string>Richard Hogg</json:string><json:string>John Kirk</json:string><json:string>Bernadette Foo</json:string><json:string>Camilla Vasquez</json:string><json:string>Janet Fraser</json:string><json:string>Knud Lambrecht</json:string><json:string>Hawkins</json:string><json:string>Andrew Elfenbein</json:string><json:string>William Lloyd</json:string><json:string>Richard Lederer</json:string><json:string>Anna Wierzbicka</json:string><json:string>Ian Mason</json:string><json:string>Joan Bresnan</json:string><json:string>Edward Powys</json:string><json:string>London Cockney</json:string><json:string>Philippine English</json:string><json:string>Kevin Russell</json:string><json:string>Christiane Meierkord</json:string><json:string>Robert Cockroft</json:string><json:string>Christine Mallinson</json:string><json:string>Shaun Hughes</json:string><json:string>Walton</json:string><json:string>X. Mukherjee</json:string><json:string>Tony Howatt</json:string><json:string>James Phelan</json:string><json:string>Edward Callary</json:string><json:string>Olga Solomon</json:string><json:string>Anne McDermott</json:string><json:string>Mary Bucholtz</json:string><json:string>Susan Butler</json:string><json:string>Charles Jones</json:string><json:string>Randall Hendrick</json:string><json:string>Megan Jones</json:string><json:string>Jean Boase</json:string><json:string>Jean Ann</json:string><json:string>Gil</json:string><json:string>R.A. Acronyms</json:string><json:string>Dan McIntyre</json:string><json:string>Peter Muhlhausler</json:string><json:string>Simon Kirby</json:string><json:string>Robert Kroetsch</json:string><json:string>Oliver Goldsmith</json:string><json:string>X. Hawkins</json:string><json:string>Bailey</json:string><json:string>Miriam Locher</json:string><json:string>Henk Zeevat</json:string><json:string>Alan Cruse</json:string><json:string>John Perry</json:string><json:string>Wolfgang Teubert</json:string><json:string>Louise Mullany</json:string><json:string>Vital Language</json:string><json:string>Peter G. Peterson</json:string><json:string>An Idea</json:string><json:string>Ron Arstein</json:string><json:string>Beaver</json:string><json:string>Peter Trudgill</json:string><json:string>Marc Picard</json:string><json:string>X. Gordon</json:string><json:string>Jean Atchison</json:string><json:string>Bernd Kortmann</json:string><json:string>Betsy Rodr</json:string><json:string>Angela E. Rickford</json:string><json:string>G. Corbett</json:string><json:string>Ricardo Otheguy</json:string><json:string>Mary Dalrymple</json:string><json:string>Zuraidah</json:string><json:string>William Starke</json:string><json:string>Francois Recanati</json:string><json:string>Antoinette Renoef</json:string><json:string>Carole Hough</json:string><json:string>Cathy Benson</json:string><json:string>Nitya</json:string><json:string>Walter Scott</json:string><json:string>Lisa Green</json:string><json:string>Cormier</json:string><json:string>Derek Bickerton</json:string><json:string>Job Applications</json:string><json:string>Kevin McCafferty</json:string><json:string>Katia Lida</json:string><json:string>Juan Li</json:string><json:string>Yinglin Ji</json:string><json:string>George Guess</json:string><json:string>Dan Sperber</json:string><json:string>Derek Attridge</json:string><json:string>Ming-Yu Tseng</json:string><json:string>Kimberley Emmons</json:string><json:string>Ingo</json:string><json:string>John Ashbery</json:string><json:string>Peter R. Kitson</json:string><json:string>Hanne-Pernille Stax</json:string><json:string>Tom McArthur</json:string><json:string>David Galef</json:string><json:string>Richard Hudson</json:string><json:string>Carol Percy</json:string><json:string>Ji</json:string><json:string>X. Jila</json:string><json:string>Peter Snow</json:string><json:string>Idan Landau</json:string><json:string>Michael Tomasello</json:string><json:string>E. Ojeda</json:string><json:string>Bernard Harrison</json:string><json:string>Deirdre Wilson</json:string><json:string>Nina Hyams</json:string><json:string>Moira Inghilleri</json:string><json:string>Malcolm Awadajin</json:string><json:string>Sonja Laden</json:string><json:string>Rajend Mesthrie</json:string><json:string>Susie Dent</json:string><json:string>Michael Dummett</json:string><json:string>Manuel Fernandez-Ferreiro</json:string><json:string>Margaret Laing</json:string><json:string>Gail Stygall</json:string><json:string>Dan Shen</json:string><json:string>David S. Miall</json:string><json:string>Rajend</json:string><json:string>Anita Puckett</json:string><json:string>M. Mazrui</json:string><json:string>Vivienne Fong</json:string><json:string>Robert Ross</json:string><json:string>Sabine Botschuijver</json:string><json:string>Susan Fitzmaurice</json:string><json:string>My House</json:string><json:string>Guy Bailey</json:string><json:string>Daniel Schreier</json:string><json:string>Misha Becker</json:string><json:string>Robert LePage</json:string><json:string>Margot van den Berg</json:string><json:string>Anita Pomerantz</json:string><json:string>Roger Fowler</json:string><json:string>James Pustejovsky</json:string><json:string>Lothar</json:string><json:string>Greg Carlson</json:string><json:string>Margaret Speas</json:string><json:string>Peter Mark</json:string><json:string>Richard Bailey</json:string><json:string>Andrew Chesterman</json:string><json:string>Nancy Lee</json:string><json:string>Jeremy Munday</json:string><json:string>Hong Kingston</json:string><json:string>Gerhard Leitner</json:string><json:string>Nicholas Asher</json:string><json:string>Franz Pochhacker</json:string><json:string>English</json:string><json:string>Thomas Kohnen</json:string><json:string>La Salle</json:string><json:string>Andree Tabouret-Keller</json:string><json:string>Claudius Holyband</json:string><json:string>Eileen Fitzpatrick</json:string><json:string>Charles Antaki</json:string><json:string>Douglas G. Wilson</json:string><json:string>Judith Aissen</json:string><json:string>Barbara M. Horvath</json:string><json:string>Miriam Shlesinger</json:string><json:string>Simone Zwickl</json:string><json:string>Priya Hosali</json:string><json:string>Jonathan Charteris-Black</json:string><json:string>M.S. Seegmiller</json:string><json:string>Kenneth de Jong</json:string><json:string>Jan Alber</json:string><json:string>Scott F. Kiesling</json:string><json:string>Pargman</json:string><json:string>Sally Rice</json:string><json:string>Herbert Igboanusi</json:string><json:string>Ann Fisher</json:string><json:string>Henry Ford</json:string><json:string>X. Wilton</json:string><json:string>Thomas A. Upton</json:string><json:string>Fred Landman</json:string><json:string>Atlases</json:string><json:string>William Labov</json:string><json:string>Michael Hoey</json:string><json:string>Fetzer</json:string><json:string>Robert Rodman</json:string><json:string>Fiona Cotton</json:string><json:string>Wolfram</json:string><json:string>Thrainsson</json:string><json:string>Dolores Gonzalez-Alvarez</json:string><json:string>John Field</json:string><json:string>Lars von Trier</json:string><json:string>William H. Fletcher</json:string><json:string>Fritz</json:string><json:string>Walther von Wartburg</json:string><json:string>Looser</json:string><json:string>Narrative</json:string><json:string>Astrid Fiess</json:string><json:string>Philip Carter</json:string><json:string>Maarten Mous</json:string><json:string>Mark Boardman</json:string><json:string>John McDowell</json:string><json:string>Fred Eckman</json:string><json:string>Roger B. Henkle</json:string><json:string>Mary</json:string><json:string>Christian Kay</json:string><json:string>David Miall</json:string><json:string>Monique C. Cormier</json:string><json:string>Mark Johnson</json:string><json:string>Anita Herzfeld</json:string><json:string>Roger Grabowski</json:string><json:string>Andrew Kehoe</json:string><json:string>Victor Watts</json:string><json:string>Sidney Baker</json:string><json:string>Hilary Putnam</json:string><json:string>Jonathan J. Webster</json:string><json:string>M. Bagwasi</json:string><json:string>Paroo Nihalani</json:string><json:string>J.C. Catford</json:string><json:string>Robert McMahon</json:string><json:string>Jane Stuart-Smith</json:string><json:string>Luigi Rizzi</json:string><json:string>Gertrude Stein</json:string><json:string>Angelika Kratzer</json:string><json:string>F.D. Hughes</json:string><json:string>Pacific Ocean</json:string><json:string>Mick</json:string><json:string>William Golding</json:string><json:string>Ariel Cohen</json:string><json:string>Michael Toolan</json:string><json:string>Emma Dafouz</json:string><json:string>Scott Allan</json:string><json:string>Alastair Butler</json:string><json:string>Robert Bayley</json:string><json:string>Frederick J. Newmeyer</json:string><json:string>Robert L. Moore</json:string><json:string>John Haiman</json:string><json:string>Jim Miller</json:string><json:string>Resource Book</json:string><json:string>Helmut Weiss</json:string><json:string>Edgar W. Schneider</json:string><json:string>G.R. Stewart</json:string><json:string>David Beaver</json:string><json:string>Richard B. Baldauf</json:string><json:string>Denis Bouchard</json:string><json:string>Manfred Stede</json:string><json:string>Julie Anne</json:string><json:string>Robert Frost</json:string><json:string>Jennifer Hay</json:string><json:string>Thomas</json:string><json:string>Robert M. Polhemus</json:string><json:string>David Moskowitz</json:string><json:string>Martin Stokhof</json:string><json:string>Andreas Fischer</json:string><json:string>Raymond Hickey</json:string><json:string>Greg Crossan</json:string><json:string>Nyati-Ramahobo</json:string><json:string>Nina Norgaard</json:string><json:string>Thumb</json:string><json:string>The Ambassadors</json:string><json:string>Peter Tiersma</json:string><json:string>Harvey Sacks</json:string><json:string>Hubert Haider</json:string><json:string>Sali</json:string><json:string>Edgar Allan</json:string><json:string>Ana Deumert</json:string><json:string>Jamaicans</json:string><json:string>Isahara</json:string><json:string>Anja Janoschka</json:string><json:string>J. Roderick</json:string><json:string>John Heywood</json:string><json:string>Franz Stanzel</json:string><json:string>Williams</json:string><json:string>Dustin Hoffman</json:string><json:string>Louis Hjelmslev</json:string><json:string>Darlene</json:string><json:string>Ken Tucker</json:string><json:string>Hilary P. Dannenberg</json:string><json:string>Martha Craven</json:string><json:string>William Sayers</json:string><json:string>Martina Penke</json:string><json:string>John Local</json:string><json:string>Marshall Bruce</json:string><json:string>Graham Shorrocks</json:string><json:string>Richard B. Jr</json:string><json:string>Linda Mugglestone</json:string><json:string>Sheila Glasbey</json:string><json:string>Holder</json:string><json:string>Zhonghua Xiao</json:string><json:string>Yue Yuan</json:string><json:string>Danilo T. Dayag</json:string><json:string>Sheila Watson</json:string><json:string>Manfred Krifka</json:string><json:string>John Ingram</json:string><json:string>Patricia Hanna</json:string><json:string>Timothy Weiss</json:string><json:string>German Narratology</json:string><json:string>Judith Baxter</json:string><json:string>Ulla Connor</json:string><json:string>Giorgio de Chirico</json:string><json:string>Guy Cook</json:string><json:string>Olga Fischer</json:string><json:string>Otto Jespersen</json:string><json:string>Anatol Stefanowitsch</json:string><json:string>Petra Bos</json:string><json:string>William Croft</json:string><json:string>Ilse Wischer</json:string><json:string>Eleanor Rosch</json:string><json:string>Laura Hidalgo</json:string><json:string>Collins</json:string><json:string>Irene Logonikos</json:string><json:string>Peter Slomanson</json:string><json:string>Susan Rothstein</json:string><json:string>Howard Lasnik</json:string><json:string>Jan Tillery</json:string><json:string>Malcolm Williams</json:string><json:string>Tanya Reinhart</json:string><json:string>Maurice Merleau-Ponty</json:string><json:string>Sydney Lamb</json:string><json:string>Wilhelm Geuder</json:string><json:string>Placenames</json:string><json:string>Val Godwin</json:string><json:string>Shen</json:string><json:string>Susan Hunston</json:string><json:string>Javier</json:string><json:string>Maarten Janssen</json:string><json:string>Martine Taeymans</json:string><json:string>Modern English</json:string><json:string>Beal</json:string><json:string>Kong English</json:string><json:string>Mark de Vos</json:string><json:string>Philip Durkin</json:string></persName><placeName><json:string>Gustavia</json:string><json:string>Ashford</json:string><json:string>Bedford</json:string><json:string>Lund</json:string><json:string>Wakefield</json:string><json:string>Lancashire</json:string><json:string>Goa</json:string><json:string>Bradford</json:string><json:string>Birmingham</json:string><json:string>Malaysia</json:string><json:string>Potsdam</json:string><json:string>New Multi</json:string><json:string>Miami</json:string><json:string>Singapore</json:string><json:string>Columbia</json:string><json:string>Africentricity</json:string><json:string>United States</json:string><json:string>Multiplicity</json:string><json:string>Australia</json:string><json:string>Bolton</json:string><json:string>St Barthelmy</json:string><json:string>Altendorf</json:string><json:string>Jamaica</json:string><json:string>Newfoundland</json:string><json:string>Mozambique</json:string><json:string>Vanuatu</json:string><json:string>Engelberg</json:string><json:string>Beijing</json:string><json:string>Barbados</json:string><json:string>St. Barthelmy</json:string><json:string>Santos</json:string><json:string>US</json:string><json:string>Cyclicity</json:string><json:string>Pittsburgh</json:string><json:string>Chronicity</json:string><json:string>Hong Kong</json:string><json:string>Goldsborough</json:string><json:string>Scotland</json:string><json:string>Ethnicity</json:string><json:string>Logophoricity</json:string><json:string>New Critical</json:string><json:string>Edinburgh</json:string><json:string>Canada</json:string><json:string>Costa Rica</json:string><json:string>Niger</json:string><json:string>Oakland</json:string><json:string>Martin</json:string><json:string>Houston</json:string><json:string>Manila</json:string><json:string>Kenya</json:string><json:string>London</json:string><json:string>American</json:string><json:string>Mondorf</json:string><json:string>Reading</json:string><json:string>New York City</json:string><json:string>Boston</json:string><json:string>India</json:string><json:string>Cincinnati</json:string><json:string>Austin</json:string><json:string>Lebanon</json:string><json:string>China</json:string><json:string>Norfolk</json:string><json:string>Simplicity</json:string><json:string>Europe</json:string><json:string>Bender</json:string><json:string>Strasbourg</json:string><json:string>America</json:string><json:string>Wales</json:string><json:string>Nigeria</json:string><json:string>Gambia</json:string><json:string>South Africa</json:string><json:string>Brighton</json:string><json:string>Philippines</json:string><json:string>Sierra Leone</json:string><json:string>Dublin</json:string><json:string>Glasgow</json:string><json:string>New Zealand</json:string><json:string>Rome</json:string><json:string>Chicago</json:string><json:string>Britain</json:string><json:string>Sudan</json:string><json:string>New Englishes</json:string><json:string>Lancaster</json:string><json:string>York</json:string><json:string>Cameroon</json:string><json:string>TN</json:string><json:string>Ottawa</json:string><json:string>Galway</json:string><json:string>Northumbria</json:string><json:string>Bamberg</json:string><json:string>Ireland</json:string><json:string>Tanzania</json:string><json:string>Gap</json:string><json:string>Kingston</json:string><json:string>France</json:string><json:string>Aberdeenshire</json:string><json:string>Memphis</json:string><json:string>Iconicity</json:string><json:string>Cambridge</json:string><json:string>Cleveland</json:string><json:string>Detroit</json:string><json:string>Panama</json:string><json:string>England</json:string><json:string>Botswana</json:string><json:string>Bahamas</json:string><json:string>Goldberg</json:string><json:string>Oxford</json:string><json:string>Armagh</json:string><json:string>Dominican Republic</json:string><json:string>Elasticity</json:string><json:string>Nassau</json:string></placeName><ref_url><json:string>http://www.routledge.com/textbooks/</json:string></ref_url><ref_bibl><json:string>Simon Kirby et al.</json:string><json:string>English and Spanish (1705)</json:string><json:string>Gordon et al.</json:string><json:string>[204]</json:string><json:string>[1997]</json:string><json:string>Kay et al.</json:string><json:string>[1992]</json:string><json:string>[1957]</json:string><json:string>[1985]</json:string><json:string>[1991]</json:string><json:string>[1989]</json:string><json:string>[1984]</json:string><json:string>[1990]</json:string><json:string>[1977]</json:string><json:string>[2005]</json:string><json:string>[1791]</json:string><json:string>[1998]</json:string><json:string>[1982]</json:string></ref_bibl><bibl></bibl></unitex></namedEntities><ark><json:string>ark:/67375/HXZ-GC5MMT2D-L</json:string></ark><categories><wos></wos><scienceMetrix></scienceMetrix><scopus><json:string>1 - Social Sciences</json:string><json:string>2 - Arts and Humanities</json:string><json:string>3 - Literature and Literary Theory</json:string><json:string>1 - Social Sciences</json:string><json:string>2 - Social Sciences</json:string><json:string>3 - Linguistics and Language</json:string><json:string>1 - Social Sciences</json:string><json:string>2 - Arts and Humanities</json:string><json:string>3 - Language and Linguistics</json:string></scopus></categories><publicationDate>2006</publicationDate><copyrightDate>2006</copyrightDate><doi><json:string>10.1093/ywes/mal001</json:string></doi><id>A670BB1E867BF142D05FDC325B2FAF3F13136C0D</id><score>1</score><fulltext><json:item><extension>pdf</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>application/pdf</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/A670BB1E867BF142D05FDC325B2FAF3F13136C0D/fulltext/pdf</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>zip</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/zip</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/A670BB1E867BF142D05FDC325B2FAF3F13136C0D/fulltext/zip</uri></json:item><istex:fulltextTEI uri="https://api.istex.fr/document/A670BB1E867BF142D05FDC325B2FAF3F13136C0D/fulltext/tei"><teiHeader><fileDesc><titleStmt><title level="a">IEnglish Language</title></titleStmt><publicationStmt><authority>ISTEX</authority><publisher scheme="https://publisher-list.data.istex.fr">Oxford University Press</publisher><availability><licence><p>© The English Association; all rights reserved</p></licence><p scheme="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XBH-GTWS0RDP-M">oup</p></availability><date>2006</date></publicationStmt><notesStmt><note type="research-article" scheme="https://content-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XTP-1JC4F85T-7">research-article</note><note type="journal" scheme="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/JMC-0GLKJH51-B">journal</note></notesStmt><sourceDesc><biblStruct type="inbook"><analytic><title level="a">IEnglish Language</title><author xml:id="author-0000"><persName><forename type="first">Evelien</forename><surname>Keizer</surname></persName><affiliation>University of Amsterdam</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0001"><persName><forename type="first">Mohammed</forename><surname>Albakry</surname></persName><affiliation>Middle Tennessee State University</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0002"><persName><forename type="first">Jeroen</forename><surname>van de Weijer</surname></persName><affiliation>University of Leiden</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0003"><persName><forename type="first">Bettelou</forename><surname>Los</surname></persName><affiliation>Radboud University Nijmegen</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0004"><persName><forename type="first">Wim</forename><surname>van der Wurff</surname></persName><affiliation>University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0005"><persName><forename type="first">Beáta</forename><surname>Gyuris</surname></persName><affiliation>Hungarian Academy of Science</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0006"><persName><forename type="first">Julie</forename><surname>Coleman</surname></persName><affiliation>University of Leicester</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0007"><persName><forename type="first">Edward</forename><surname>Callary</surname></persName><affiliation>Northern Illinois University</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0008"><persName><forename type="first">Lieselotte</forename><surname>Anderwald</surname></persName><affiliation>Albert-Ludwigs University, Frieburg</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0009"><persName><forename type="first">Andrea</forename><surname>Sand</surname></persName><affiliation>Albert-Ludwigs University, Freiburg</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0010"><persName><forename type="first">Camilla</forename><surname>Vasquez</surname></persName><affiliation>University of South Florida</affiliation></author><author xml:id="author-0011"><persName><forename type="first">Laura</forename><surname>Hidalgo</surname></persName><affiliation>Downing University Autonoma, Madrid</affiliation></author><idno type="istex">A670BB1E867BF142D05FDC325B2FAF3F13136C0D</idno><idno type="ark">ark:/67375/HXZ-GC5MMT2D-L</idno><idno type="DOI">10.1093/ywes/mal001</idno></analytic><monogr><title level="j">The Year's Work in English Studies</title><idno type="pISSN">0084-4144</idno><idno type="publisher-id">ywes</idno><idno type="PublisherID-hwp">ywes</idno><imprint><publisher>Oxford University Press</publisher><date type="published" when="2006"></date><biblScope unit="volume">85</biblScope><biblScope unit="issue">1</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" from="1">1</biblScope><biblScope unit="page" to="128">128</biblScope></imprint></monogr></biblStruct></sourceDesc></fileDesc><profileDesc><creation><date>2006</date></creation><abstract><p>This chapter has twelve sections: 1. General; 2. History of English Linguistics; 3. Phonetics and Phonology; 4. Morphology; 5. Syntax; 6. Semantics; 7. Lexicography, Lexicology and Lexical Semantics; 8. Onomastics; 9. Dialectology and Sociolinguistics; 10. New Englishes and Creolistics; 11. Pragmatics and Discourse Analysis; 12. Stylistics. Section 1 is by Evelien Keizer; section 2 is by Mohammed Albakry; section 3 is by Jeroen van de Weijer; sections 4 and 5 are by Bettelou Los and Wim van der Wurff; section 6 is by Beàta Gyuris; section 7 is by Julie Coleman; section 8 is by Edward Callary; section 9 is by Lieselotte Anderwald; section 10 is by Andrea Sand; section 11 is by Camilla Vasquez; section 12 is by Laura Hidalgo.</p></abstract><textClass><keywords scheme="Journal Subject"><list><head></head><item><term>Articles</term></item></list></keywords></textClass></profileDesc><revisionDesc><change when="2006">Published</change></revisionDesc></teiHeader></istex:fulltextTEI><json:item><extension>txt</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>text/plain</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/A670BB1E867BF142D05FDC325B2FAF3F13136C0D/fulltext/txt</uri></json:item></fulltext><metadata><istex:metadataXml wicri:clean="corpus oup, element #text not found" wicri:toSee="no header"><istex:xmlDeclaration>version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"</istex:xmlDeclaration><istex:docType PUBLIC="-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v2.3 20070202//EN" URI="journalpublishing.dtd" name="istex:docType"></istex:docType><istex:document><article article-type="research-article">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id journal-id-type="hwp">ywes</journal-id>
<journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">ywes</journal-id>
<journal-title>The Year's Work in English Studies</journal-title>
<issn pub-type="ppub">0084-4144</issn>
<publisher>
<publisher-name>Oxford University Press</publisher-name>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.1093/ywes/mal001</article-id>
<article-categories>
<subj-group>
<subject>Articles</subject>
</subj-group>
</article-categories>
<title-group>
<article-title>I<break></break>English Language</article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Keizer</surname><given-names>Evelien</given-names></name>
</contrib>
<aff>University of Amsterdam</aff>
</contrib-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Albakry</surname><given-names>Mohammed</given-names></name>
</contrib>
<aff>Middle Tennessee State University</aff>
</contrib-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>van de Weijer</surname><given-names>Jeroen</given-names></name>
</contrib>
<aff>University of Leiden</aff>
</contrib-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Los</surname><given-names>Bettelou</given-names></name>
</contrib>
<aff>Radboud University Nijmegen</aff>
</contrib-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>van der Wurff</surname><given-names>Wim</given-names></name>
</contrib>
<aff>University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne</aff>
</contrib-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Gyuris</surname><given-names>Beáta</given-names></name>
</contrib>
<aff>Hungarian Academy of Science</aff>
</contrib-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Coleman</surname><given-names>Julie</given-names></name>
</contrib>
<aff>University of Leicester</aff>
</contrib-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Callary</surname><given-names>Edward</given-names></name>
</contrib>
<aff>Northern Illinois University</aff>
</contrib-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Anderwald</surname><given-names>Lieselotte</given-names></name>
</contrib>
<aff>Albert-Ludwigs University, Frieburg</aff>
</contrib-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Sand</surname><given-names>Andrea</given-names></name>
</contrib>
<aff>Albert-Ludwigs University, Freiburg</aff>
</contrib-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Vasquez</surname><given-names>Camilla</given-names></name>
</contrib>
<aff>University of South Florida</aff>
</contrib-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name><surname>Hidalgo</surname><given-names>Laura</given-names></name>
</contrib>
<aff>Downing University Autonoma, Madrid</aff>
</contrib-group>
<pub-date pub-type="ppub">
<year>2006</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>85</volume>
<issue>1</issue>
<fpage>1</fpage>
<lpage>128</lpage>
<copyright-statement>© The English Association; all rights reserved</copyright-statement>
<copyright-year>2006</copyright-year>
<abstract>
<p>This chapter has twelve sections: 1. General; 2. History of English Linguistics; 3. Phonetics and Phonology; 4. Morphology; 5. Syntax; 6. Semantics; 7. Lexicography, Lexicology and Lexical Semantics; 8. Onomastics; 9. Dialectology and Sociolinguistics; 10. New Englishes and Creolistics; 11. Pragmatics and Discourse Analysis; 12. Stylistics. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC1">Section 1</xref> is by Evelien Keizer; <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC2">section 2</xref> is by Mohammed Albakry; <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC3">section 3</xref> is by Jeroen van de Weijer; <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC4">sections 4</xref> and <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC5">5</xref> are by Bettelou Los and Wim van der Wurff; <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC6">section 6</xref> is by Beàta Gyuris; <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC7">section 7</xref> is by Julie Coleman; <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC8">section 8</xref> is by Edward Callary; <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC9">section 9</xref> is by Lieselotte Anderwald; <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC10">section 10</xref> is by Andrea Sand; <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC11">section 11</xref> is by Camilla Vasquez; <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC12">section 12</xref> is by Laura Hidalgo.</p></abstract>
</article-meta>
</front>
<body>
<sec id="SEC1"><title>1. General</title>
<p>In recent years three major themes have emerged in publications on the English language: the evolution of language; the relation between language, mind and brain; and the question of what constitutes good practice within linguistics. This trend continued—on a more moderate scale perhaps—in 2004. We will start, however, by looking at a number of general contributions.</p>
<p>The first of these, David Crystal's <italic>The Language Revolution</italic>, is a small book, presenting a summary of extensive work of recent years. Crystal describes the consequences of the dramatic linguistic changes which took place during the second half of the twentieth century, especially in the last decade. These changes, Crystal argues, are unprecedented in that they affect everyone and virtually all languages, and as such can be seen as having brought about a revolution. Three major trends are distinguished, each of which formed the subject of earlier publications by Crystal: <italic>English as a Global Language</italic> [1997, 2nd edn. 2003], <italic>Language Death</italic> [2000] and <italic>Language and the Internet</italic> [2001]. However, where these earlier books were intended for linguists and language professionals, the present book has been written for a general readership. Chapters 1 to 3 describe the three trends. In chapter 1, Crystal explains why English emerged as the world's first truly global language and describes the impact of this development on the English language itself. Chapter 2 deals with language death, indicating possible ways of preserving and regenerating (some of) the large number of currently endangered languages. Chapter 3 is concerned with the effects of the growing use of the internet on the evolution of the English language. Chapters 4 and 5 subsequently serve to bring these themes together, indicating how they interact and reinforce each other, the overall message being that these developments are not by definition bad, but present both threats and opportunities. Crystal ends by giving some general advice on how to counter the threats and exploit the opportunities, stressing the responsibilities of linguists, language teachers and other language professionals, but also the responsibility of governments to provide the political and financial backing needed to deal properly with the present situation. As always, Crystal has produced an informative, thought-provoking and well-balanced book, written in a very readable style.</p>
<p>The second general work, Pam Peters' <italic>The Cambridge Guide to English Usage</italic>, is a reference book, giving up-to-date information on questions of English style and usage in more than 4,000 alphabetically ordered headwords. The book functions as a guide to various aspects of the English language. There is information on spelling (including alternative spellings and frequent mistakes) and punctuation; information on the meaning and use of individual words (sometimes in the form of (confusing) pairs, such as <italic>ingenuous</italic> and <italic>ingenious</italic>; <italic>between</italic> and <italic>among, distinct</italic> and <italic>distinctive</italic>), as well as phrases and affixes; entries on grammatical notions and constructions (from the subjunctive to dangling participles); as well as a wealth of information on stylistic matters (from split infinitives and clause-final prepositions to the use of <italic>he</italic> and/or <italic>she</italic>). There are also several appendices, listing, for instance, the IPA symbols for English sounds, selected proofreading marks and currencies of the world. The book is refreshing in the sense that it is descriptive rather than prescriptive (simply distinguishing between standard, formal and informal use) and in that it covers not only British and American English, but also Canadian, Australian and New Zealand English, as well as other regional varieties. Moreover, the book is the first of its kind to make use of large electronic corpora of English and American English, such as the British National Corpus and the Cambridge International Corpus of American English. In sum, this book is extremely useful for any professional user in need of guidance on the use of the English language, but lends itself just as well for endless browsing just for he fun of it.</p>
<p>Another major work of reference, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B84"><italic>The Linguistics Encyclopedia</italic></xref>, ed. Kirsten Malmkjær, benefits from a second edition (new in paperback). The work has been thoroughly revised and updated, with new entries on, for instance, applied linguistics, contrastive linguistics and cross-linguistic study, cognitive linguistics and forensic linguistics. Another new feature is the introduction by Tony Howatt, which provides a brief history of the field of linguistics. As in the first edition, the list of contributors is impressive, including prominent linguists from many different fields and schools of thought (e.g. Malcolm Coulthard, Nikolas Coupland, Norman Fairclough, James Lantolf, William Foley, Roger Fowler, Geoffrey Leech and Frederick Newmeyer). The alphabetically ordered entries are written in a very accessible style and contain useful suggestions for further reading. As for the way the entries are organized, however, some criticism may be in place. Thus, whereas there is an entry on semantics, there is no parallel entry on syntax. Instead there is a long section on generative grammar (dealing with Chomskyan grammar only) and an entry on non-transformational grammars, listing many (but not all) other types of grammar. In the section on cognitive linguistics we read that cognitive grammar belongs to the functionalist tradition; the (very short) entry on functionalist linguistics, however, does not mention cognitive grammar—nor does it include information on systemic-functional grammar, which is granted a separate entry. Similar confusion prevails in some of the other areas (e.g. sociolinguistics and phonetics). Despite these shortcomings, however, the encyclopaedia's wide coverage (of all major and most minor areas of linguistic study) makes it a very useful tool for linguists of all possible backgrounds, as well as for students or general readers with an interest in linguistics.</p>
<p>Two monographs published this year were—wholly or partly—devoted to the evolution of language. The first is Wolfgang Wildgen's <italic>The Evolution of Human Language</italic>. In his introductory chapter, Wildgen defines the concern of the book very broadly as ‘[t]he whole field of linguistic and symbolic capacities and the (causal) links they have with the bodily evolution of human beings’ (p. xx). Three general questions are addressed. (1) In what period did language first evolve and how old is our language capacity? (2) Did language grow gradually or through sudden changes, or perhaps through a combination of gradual and sudden changes? (3) Which forces shaped the evolution of language? Chapter 2 sketches four basic scenarios of language evolution: (1) cognitive and physical predispositions for language; (2) bottleneck situations and the rapid evolution of language; (3) sexual selection and a run-away evolution of language; (4) language as a universal symbolic medium. Wildgen concludes that the best approach is one that combines these scenarios in a multilayer model. The rest of the book is meant to confirm this idea. Chapter 3 looks at the transition between animal communication and the evolution of the comical genre. Chapters 4 and 5 subsequently consider the evolution of language in the context of the evolution of technique and (prehistoric) art. Chapters 6 to 8 deal more specifically with languages, grammars and lexicons: chapter 6 addresses the problem of (symbolic) creativity; chapter 7 takes up Ray Jackendoff's [2002] idea of fossils of linguistic evolution, giving an account of the evolution in the lexicon of ‘hand’ and ‘eye’; while chapter 8 sketches the form of a possible ‘protolanguage’ and outlines the beginnings of a theory of language evolution. Chapter 9 briefly discusses the general classification of symbolic forms, generalized media and their evolution. Chapter 10 concludes with some reflections on consciousness, language universals and a new methodology of linguistics. Here the consequences of the multilayer model become clear, as Wildgen argues that ‘language universals should respect the evolutionary stratification of the linguistic capacity of humans’ (p. 203), and as such may be expected to occur at different levels. Similarly, different types of methodology will be required to investigate the different layers. Although many of Wildgen's ideas are interesting and original, the book is not exactly an easy read, which is due first of all to a rather forced style but even more to a certain lack of coherence, both in the topics discussed and in the argumentation used, which at times leaves the reader wondering about the relevance of the discussion to the overall aims of the book.</p>
<p>In <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B37"><italic>The Growth and Maintenance of Linguistic Complexity</italic></xref>, Östen Dahl is also concerned with the evolution of language, defending the thesis that ‘linguistic phenomena have life cycles in the sense that they pass through a number of successive stages, during which they “mature”, that is, acquire properties that would not otherwise be possible’ (p. 2). Where other linguists have treated such developments from the point of view of grammaticalization, Dahl introduces the term ‘maturity’, mature linguistic phenomena being ‘those that … can only exist in a language which has passed through specific earlier stages’ (p. 2). Grammatical maturation generally results in greater linguistic complexity, where complexity is to be seen as an objective property of a system, as ‘a measure of the amount of information needed to describe or reconstruct it’ (p. 2). The book consists of twelve chapters, the first five of which provide the background needed for the discussion of linguistic complexity and maturation processes in grammar. Chapter 2 introduces the mathematical notion of information and the related notion of redundancy. Chapter 3 discusses such notions as order, structure and pattern and introduces the concept of complexity as defined in terms of linearity and verbosity. Chapter 4 considers language from an evolutionary perspective, comparing a non-genetically inherited system like language and the genetically inherited systems studied by evolutionary biologists. Here Dahl notices an important parallel between linguistics and biology: the idea that grammatical entities pass through a series of stages similar to those that an organism goes through in its life cycle. Chapter 5 deals with the way language, as an abstract entity, is acquired and used by concrete human beings, and discusses notions like function and intention, ritualization and conventions, entrenchment and the storage of linguistic knowledge. Chapter 6 then turns to ‘maturity’ and considers what linguistic phenomena can be regarded as displaying it (e.g. inflectional morphology and incorporation). Chapter 7 deals with the components of grammatical maturation processes, looking at pattern spread, pattern competition and pattern regulation. Chapter 8 looks at one more component of grammatical maturation—pattern adaptation—and discusses the notions reanalysis and condensation. Chapters 9 and 10 deal with more specific aspects of grammatical maturation: the genesis of abstract grammatical features and inflectional systems and (diachronic aspects of) compounding and incorporation. Chapter 11 considers grammatical maturation in an ‘ecological’ perspective, discussing the stability of grammatical systems and the factors underlying changes of different kinds. Finally, chapter 12 sums up the main themes of the book and their consequences for the study of linguistics, in particular the idea that ‘mature language states presuppose the presence of both a specific genetically determined acquisition mechanism and a specific cultural chain of development’ (p. 295). The book presents an original take on largely familiar linguistic phenomena. Moreover, by using a lucid, no-nonsense style, Dahl succeeds in presenting the complex material in an accessible way.</p>
<p>The second major theme, the relation between language and mind, forms the subject of three otherwise rather dissimilar publications. In the first, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B36"><italic>Language, Mind and Brain</italic></xref>, Ewa Dąbrowska argues that in order to come to a psychologically realistic theory of language linguists need to turn to other disciplines, in particular those disciplines—neuroscience, psychology, biology—that deal with the mind and brain. Dąbrowska therefore draws on insights from research on language acquisition and impairment, language processing, neurolinguistics, psychology and genetics to identify some general specifications for the design of linguistics theories. The first six chapter (making up part 1) serve to introduce these general specifications. Chapter 1 briefly introduces the relevant psychological and neurological issues. Chapter 2, on language processing, looks at complexity, speed and different processing strategies (including processing shortcuts, the use of prefabricated units, shallow processing and frequency). Chapter 3, which deals with language acquisition, addresses such questions as ‘How much is innate (and universal)?’ and ‘How much is determined by external factors?’, and mentions a number of problems with innate universal grammar. Chapter 4 is devoted to language impairment, in particular the localization question and the effects on linguistic performance of Broca's aphasia and Wernicke's aphasia. In chapter 5 Dąbrowska discusses the relation between language and other cognitive processes, focusing on a specific form of language impairment, William's syndrome. Chapter 6 is concerned with biological matters, such as human adaptations to language, evolution and universal grammar. In the next three chapters the general specifications identified in part 1 are applied to a number of central aspects of linguistic organization. The subjects dealt with are lexical semantics (the semantics and acquisition of locative terms, semantic and perceptual primitives and learning in a constrained connectionist network); rules and regularity (in particular irregular inflections and the advantages and problems of a connectionist approach); and a number of syntactic constructions (among other things, the relation between lexical and grammatical knowledge and evidence for piecemeal learning). Finally, chapter 10 is devoted to approaches to language which best meet the requirements outlined in part 1, in particular cognitive grammar and construction grammar. The book is well written and the arguments are presented in a convincing manner. Its accessibility makes it suitable for a wide range of readers: teachers, students (both beginning and advanced), researchers from various disciplines, and even for a general readership.</p>
<p>Another volume dealing with the relation between language and mind is <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B76"><italic>Language and Reality</italic></xref>, a collection of twenty-eight papers (some new, some revised versions of earlier, relatively little known work) by Sydney Lamb, edited by Jonathan Webster. As in his better-known work, Lamb's main aim in this volume is to see reality as it really is, and, more particularly, to expose some of the illusions about the relation(s) between language and other aspects of reality, including neurological aspects; or, as Lamb explains in the preface, ‘[i]n order to gain real understanding it is necessary to get past the illusion that our minds transparently reveal to us the world as it is’. In addition, the papers in this volume are a good reminder of the important contribution that Lamb has made over the past four decades to the development of linguistic theory, with his pioneering work on stratification grammar, relational network theory and neuro-cognitive linguistics. The book consists of four parts. Part 1 serves to introduce the author's personal outlook on linguistics. This outlook is perhaps best expressed in chapter 1 [1980], in which Lamb, following Louis Hjelmslev (here referred to as ‘Hjemslev’), argues for linguistics as a discipline ‘sans frontiers’, which can contribute to many other disciplines, including psychology, anthropology, sociology, artificial intelligence, semiotics and philosophy. The papers in part 2 are concerned with Lamb's ideas about the structure of language. Chapter 5 [1966], for instance, is an attempt to do justice to ‘one of the classics of twentieth-century linguistics’, Hjelmslev's ‘Epilegomena to a Theory of Language’ [1961], and shows Lamb's indebtedness to Hjelmslev's ideas about language. Chapter 11 [1988], based on the second of two formal discussions between Lamb and his contemporary M.A.K. Halliday, traces the development, over two decades, of Lamb's ideas about the organization of language, from neat stratification to the rich complexity of language as a cognitive system. Part 3 consists of more recent work on the neuro-cognitive basis of language, exploring in particular the relation between relational networks in language and neural networks. In chapter 17 [2001], for instance, Lamb presents both linguistic and neurological evidence for the hypothesis that the neuro-cognitive basis of a person's linguistic system is a relational network. Part 4 deals with language in the real world and examines the way in which language interconnects with other kinds of human experience. Thus, in chapter 28, Lamb relates people's different philosophical views to their ‘cognitive style’: whereas some people are splitters (analytical thinkers), others are lumpers (holists), depending on which hemisphere of the brain they favour in their mental activity. Lamb stresses, however, that the dichotomy is not a simple one, and that the best brains are those with facility in both hemispheres. Although not all chapters in the book are equally accessible, and the link with the overall theme is at places somewhat tenuous, the volume is on the whole extremely readable, inspiring and thought-provoking, giving a good impression of the developments in the linguistic theorizing of one of the leading linguists of our times.</p>
<p>In <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B55"><italic>Word & World</italic></xref>, Patricia Hanna and Bernard Harrison are also concerned with the nature of the relationship between language and reality, an important subject of discussion in the philosophy of language from antiquity to the present. Hanna and Harrison distinguish two broad camps: the Russellians and the Wittgensteinians. The former are advocates of referential realism, which insists that there is a direct relation between a word and (some element in) the world, and that meaning is derived from this relationship. Wittgensteinians deny the need for such a link, believing instead that meaning exists independent of the external world. According to such a relativistic view, people have no access to reality, only to some mental representation of reality. Hanna and Harrison offer the compromise of what they label ‘relative realism’, which combines features of both realism and relativism. Thus, they claim, there is a link between language and the external world, but this relationship is indirect, with a third player mediating between the two. This idea of a third player is not new; what is new is the form it is given by Hanna and Harrison. For them, language and reality are linked by the notion of (linguistic) practices, whereby a practice is to be understood as ‘a way of manipulating the world which is socially maintained because it serves certain purposes’ (p. 353). The scope of the book is impressive. The various parts discuss at length the most important contributions to the debate, comparing and evaluating the various positions, not only those of Bertrand Russell and Ludwig Wittgenstein, but also those of Willard V.O. Quine, Saul Kripke, Hilary Putnam, Donald Davidson, Michael Dummett and John McDowell (representing the Russellian view) and—though in less detail—Maurice Merleau-Ponty and Jacques Derrida (representing the Wittgensteinian view). In the epilogue the authors expound their own solution to the longstanding problem. The book thus serves two purposes: it presents a good overview of one of the crucial debates in language philosophy and offers a new perspective on an old controversy. As such, it will be of interest to scholars and (advanced) students of language philosophy, as well as to readers from related disciplines, such as linguistics and psycholinguistics.</p>
<p>In a special issue of <italic>Studies in Language</italic>, entitled <italic>What Counts as Evidence in Linguistics? The Case of Innateness</italic> (<italic>SLang</italic> 28:iii[2004]), guest editors Martina Penke and Anette Rosenbach have collected a number of papers dealing with the much-debated issues of what kind of evidence and what method of investigation to use in linguistic research. In addressing this issue, the volume focuses on the question of innateness, as this ‘looked very promising to reveal some of the basic differences in the treatment of linguistic evidence within formal and functional approaches’ (p. 478). Linguists from both camps were invited to contribute; to enhance the idea of a debate, each paper is followed by a commentary by a representative from the opposite camp. All contributors were asked to answer one or more of the following three questions: (1) What type of evidence can be used for innateness claims (or Universal Grammar)? (2) What is the content of such innate features (or UG)? and (3) How can UG be used as a theory guiding empirical research? The first of these questions is addressed in the first five papers, all of which consider the status of one particular type of evidence, namely typological evidence. Not surprisingly perhaps, the various authors hold different views on the role and relevance of cross-linguistic data; interestingly, however, these differences do not follow the formal–functional divide. Frederick Newmeyer, for instance, concludes that only absolute universals (properties of language without any cross-linguistic exceptions) are relevant for the construction of UG; in his view, other types of typological evidence (implicational universals and frequency statements) are not part of linguistic knowledge. Martin Haspelmath agrees with Newmeyer that typological evidence is largely irrelevant for the construction of UG, but for a different reason. In Haspelmath's view UG is a statement about what is possible in language; since cross-linguistic data provide only part of what is possible, they cannot fully determine UG. Dieter Wunderlich disagrees with both Newmeyer and Haspelmath: he believes that typological evidence, being the result of an interplay between changing input and UG, is relevant (either directly or indirectly). In Simon Kirby, Kenny Smith and Henry Brighton's evolutionary approach, there is only an indirect connection between UG and universal properties; researchers should, therefore, be careful in relying on linguistic variation to uncover features of UG. Helmut Weiss finally objects to the use of ‘standard languages’ as the main source of evidence used in linguistics, since these languages originally emerged as secondarily learned written languages, not as the language of native speakers. The second question, ‘What is the content of such innate features (or UG)?’, is tackled only by Wunderlich, who provides what he sees as an exhaustive list of what should be part of UG. In addressing the third issue, the relation between UG and empirical evidence, two questions need to be distinguished: (1) Can empirical evidence be used for the construction of UG? and (2) Can UG be used as a theoretical framework guiding and interpreting empirical evidence? For Haspelmath and Newmeyer, the answer to both questions is ‘No’; for Wunderlich, ‘Yes’. Olga Fischer, considering evidence in historical linguistics, gives different answers to these questions: ‘Yes’ to the first, but ‘No’ to the second—or rather ‘Not yet’, since the concept of UG is as yet too empirically weak to be used as a theory guiding historical research. Fischer justifies this claim by providing a survey of functionalist objections to UG. Fred Eckman also argues that innateness claims should not guide empirical research into, in his case, L2 acquisition. According to Eckman, typological universals have more (higher-level) explanatory power than UG, since they allow for the possibility of (lower-level) generalizations to follow from more general cognitive principles (for some more syntactic details, see also <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC5">Section 5</xref>).</p>
<p>Turning to particular theoretical approaches within linguistics, we find two noteworthy publications within the cognitive-communicative tradition. The first of these, Contini-Morava, Kirsner and Rodríguez-Bachiller, eds., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B26"><italic>Cognitive and Communicative Approaches to Linguistic Analysis</italic></xref>, is particularly notable in that it tries to bring about a dialogue between sign-based linguists (e.g. Columbia School, CS) and representatives of cognitive linguistics (in particular Ronald Langacker's cognitive grammar, CG). Most of the contributions centre on one of the basic differences between the two approaches, namely the choice between a monosemous (unitary-meaning) approach (advocated by CS) and a polysemy (semantic network) approach (as adopted in CG). Most contributions, however, are written within one of the two frameworks; only two really engage in the envisaged dialogue, comparing and evaluating the two approaches. The first of these is chapter 1, by Langacker, which offers a CG analysis of double subject constructions and ends with a critique of CS; the second is chapter 3, where Wallis Reid takes issue with the CG concept of polysemy, defending the monosemic bias of CS theory. Of the thirteen remaining contributions, only one, Michael Smith's paper on the conceptual import and discourse function of cataphoric pronouns, is written from the CG perspective, using Gilles Fauconnier's theory of mental spaces and John Haiman's concept of iconicity. The CS contributions are divided over three themes (theoretical issues in classical sign-based linguistics; analyses on the level of the classic linguistic sign; elements larger and smaller than the sign) and deal with a variety of languages (whereby chapter 15, on Argentinean Spanish with a Quechua substrate, is written in Spanish). Contributions dealing (specifically or largely) with English are chapter 8, by Nancy Stern, presenting ‘A Sign-Based Analysis of English Pronouns in Conjoined Expressions’, and chapter 13, by Ricardo Otheguy, Betsy Rodríguez-Bachiller and Eulalia Canals, on ‘Length of the Extra-Information Phrase as a Predictor of Word Order: A Cross-Language Comparison’. Despite the lack of any true exchange of ideas, the volume is certainly proof of the fact that linguists from both sides are not only interested in the same linguistic phenomena, but also keep an open mind as to the way in which to deal with these phenomena. As such, it will certainly be of interest to researchers and students from both the communicative and the cognitive approach to linguistic analysis.</p>
<p>An important contribution within cognitive linguistics (CL) is Vyvyan Evans's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B44"><italic>The Structure of Time.</italic></xref> Whereas, so far, CL's interest in conceptual relations has been restricted to the spatial domain, Evans moves into the temporal dimension. The book's primary concern is with the ‘metaphysical problem of time’: people are aware of time, without being able to perceive it directly—what, then, is the nature of time? Evans begins by introducing three major views on time: (1) the physicalist (or commonsense) view, according to which is time physically real and objectively embedded in the external world; (2) the cognitivist (or mental achievement) view, which takes time to be a derived abstract notion, dependent on the relations between events; and (3) the phenomenological view, according to which our awareness of time derives from internal cognitive and other perceptual processes. Secondly, Evans addresses the ‘linguistic problem’: why is it we talk about time in terms of three-dimensional space? The ultimate goal of the book is to solve the metaphysical problem by tackling the linguistic problem, on the assumption that by examining the way in which language lexicalizes time we will gain important insights into the conceptualization—and hence the nature—of time. According to Evans, time ought to be seen as ‘a complex range of phenomena and processes which relate to different levels and kinds of experience’ (p. 7). As such, it is not an empirical primitive (the physicalist view), nor an abstraction (the cognitivist view), but rather phenomenological in origin. The book consists of three parts. Part 1 serves as an orientation, describing the linguistic problem, introducing the theoretical assumptions and reviewing relevant literature on the subject. Part 2 discusses the various senses of the lexeme ‘time’ (such as the duration sense, the event sense and the measurement-system sense), ending with a brief discussion of the concepts of Present, Past and Future. Part 3 deals with models for time, both larger-scale cognitive models and smaller-scale lexical concepts (e.g. the ‘moving time model’, the ‘moving ego model’ and the ‘temporal sequence model’). In the final chapter, Evans returns to the main issue, considering the implications of the previous chapters for our understanding of the structure of time. He concludes that time, as a complex concept, combines the notions of time as a process and time as an object; or, as Evans puts it, ‘[o]ur conceptual systems allow us to model the phenomenological experiences that constitute temporal awareness. Via language these models are indexed and elaborated in service of our functional, communicative, and cultural needs’ (p. 253).</p>
<p>Several books appeared this year on the subject of translation (studies), two of which will be discussed here. The first, Schäffner, ed., <italic>Translation Research and Interpreting Research</italic>, originates in one-day seminar held at Aston University in February 2002, which is reflected in its organization. Thus, after an introduction by the editor, chapter 2 presents the main contribution to the volume, written by Daniel Gile, also the main contributor to the seminar, while chapter 3 consists of the transcription of a recorded debate between participants in the seminar on the (false) opposition between translation and interpretation studies. The various contributions address such questions as: ‘What exactly are the common features and what are the differences between translation and interpreting?’; ‘Which methods can we use to conduct research into translation and interpreting?’; and ‘Do the two modes belong to the same discipline or to separate (sub)disciplines?’. With regard to the third question, Daniel Gile argues that, despite differences between translation and interpretation research in terms of history, focus and academic status, the phenomenological, epistemological, methodological, institutional and sociological similarities are such that they are natural partners, and that recent developments (increasing popularity, both in research and in teaching; rapid technological developments) seem to narrow the gap between them. Ian Mason, too, argues that the two modes have so much in common that the same research model ought to be applied to both. In their respective contributions, Andrew Chesterman and Miriam Shlesinger, on the other hand, prefer to regard translation studies and interpretation studies as two separate subdisciplines within a larger, interdisciplinary academic discipline of translation. All authors agree, however, that research in both fields will benefit from a closer partnership, and suggest ways in which this may be achieved. In the remaining chapters, Jan Cambridge, Janet Fraser, Yves Gambier, Moira Inghilleri, Zuzana Jettmarová, Mariana Orozco and Franz Pöchhacker discuss one or more of the main issues, sometimes focusing on specific aspects. In the final chapter Daniel Gile briefly reacts to some of the other contributions.</p>
<p>The second contribution to the field of translation, Maria González Davies's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B38"><italic>Multiple Voices in the Translation Classroom</italic></xref>, is of a more practical nature. The title refers to the fact that in the teaching of translation various protagonists play a role: teachers and students, theorists and researchers, as well as practitioners and initiators. Whereas, however, the voices of theorists, researchers and practitioners have been heard more and more powerfully over the last fifty years, this is not the case for teachers—while students have tended to be ignored altogether. The aim of this book is to restore the balance by providing practical teaching ideas that are adaptable to different learning environments. In particular, it is argued that translator education can benefit considerably from the areas of pedagogy and psychology. From pedagogy we may learn which aspects to concentrate on while teaching translation (approach, design and procedures), while psychology may provide us with the means to observe, explore and practise those mental processes that enable the students to improve their translation performance, and to recognize and consider differences in students’ backgrounds and learning styles. This calls for a new approach to translation teaching which (1) includes a combination of written, oral and non-verbal activities; (2) practises skills such as analysing, paraphrasing and summarizing texts and adapting the source text, as well as the adequate use of software and resources; (3) moves away from a text- and teacher-centred approach to an approach which actively involves students and which uses updated pedagogical tools. The book consists of four chapters, divided over two parts. Part 1 describes the basic principles underlying the pedagogical approach and considers the roles of teacher and student. Part 2 starts with a reflection on translation, addressing such issues as the (im)possibility of translation, the roles of culture and the intended reader and the degree of fidelity to the source text, and goes on to explore three crucial areas in translation teaching: linguistic skills, encyclopaedic knowledge and transference skills. Each chapter contains a large number of activities, tasks and projects, described in detail and accompanied by numerous examples. All in all, this book will be a valuable resource for anyone involved in translation education, whether as a teacher, student or course designer.</p>
<p>Also practical in nature is Sheldon, ed., <italic>Directions for the Future: Issues in English for Academic Purposes</italic>. The volume consists of a selection of papers presented at the 2001 Conference of the British Association of Lecturers in English for Academic Purposes, held at the University of Strathclyde (Glasgow), and is mainly concerned with concrete, practical issues, such as essay writing, curriculum design, pedagogical approaches, testing and evaluation, and the role of research. At the same time, the contributions reflect the need for practitioners of English for Academic Purposes (EAP) to look ahead and respond to recent changes in the field, such as the growing importance of EAP and the impact of new technology. The volume is organized around six central issues, dealt with in separate sections. In <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC1">section 1</xref>, on the future of EAP, Tony Dudley-Evans considers the changing role of the teacher (as a ‘rights analyst’) and the need for specific EAP courses for students from different subject areas, while Ron White considers the role of EAP within the university, and, increasingly, the marketplace. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC2">Section 2</xref> is concerned with cognitive skills (Jeanette Littlemore) and critical thinking (Ros Richards). <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC3">Section 3</xref>, on practical pedagogy, contains six papers, dealing with such subjects as how to teach EAP to Chinese students (in papers by David Catterick and Andy Curtis); the (more general) divergence between learner/teacher values (Fiona Cotton); the use of corpus linguistics and discourse analysis to increase the effectiveness of EAP teaching (Martha Jones and Roger Bird); the need for EAP courses allowing for the gradual development of student autonomy (Zoe Kantaridou); and the potential of a good EAP tutorial (John Straker). <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC4">Section 4</xref> contains three papers on the subject of writing for academic purposes. Kenneth Anderson, Cathy Benson and Tony Lynch analyse what often goes wrong in giving feedback, Johnson Kalu stresses the importance of assessing students’ learning outcomes to design more effective EAP courses, and Siân Preece addresses the question of how to cater for (the increasing number of) bilingual students with multicultural UK identities, who often speak non-standard English. <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC5">Section 5</xref>, on testing and evaluation, includes contributions on how to measure the use of low-frequency vocabulary in speech (Irene Turner, Val Godwin and Lynda Wilks) and on the revision of the International English Language Testing Service (IELTS) speaking test (Alan Tonkyn and Julia Wilson). In the final section, Jo McDonough describes recent changes in EAP research methodology, while Keith Morrow offers advice on how to get published in refereed academic journals. All contributions are short, to the point, readable and, indeed, practical; as such they will be of interest to all teachers of and researchers in EAP.</p>
<p>Finally, the year 2004 once again saw the publication of several interesting readers and textbooks. Sampson and McCarthy, eds., <italic>Corpus Linguistics: Readings in a Widening Discipline</italic>, comprises forty-three relatively short papers on the history and scope of the expanding field of corpus linguistics. The papers are given in chronological order, starting with the ‘BC’ (before computers) era, through the early stages of computerization to present times, when the term ‘corpus linguistics’ has become almost synonymous with ‘electronic corpus linguistics’. All contributions have been published elsewhere, but since many of the earlier contributions especially may be hard to get hold of, re-assembling them in this manner seems justified. Moreover, it is only in this way that the book can achieve its aim of offering newcomers to corpus linguistics ‘prior knowledge of where the subject as a whole has come from or the range of directions in which it is developing’ (p. 4). In the introductory chapter the editors give a brief history of the discipline, from its small beginnings to the technological developments that have led to the recent growth of interest in corpus linguistics. The contributions subsequently provide the reader with an overview of the many technical and social science aspects of the subject. Each chapter is preceded by a brief introduction, putting the paper in context by indicating its contribution to the field. The book also contains an appendix with a list of useful websites. Overall, it is a very useful resource, not only for students and researchers within the field of corpus linguistics, but for any theoretical linguist interested in corpus research.</p>
<p>The second reader, Aarts, Denison, Keizer and Popova, eds., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B1"><italic>Fuzzy Grammar</italic></xref>, deals with a much-discussed and still highly topical issue: the role of vagueness and fuzziness in language and linguistic theory. As the editors explain in the preface, the reasons for compiling this reader were several. First, the notions of vagueness and fuzziness have, for a long time, played an important role, not only in linguistics, but also in philosophy and psychology. Secondly, recent renewed interest shows that questions related to categorization and gradience in grammar are still considered important. Thirdly, the editors felt that linguistics had been unduly dominated by theories advocating the classical view of categorization, and that it was time to restore the balance. The reader brings together key texts from classical times to the present, written by philosophers, psychologists and linguists from various backgrounds. It is divided into five parts, each with its own theme. Part 1 contains a number of crucial philosophical writings: Aristotle on categories, Gottlob Frege on concepts, Bertrand Russell on vagueness, Ludwig Wittgenstein on family resemblances, and a recent contribution to the vagueness debate by Rosanna Keefe. Part 2 is concerned with categories in cognition, and includes texts by psychologists (William Labov, Eleanor Rosh) as well as linguists (Ray Jackendoff, Ronald Langacker, George Lakoff). Part 3, dealing with categories in grammar, contains work by Otto Jespersen, David Crystal, John Lyons, John Anderson and John Taylor. The papers in part 4 address the related issue of gradience in grammar; this part includes work by Dwight Bolinger, Noam Chomsky, Randolph Quirk, John Robert Ross and Carson T. Schütze. The final part presents the work of linguists who are critical of the notion of fuzziness and its application in linguistics (Martin Joos, Anna Wierzbicka, Denis Bouchard and Frederick Newmeyer). The five sections are preceded by an introduction in which the editors discuss the various themes, contextualize the selected passages and assess their contribution to the vagueness debate. The book is intended for a wide range of readers, and will, indeed, be of interest to students and scholars from linguistics, philosophy and psychology.</p>
<p>Yet another reader, Venuti, ed., <italic>The Translation Studies Reader</italic>, appeared in a second edition this year. Like the first edition, it contains influential texts from a variety of disciplines, such as linguistics, literary criticism, philosophy and anthropology, presented in chronological order. However, where the first edition included only twentieth-century texts, this edition includes a new section called ‘Foundation Statements’, comprising six pre-twentieth-century passages on translation (from Jerome's ‘Letter to Pammachius’ to Nietzsche's ‘Translations’). This section is followed by five sections, each of which, as in the first edition, covers a period of one or more decades; in the new edition, however, some contributions have disappeared (those by José Ortega y Gasset, Willard V.O. Quine, J.C. Catford, Jirí Levý, William Frawley, Ernst-August Gutt, and Basil Hatim and Ian Mason), while others have been added (apart from those included in the first section, texts by Jacques Derrida, Abé Mark Nornes and Ian Mason). The book begins with a general introduction in which the editor describes the latest developments in translation studies and briefly addresses the question of what translation theory actually is. In addition, each section is introduced by an essay describing the major developments in translation studies of the period. Suggestions for further reading are provided throughout the book. It will be clear that the book covers not only a long period, but also a very large field, addressing all the various aspects of translation from a large variety of perspectives and academic disciplines. This wide coverage, as well as the lucid commentaries, makes the book very suitable as a course book, as well as for self-study; for other readers (scholars from various backgrounds, teachers and translators), too, however, the book will be a valuable resource.</p>
<p>An important textbook published this year is <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B33"><italic>Cognitive Linguistics</italic></xref>, by William Croft and Alan Cruse. This book, intended for advanced undergraduate and postgraduate students, as well as for linguists and researchers from related fields, does not deal with one particular theory or model, but describes various conceptual approaches to linguistic analysis (cognitive grammar and construction grammar, as well as a usage-based model). A brief characterization of the conceptual approach is given in chapter 1. The rest of the book is divided into three parts. Part 1 discusses in more detail the basic principles and key concepts of a conceptual approach to linguistic analysis, as well as the most influential contributions (by both linguists, such as Charles Fillmore, Ronald Langacker, George Lakoff and Gilles Fauconnier, and cognitive psychologists, such as Eleanor Rosch and Herbert Clark). The final chapter of this part introduces the notion of the dynamic construal of meaning, which plays a central role in part 2. This second part deals with one of the main areas of interest in cognitive linguistics: lexical semantics. The four chapters deal with such concepts as polysemy, hyponymy and meronymy, antonymy and complementarity, and metaphor. Part 3 subsequently discusses cognitive approaches to grammatical form. Chapters 9 and 10 introduce construction grammar (in its various forms), while chapter 11 describes a usage-based model of language use, language acquisition and language change. In a short concluding chapter, the authors indicate the need for cognitive linguistics to move beyond its present boundaries, and to take into consideration discourse and functional aspects in order to ‘make a contribution to a theory of language that goes beyond cognition, as well as a theory of cognition that goes beyond language’ (p. 329). Despite the fact that cognitive linguistics has developed into a major linguistic approach, it has until now lacked a comprehensive introduction; although not always equally accessible, this book succeeds in filling this gap and will as such be very welcome to students, teachers and researchers alike.</p>
<p>A new textbook on translation, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B56"><italic>Translation: An Advanced Resource Book</italic></xref>, by Basil Hatim and Jeremy Munday, appeared this year in the Routledge Applied Linguistics series. The book comes as a response to major developments in the field of translation studies, and investigates both the practice and theory of translation. It is intended for final-year undergraduates and postgraduates in translation or applied linguistics, as well as for research students, professional translators and more experienced researchers. The book has been designed to cater for users with different levels of prior knowledge. It is divided into three sections (A, B and C) and fourteen units, with each unit appearing in each section. Section A serves to introduce the key terms and concepts; the tasks in this section are meant to encourage students to reflect on the theory. Section B is the extension section. It includes a selection of core readings (with annotations and comments), each of which is accompanied by a brief task intended to lead students to a fuller understanding of both the theory and practice of translation. Section C is of an explanatory nature, offering critiques and providing tasks that enable the student to further explore the notions introduced so far and to develop and undertake research projects. In all tasks, which are designed for individual as well as for group work, either the target or the source language is English; other languages covered include the major European languages and Arabic. The book also contains a detailed glossary. Because of its matrix organization, it can be read it in two ways: linearly (all of section A, then sections B and C) or thematically (reading one particular unit in the three sections). The book is supported by a website (<<ext-link ext-link-type="uri" xlink:href="http://www.routledge.com/textbooks/041528306X">http://www.routledge.com/textbooks/041528306X</ext-link>>), posting additional text examples, translations and illustrative material.</p>
<p>A second edition appeared this year of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B75"><italic>An Introduction to English Language</italic></xref>, by Koenraad Kuiper and W. Scott Allan. The book is meant as a textbook for undergraduate students and trainee teachers all over the world taking introductory courses in English. It contains a large number of exercises, which are of three kinds: expository exercises, setting the scene for the section to follow; practice questions, which appear at various places in the book and which practise the particular skill dealt with in the preceding section or chapter; and applied exercises, which require students to make more creative use of what they have learnt. In the new edition, the questions at the end of each chapter are marked as elementary, intermediate or more taxing. Answers to the questions can be found either in the following text or at the end of the book. Like the first edition this one consists of three parts; what has changed is the order of their presentation: part 1 now deals with words and part 2 with sounds; part 3 is still concerned with sentences. In addition to a glossary, suggestions for further reading can now also be found at the end of each chapter. Finally, more attention has been paid to regional and social varieties of English, making the book not only more comprehensive, but also better suited for world-wide use.</p>
<p>Another book on English language, but this time from a historical perspective, is Joan C. Beal's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11"><italic>English in Modern Times.</italic></xref> It has a comprehensive focus that addresses the changes of Modern English at its different linguistic levels of vocabulary, syntax, pronunciation, and phonology. The author defines ‘modern times’ as the years from the beginning of the eighteenth century to the end of the Second World War and provides a rather detailed coverage of the external and internal histories of English between the years 1700 and 1945. The period covered coincides with what is generally referred to as Late or Later Modern English. The book opens with an introductory chapter that provides the ‘extra-linguistic contexts’ or external history as a backdrop against which the changes and developments at various linguistic levels are explained. Chapters 2–7 then go into the specifics of internal history by reviewing the major lexical, syntactic, and phonological changes of the language during the defined period. Most orthodox histories of English tend to focus on the standard variety and glorify its achievement; this typical negligence of non-standard varieties, however, is avoided in this book. In the last chapter (chapter 8), Beal gives a brief review of attitudes to, and use of, the non-standard or provincial varieties of British English, and the emerging extraterritorial varieties (see further <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC10">Section 10</xref>).</p>
<p>The final book that merits mention in this year's general section is John Field's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B47"><italic>Psycholinguistics: The Key Concepts</italic></xref>, a reference work intended to introduce learners and other non-specialists to the basic concepts of psycholinguistics. As Field explains in the introduction, such a work is needed for a number of reasons. First, the cross-disciplinary nature of psycholinguistics makes it a difficult area to study, as knowledge is required of various disciplines (not only psychology and linguistics, but also phonetics, discourse analysis, language pathology, neuroscience, computer modelling and language-teaching pedagogy). Secondly, many psycholinguistic ideas and findings are often only reported in specialist journals, which means they are often difficult to find and inaccessible to beginning students. Thirdly, psycholinguistics does not always feature prominently in course programmes (especially in the UK), thus depriving students of the chance to get acquainted with the basic issues and concepts. This comprehensive guide, with its 358 entries, is meant to bridge this gap. The entries, given in chronological order, sometimes consist of a short definition, but often present more detailed treatments of the concept in question. In many cases, cross-references and suggestions for further reading are given at the end of the entry. An extensive index is provided to enable users to find terms that are not included as separate entries. This book will certainly be extremely helpful as a resource, not only for (beginning) students, but also for teachers of psycholinguistics, as well as for general linguists and other readers interested in the field.</p></sec>
<sec id="SEC2"><title>2. History of English Linguistics</title>
<p>The section this year covers work in both 2003 and 2004. Dossena and Jones, eds., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B41"><italic>Insights into Late Modern English</italic></xref> [2003] includes a collection of fifteen papers, which have their origins in a selection of papers and plenary lectures presented at the First International Conference on Late Modern English at Edinburgh University [2001]. These papers, a mix of theoretical contributions and case studies, are partly related to the history of English linguistics, and hence will be discussed here. As a whole, the volume focuses on various aspects of Late Modern English (defined here as the years between 1700 and 1900) and represents a good step towards a more balanced and representative historical account of English. Besides the editors’ introduction, the book is divided into three main sections: ‘The Late Modern English Grammatical Tradition’; ‘The Syntax of Late Modern English’; and ‘Language and Context in the Late Modern Period’.</p>
<p>Most of the papers concerned with the history of English linguistics are found in the first section, which reviews the eighteenth century's ideological stance and attitude to the notion of correctness. Richard Bailey's ‘The Ideology of English in the Long Eighteenth Century’ provides the theoretical and historical background of the prescriptive tradition of usage commentary or the complaint tradition as this attitude is described by James and Lesley Milroy [1999] <italic>Authority in Language: Investigating Standard English</italic>. Through examining the views on language of such prominent writers as Dryden and Swift, Bailey teases out an ideology that demanded pruning copiousness, imposing order by following rules, and celebrating and imitating exemplary users of language. Carol Percy's contribution, ‘The Accidence … for … Young Ladies (1775)’, has as its subject the first grammar of modern English explicitly written by ‘a lady’ and addressed to a female audience. The book, both a prescriptive grammar and a conduct book, was anonymously published in 1775 by a schoolteacher named ‘Mrs. Davis’ (Ellin Davis) whose identity was revealed by a contemporary reviewer. The paper offers a detailed historical background about grammar books of the era to situate Davis's contribution. As Percy explains, Davis was not the first woman to have written a grammar of English. Unlike other female grammar writers before her (such as Ann Fisher for example), Davis is the first female grammarian to feature her femininity in her work. Like other grammarians of her age, however, Davis shared and exploited the period's preoccupation with linguistic correctness, in her case as a marker of the truly ‘cultivated woman’. John Walker's grammar is the subject of Joan C. Beal's ‘John Walker: Prescriptivist or Linguistic Innovator?’. Beal points out that Walker's <italic>Critical Pronouncing Dictionary</italic> [1791] along with Lowth's grammar and Johnson's <italic>Dictionary</italic>, constituted ‘the triumvirate of eighteenth-century guides to usage’ (p. 84). The paper first addresses the prejudiced views of Sheldon and Holmberg towards Walker's contribution as a conservative phonetician. By closely examining the language of Walker's <italic>Dictionary</italic> the author presents a complex picture and answers the question in her title by concluding that Walker was indeed both prescriptive and descriptive. As a prescriptivist, he set out to correct the ‘faults’ of the Irish, Scots and Cockneys. Beal argues, however, that in cases of divided usage Walker did not recommend artificial pronunciations and that his observational powers led him to record and describe the sound changes in progress during the eighteenth century. Linda Mugglestone's ‘Proof or Process: The Making of the <italic>Oxford English Dictionary</italic>’ is about the working methods of the <italic>OED</italic>. Mugglestone examines some uncatalogued proof sheets of the original <italic>OED</italic> to shed some light on its history and evolution. The virtually unexamined documents are drawn from the boxes and archives of Oxford University Press and the Murray Papers in the Bodleian Library in Oxford. Because of the copious annotations with which many of the sheets are covered, the author argues that the proofs not only attest to the provisional stages of the making of the <italic>OED</italic> but also reveal much about the editorial practices and disputes. Some of the disputes discussed relate to the use of restrictive diachronic labelling such as <italic>archaic</italic> or <italic>obsolete</italic>. The proofs, Mugglestone concludes, are a valuable resource that can give us a glimpse into a hitherto hidden history of a monumental work of scholarship on language.</p>
<p>Two papers also relevant to this section can be found in parts 2 and 3 of the same volume. Rafał Molencki's study on ‘Proscriptive Prescriptivists: On the Loss of the “Pleonastic” Perfect Infinitive in Counterfactual Constructions in Late Modern English’ addresses the role of some arch-prescriptivists with regard to a specific point of language structure. In this corpus-based paper, Molencki points out the extent to which prescriptivists who relied heavily on Latin models have had an influence on language change. A case in point, he illustrates, is the condemnation of prescriptive grammarians (such as Priestley, Lowth, and Murray) of the use of the English perfect infinitive (e.g. <italic>I thought to have written last week</italic>) to express intended or unreal action. The second paper is concerned with politeness in ‘Lowth's Language’ by Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade. The author subjects to careful examination the politeness strategies used by the noted grammarian Robert Lowth in his private correspondence. In addition, the article attempts to determine the influence exercised by one correspondent on another's language by examining the use of opening and closing formulas in relation to different addressees and the degree of their social networking.</p>
<p>Similar in its methodological approach is the article ‘A Painter's Will to Please: Reynolds’ Use of <italic>Yours Affectionately/Yours Sincerely</italic>’ by Karlijn Navest (<italic>HLSL</italic> 5[2004]). It focuses on the painter Sir Joshua Reynolds's (1723–92) use of such closing formulas as <italic>Yours (most) sincerely</italic> and <italic>Yours (most) affectionately</italic> and their variations as positive politeness markers. The author makes use of social network theory, which requires paying particular attention to the addresses with whom Reynolds corresponded as well as the time when he started to use such formulas in his letters. Contrary to the prescriptions of the letter-writing manuals of the time, the findings indicate that Reynolds made frequent use of such polite formulas because he was ‘willing to please’. In the conclusion, however, the author could not definitively pinpoint whether it was Pope or Boswell who gave Reynolds the idea of using such polite closing formulas. Another article in the same online journal by Francis Austin, ‘Heaving This Importunity: The Survival of Opening Formulas in Letters in the Eighteenth and Nineteenth Centuries’ (<italic>HLSL</italic> 5[2004]), is also dedicated to the different socio-historical aspects of the opening and ending formulas of the personal letter in this period. Austin investigates the extent to which certain formulaic openings were used in personal letters as well as the social and educational levels associated with them. Based on a corpus comprising a wide variety of writers as well as a selection of letters from late eighteenth-century novels, the paper concentrates on the use and frequency of the opening formulas following immediately after salutation (specifically the ‘intention to write’ formula, which includes the word <italic>opportunity</italic> e.g. <italic>I embrace the favourable opportunity of writing a few lines</italic>). It was found that these formulas persisted longest in the letters of the less educated members of society. The two main groups that continue to use the formulas, even into the nineteenth century, are found to be seamen, mostly of the lower ranks, and women.</p>
<p>Finally, like Carol Percy, whose article is discussed above, María Rodríguez-Gil focuses on an eighteenth-century female grammarian. In ‘Ann Fisher, Descriptive or Prescriptive Grammarian?’ (<italic>LeF</italic> 17[2003] 183–203), Rodríguez-Gil notes that most English grammars of the eighteenth century are classified as either prescriptive or descriptive as if the two categories are polarized. The author, however, challenges this rigid dichotomy since even the works of a famous prescriptivist such as Lowth records the usage of contemporaries. Building on the research of Ingrid Tieken-Boon van Ostade [2000] Female Grammararians of the Eighteenth Century and others who demonstrated the untenability of this simplistic classification, Rodríguez-Gil argues that it is perhaps more appropriate to propose a continuum. Her paper illustrates the application of this continuum through a close analysis of Ann Fisher's <italic>A New Grammar with Exercises of Bad English</italic>.</p></sec>
<sec id="SEC3"><title>3. Phonetics and Phonology</title>
<p>There is no accent of English that has stirred up as much discussion as Received Pronunciation—RP. Peter Roach, ‘Illustrations of the IPA: British English: Received Pronunciation’ (<italic>JIPA</italic> 34[2004] 239–45), has a useful discussion of the present status of this variety, and a description of the present version of RP. The relation of RP to ‘BBC English’ is also discussed.</p>
<p>A number of sociolinguistic studies stand out. Eivind Torgersen and Paul Kerswill, ‘Internal and External Motivation in Phonetic Change: Dialect Levelling Outcomes for an English Vowel Shift’ (<italic>JSoc</italic> 8[2004] 23–53), discuss motivations for vowel changes in Ashford and Reading, showing that dialect levelling models account for the data better than ‘chain shift’ models. Charles Boberg contributes two studies on Montreal English, ‘Ethnic Patterns in the Phonetics of Montreal English’ (<italic>JSoc</italic> 8[2004] 538–68), and ‘Real and Apparent Time in Language Change: Late Adoption of Changes in Montreal English’ (<italic>AS</italic> 79[2004] 250–69). The first of these investigates differences in the phonetic realization of vowels by Montreal speakers of Irish, Italian, and Jewish ethnic origin, and shows that the ‘ethnophonetic’ variation is quite significant. He explains this in the light of the minority status of English in Montreal, and the social and residential segregation of these ethnic groups in distinct neighbourhoods, which limits their exposure to speakers of Standard Canadian English who might otherwise serve as models for assimilation. The second study examines whether the ‘apparent-time’ method for studying linguistic change, in which the linguistic behaviour of speakers of different age groups is compared and which is often used as a substitute for the ‘real-time’ method (in which language use of different periods of time is compared) is a reliable indicator of historical change. The focus of the article is on ‘late adoption’ of new variants by adults, and the conclusion is reached that in cases like these the apparent-time method must be complemented by real-time data in order to obtain an accurate view of change in progress. Also with respect to North American English, Lisa Green, ‘Research on African American English since 1998: Origins, Description, Theory, and Practice’ (<italic>JEngL</italic> 32[2004] 210–29), presents an overview of research into African American English since 1998. Finally, curious data have become available on a variety of English of Massachusetts origin spoken on the Bonin (Ogasawara) Islands in the western Pacific Ocean, where settlers have left their mark. Daniel Long and Peter Trudgill, in ‘The Last Yankee in the Pacific: Eastern New England Phonology in the Bonin Islands’ (<italic>AS</italic> 79[2004] 356–67), analyse recordings of a speaker. They find that his dialect resembles current eastern New England speech and provide a description of the historical-linguistic situation.</p>
<p>With respect to world Englishes, there are articles on Singapore English—Arto Anttila, Vivienne Fong, Stefan Benus and Jennifer Nycz: ‘Deriving Consonant Cluster Phonotactics: Evidence from Singapore English’ (<italic>ROA</italic> 649[2004]), which discusses vowel epenthesis, consonant reordering (metathesis, copy), and consonant lenition in an OT framework—and Philippine English, Ma. Lourdes G. Tayao's ‘The Evolving Study of Philippine English Phonology’ (<italic>WEn</italic> 23[2004] 77–90).</p>
<p>In phonology proper, May Paster, ‘Vowel Height Harmony and Blocking in Buchan Scots’ (<italic>Phonology</italic> 21[2004] 359–407), examines vocalic height harmony. The interesting fact is that some intervening consonants block the operation of harmony, which is explained in terms of a multi-valued feature (closed) and in terms of phonetics–phonology interaction. Prosodic-phonetic studies were reported on in Taehong Cho, ‘Prosodically Conditioned Strengthening and Vowel-to-Vowel Coarticulation in English’ (<italic>JPhon</italic> 32[2004] 141–76), which investigates the effect of prosodic factors (stress, prosodic boundaries, position in the phrase) on co-articulation, and in Kenneth de Jong, ‘Stress, Lexical Focus, and Segmental Focus in English: Patterns of Variation in Vowel Duration’ (<italic>JPhon</italic> 32[2004] 493–516), which investigates the effects of stress and focus on vowel duration and quality in English.</p>
<p>Finally, a Festschrift should be mentioned that was put together for John M. Anderson, whose work in historical English phonology, phonological theory and other areas cannot be overestimated and is rightly honoured. This collection is preceded by a bibliography of Anderson's work. A number of articles focus on (Old) English—Fran Colman, ‘Old English <italic>I</italic>-Umlaut: A Unitary Sound Change? Dependency, Contrast and Non-Specification’ (pp. 31–62), Mike Davenport, ‘Old English Breaking and Syllable Structure’ (pp. 63–76), and Jacques Durand, ‘Tense/Lax, the Vowel System of English and Phonological Theory’ (pp. 77–97)—while other articles are welcome contributions to the sorts of theories Anderson helped developed in the past.</p></sec>
<sec id="SEC4"><title>4. Morphology</title>
<p>There are several items on affixation. Jennifer Hay and Ingo Plag, in ‘What Constrains Possible Suffix Combinations? On the Interaction of Grammatical and Processing Restrictions in Derivational Morphology’ (<italic>NL<</italic> 22[2004] 565–96), predict that an affix which can be easily parsed out in processing should not occur inside an affix which cannot. Seizi Iwata, in ‘<italic>Over</italic>-Prefixation: A Lexical Constructional Approach’ (<italic>ELL</italic> 8[2004] 23–92), offers an analysis of this prefix within the framework of construction grammar that may account for the changes in argument structure that it is associated with. Klaus Dietz, in ‘Die altenglischen Präfixbildungen und ihre Charakteristik’ (<italic>Anglia</italic> 122[2004] 561–613), presents a detailed study of the formal, functional and semantic aspects of the OE prefix system. Ingo Plag, in ‘Syntactic Category Information and the Semantics of Derivational Morphological Rules’ (<italic>FoLi</italic> 38[2004] 193–225), argues on the basis of a study of the affixes -<italic>er</italic>, -<italic>ee</italic>, -<italic>able</italic>, -<italic>ize</italic>/-<italic>ify</italic> and <italic>un</italic>- that semantic output-oriented rules make better predictions than rules that rely on the syntactic category of the base. Paolo Acquaviva, in ‘Constraining Inherent Inflection: Number and Nominal Aspect’ (<italic>FoLi</italic> 38[2004] 333–54), shows that number, though officially inflectional morphology, can be lexicalized, and it is the more lexicalized, ‘inherent’ plurals that take part in lexeme formation. He concludes that morphology is not ‘split’, but its uses are.</p>
<p>Compounding has also attracted some attention. In ‘Compound or Phrase? English Noun-plus-Noun Constructions and the Stress Criterion’ (<italic>ELL</italic> 8[2004] 1–24), Heinz J. Giegerich employs stress as a diagnostic for which NNs originate in the lexicon (lexical NNs like <italic>watch-maker</italic>) and which in the syntax (phrasal combinations like <italic>steel bridge</italic>). Peter Hohenhaus, in ‘Identical Constituent Compounding—A Corpus-Based Study’ (<italic>FoLi</italic> 38[2004] 297–331), explores doublings such as <italic>pain pain</italic> (physical pain as opposed to emotional pain) that are apparently constructed on the pattern: an <italic>XX</italic> is a proper/prototypical <italic>X</italic>. Jila Gomeshi, Ray Jackendoff, Nicole Rosen and Kevin Russell, in ‘Contrastive Focus Reduplication in English (The Salad-Salad Paper)’ (<italic>NL<</italic> 22[2004] 307–57), examine similar examples and propose an analysis in Jackendoff's parallel architecture framework. Paula López Rúa, in ‘The Categorial Continuum of English Blends’ (<italic>ES</italic> 85[2004] 63–76), proposes a basis for classification of such items as <italic>intellivision</italic> or <italic>botel</italic> along a number of different parameters.</p>
<p>In ‘Suppletion: Frequency, Categories and Distribution of Stems’ (<italic>SLang</italic> 28[2004] 387–418), Andrew Hippisley, Marina Chumakina, Greville G. Corbett and Dunstan Brown present a study of the phenomenon of suppletion in thirty languages and show that suppletive items persist not only because of their high frequency, but also because of the type of inflectional category they belong to and the nature of the distribution of their stems. Martin Maiden, in ‘When Lexemes Become Allomorphs—On the Genesis of Suppletion’ (<italic>FoLi</italic> 38[2004] 227–56), shows how suppletion often involves the mapping of virtually meaningless differences onto wholly meaningless, but very prominent, formal divisions in a morphological paradigm. Fran Colman and John Anderson, in ‘On Metonymy as Word-Formation: With Special Reference to Old English’ (<italic>ES</italic> 85[2004] 547–65), argue that metonymic shifts like <italic>tongue</italic> for language should also be regarded as part of the word-formation strategies of a language, on a par with conversion, derivation, back formation, etc.</p></sec>
<sec id="SEC5"><title>5. Syntax</title>
<sec id="SEC5.1"><title>(a) Modern English</title>
<p>This year we begin by repeating some words written by J.R.R. Tolkien, one of our distinguished predecessors on these pages. Eighty years ago he found ‘the mass of material probably greater than usual’, and added that ‘a general view and appreciation of recent work (even of one year's work) is … a task for a polymath of unusual leisure and voracity’ (<italic>YWES</italic> 5[1924] 26). Now, our leisure and voracity are quite limited, and we have even less to offer in the polymath department. Nevertheless, we have done our best again with the masses of material and hope our readers will continue to find our reviews useful. As always, it has to be understood that, where important items have escaped our attention or fallen victim to our lack of leisure, this will be made good in the coming instalments.</p>
<p>Interest in typology continues to inform much work on English. Usefully, William Croft has produced a second edition of his textbook <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B31"><italic>Typology and Universals</italic></xref> [2003], updating the earlier version on the basis of results achieved since its original publication. The chapters contain a good amount of material from ‘exotic’ languages, but the book is organized by theoretical concept rather than by linguistic phenomena, which means that the data support the analytic framework rather than the other way round. As a result, the work is informative also for those whose day-to-day work is not cross-linguistic. Chapter topics include typological classification; implicational universals; markedness, economy and iconicity in grammatical categories; grammatical hierarchies; prototypes and interacting typologies; syntactic structure in typology; and diachronic typology. Throughout, Croft pays serious attention to the motivation for typological patterns; his explanations tend to come from the cognitive-cum-functional field.</p>
<p>There are several other textbooks to report on. Victoria Fromkin, Robert Rodman and Nina Hyams have written a seventh edition of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B51"><italic>An Introduction to Language</italic></xref> [2003]. It remains an attractive yet solid introduction to all the various fields of linguistics, now updated in content and here and there also in organization. The twelve chapters deal with the topics of the nature of language, brain and language, morphology, syntax, semantics and pragmatics, phonetics, phonology, language acquisition, processing, language in society, language change, and writing. Each comes with a summary, references for further reading, and an extensive set of exercises. A less ambitious but no less useful work is the second edition of the late Sidney Greenbaum's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B53"><italic>An Introduction to English Grammar</italic></xref>, prepared by Gerald Nelson. Here, the novice can learn about all the basic grammatical concepts and terms of the Quirk tradition, and can read about problems of usage connected with grammar, style in writing, punctuation and spelling, and registers of English. He or she can practise the material through exercises, and do some further reading as well.</p>
<p><italic>Binding Theory</italic> by Daniel Büring is a comprehensive textbook on the syntax and semantics of binding, meant to fill the gap between introductory syntax textbooks and the primary research literature. The first six chapters—‘The ABC of Binding Theory’, ‘Interpreting Indexed Structures’, ‘Domains and Orientation’, ‘Binding versus Co-Reference’, ‘Other Cases of Semantic Binding’ and ‘The Coreference Rule’—build on each other; the remaining chapters—‘Descriptive Pronouns and Individual Concepts’, ‘Semantic Binding and C-Command’, ‘Plurals’, ‘Reciprocals’, ‘Exempt Anaphora and Reflexivity’ and ‘Binding and Movement’—can be accessed independently of each other. Within each chapter, more advanced material is clearly demarcated from the basics, and can be skipped without compromising understanding of the later chapters. There are exercises at the end of the earlier chapters. The primary language analysed is English, though there are also data from other languages.</p>
<p>All you ever wanted to know about person marking is to be found in Anna Siewierska's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B103"><italic>Person</italic></xref>, a textbook with data drawn from a wide range of languages. After a discussion of person as a grammatical theory (chapter 1) and the presentation of a detailed person typology (chapter 2), the author explores the person paradigm (chapter 3). The two most common grammatical distinctions encoded in the paradigm are, of course, number and gender, although there are exceptional languages that do not exhibit any number oppositions in their person systems. Some languages have different forms for inclusive and exclusive ‘we’. Most gender contrasts in person markers are sex-based; the treatment of ‘sexless’ referents varies. Sex-based gender may interact with the human/non-human or animate/inanimate distinction; gender contrasts not involving sex but solely these other distinctions are considerably less common. Chapter 4 presents a discussion of person agreement. There are languages in which person agreement only occurs on event predicates, or only on event and property predicates, or only on event, property and class predicates, or on event, property and locational predicates, pointing at a semantic predicate hierarchy <italic>event</italic> > <italic>property</italic> > <italic>class, locational.</italic> The most typical agreement pattern is that of subject and verb, or, more precisely, of agent and verb in the accusative alignment and patient and verb in the ergative alignment. A second frequent agreement pattern is that of agreement between possessor and possessed in substantival possession, with as a relevant distinction alienable versus inalienable possession. Chapter 5 discusses the function of person forms, accessibility, and also Binding Theory. Chapter 6 tackles social deixis, in which dimensions such as rank, status, generation, formality and informality, intimacy, social distance and emotional excitement can all be factors in the selection of one person form over another. The final chapter deals with the diachronic perspective: where the source of a person form can be recovered, first- and second-person markers tend to be drawn from nominals denoting human relations (typically ‘slave’ or ‘servant’ for first, and ‘master’ or ‘lord’ for second), whereas third-person markers tend to go back to words such as ‘thing’, ‘human’, ‘man’, or ‘body’, or to demonstratives. Independent person markers can grammaticalize into agreement markers.</p>
<p>We will devote some more space to the special volume of <italic>SLang</italic> 28[2004] on the nature of linguistic evidence, edited by Martina Penke and Anette Rosenbach, even though it has been discussed in <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC1">Section 1</xref>, highlighting some other aspects relevant to the present section. In ‘Typological Evidence and Universal Grammar’ (<italic>SLang</italic> 28[2004] 527–48), Frederick J. Newmeyer argues that some of the best-established typological generalizations have explanations based on language use, and so it is either empirically unmotivated or redundant to attempt to encompass them within UG theory. Mark Baltin comments on this paper in ‘Remarks on the Relation between Language Typology and Universal Grammar’ (<italic>SLang</italic> 28[2004] 549–53). ‘Does Linguistic Explanation Presuppose Linguistic Description?’ asks Martin Haspelmath (<italic>SLang</italic> 28[2004] 554–79), and he argues that the answer depends on what is meant by ‘linguistic description’. Any cross-linguistic generalizations that are found are best explained by functional factors. For this purpose, a ‘phenomenological description’ which makes no claims about mental reality is sufficient. In their commentary, ‘Remarks on Description and Explanation in Grammar’ (<italic>SLang</italic> 28[2004] 580–3), Judith Aissen and Joan Bresnan question Haspelmath's assumption that a phenomenological description does not require a theoretical framework of any kind. Martin Haspelmath's ‘Author's Response’ (<italic>SLang</italic> 28[2004] 584–6) concedes this, but argues that his main point is that this mentalistic approach to description does not bring us much closer to understanding grammars or to the nature of the cognitive code. Simon Kirby, Kenny Smith and Henry Brighton, in ‘From UG to Universals’ (<italic>SLang</italic> 28[2004] 587–607) demonstrate by means of Iterated Learning, a computer simulation, that UG and universals cannot be directly equated, as languages in the simulation will tend to evolve towards similar stable states quite naturally given the fact that it is the more general rules that tend to survive being squeezed through the bottleneck of language acquisition. A commentary is provided in ‘Form, Meaning and Speakers in the Evolution of Language’ by William Croft (<italic>SLang</italic> 28[2004] 608–11), who translates the learning model into a bias towards iconicity and argues that language acquisition has been given too prominent a role in the model. Simon Kirby et al. cite further simulation studies in their ‘Authors’ Response’ (<italic>SLang</italic> 28[2004] 612–14). They show that varying the frequency of meanings in the model results in islands of non-compositionality in high-frequency parts of the space, mirroring the irregularity-by-frequency interaction in the morphology of many languages. Dieter Wunderlich asks: ‘Why Assume UG?’ (<italic>SLang</italic> 28[2004] 615–41) and debates the question of UG as a system specific to language or adapted from general cognitive capacities, He argues that linguistic typology can contribute to our knowledge of UG, and vice versa. Michael Tomasello, in his comment, ‘What Kind of Evidence Could Refute the UG Hypothesis?’(<italic>SLang</italic> 28[2004] 642–5), lists the many different ways in which UG has been defined and emphasizes that there are no agreed-upon methods for evaluating these. Wunderlich answers, in ‘Author's Response: Is There Any Evidence That Refutes the UG Hypothesis?’ (<italic>SLang</italic> 28[2004] 646–7), that the UG hypothesis should be seen as a general idea that directs scientific investigation rather than a specific hypothesis. Finally, Helmut Weiss, in ‘A Question of Relevance: Some Remarks on Standard Languages’ (<italic>SLang</italic> 28[2004] 648–74), argues that linguistic evidence based on standard languages should be treated with caution as they have originally emerged as secondarily learned written languages.</p>
<p>Richard Hudson, in ‘Why Education Needs Linguistics (and Vice Versa)’ (<italic>JL</italic> 40[2004] 105–30), argues persuasively that linguistics on all its various levels has an important contribution to make in language teaching. ‘Modelling Linguistic Gradience’ by Bas Aarts (<italic>SLang</italic> 28[2004] 1–49) argues that categorial vagueness, or ‘gradience’, should have a role to play in language studies, and introduces a formalism that uses morphosyntactic tests to establish whether an item belongs to a particular class or to a ‘bordering’ one by weighing up the form-class features that apply to the item in question. Kees Hengeveld, Jan Rijkhoff and Anna Siewierska, in ‘Parts-of-Speech Systems and Word Order’ (<italic>JL</italic> 40[2004] 527–70), argue that the word-order possibilities of a language are partly determined by its parts-of-speech system.</p>
<p>A work that argues for a close link between performance and grammar is <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B57"><italic>Efficiency and Complexity in Grammars</italic></xref> by John Hawkins. Building on his earlier work, Hawkins proposes that what is beneficial for language processing is what gets incorporated in grammars. Formulating three efficiency principles (‘Minimize Domains’; ‘Minimize Forms’; ‘Maximize On-Line Processing’), he proceeds to test them using frequency data (mostly from English), findings from psycholinguistic experiments, typology, and language change. Among the phenomena explored in this way are adjacency effects inside phrases and clauses, relative clause marking, the accessibility hierarchy, and word order. In each case, the predictions made by his basically very simple model are confirmed. Like Hawkins's earlier work in this field, the overall argument is cogent and the weight of the evidence is impressive (though, somehow, the demonstration that so much can be explained by so little arouses a feeling of suspicion—is language really so simple?).</p>
<p>Joybrato Mukherjee's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B88"><italic>Form and Function of Parasyntactic Presentation Structures: A Corpus-Based Study of Talk Units in Spoken English</italic></xref> proposes a framework for a functional and empirical analysis of the prosody–syntax interface in terms of a modified talk-unit model. This model was tested against a 50,000-word corpus, mainly taken from the London–Lund Corpus of Spoken English. All tone-unit boundaries were analysed in terms of their prosodic and syntactic status, and talk-unit boundaries were identified on this basis, identifying in turn parasyntactic configurations. A quantitative analysis then revealed correlations between the distribution and frequency of parasyntactic configurations on the one hand and stylistic and text-typological variation across the corpus on the other, confirming the hypothesis that talk units fulfil communicative functions in spoken English. Prosodic and syntactic structure are fundamentally different in nature: in syntax, there is a complex hierarchy of grammatical units (sentence, clause, phrase, etc.), whereas in prosody there is only a binary choice between the placement and non-placement of a tone-unit boundary. Fundamental differences were also found between speaking and reading intonation. The study identifies eight parasyntactic principles relevant to the interface of syntax and prosody, ranging from the interplay of closure or non-closure of intonational or syntactic patterns to information packaging and turn-taking. This is a thorough and ground-breaking work. Intonation and the information it conveys is also much to the fore in Martin Warren's ‘A Corpus-Driven Analysis of the Use of Intonation to Assert Dominance and Control’ (in Connor and Upton, eds., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B25"><italic>Applied Corpus Linguistics: A Multidimensional Perspective</italic></xref>, pp. 21–33): the choice of tone is determined by both the discourse type and the designated roles of speakers.</p>
<p>Petra Bos, Bart Hollebrandse and Petra Sleeman have edited a special issue of <italic>The International Review of Applied Linguistics in Language Teaching</italic> on interfaces. Their introduction, ‘The Pragmatics-Syntax and the Semantics-Syntax Interface in Acquisition’ (<italic>IRAL</italic> 42[2004] 101–10), discusses how cross-linguistic variation in mapping these language components may affect L1 and L2 acquisition. William Philip and Sabine Botschuijver, in ‘Discourse Integration and Indefinite Subjects in Child English’ (<italic>IRAL</italic> 42[2004] 189–201), report on an experiment that appears to indicate that children's immature grasp of discourse representations places a non-grammatical cognitive limitation on their acquisition of syntax. In ‘Tacit Belief, Semantics and Grammar’ (<italic>Ling&P</italic> 27[2004] 57–91), Kent Johnson explores speakers’ epistemic access to the semantic and syntactic features of the utterances of their own language. In ‘Scalar Implicatures in Complex Sentences’ (<italic>Ling&P</italic> 27[2004] 367–91), Uli Sauerland develops a Gricean account for the computation of scalar implicatures that holds even in cases when one scalar term is in the scope of the other (e.g. <italic>Kai had the broccoli or some of the peas last night</italic>). Laura A. Michaelis, in ‘Type Shifting in Construction Grammar: An Integrated Approach to Aspectual Coercion’ (<italic>CogLing</italic> 15[2004] 1–67), examines type shifting (also known as type coercion), which can force, for instance, a durative interpretation on an achievement—witness a sentence such as <italic>She was winning the race when she got tripped</italic>. In ‘The Notion of a “Lemma”: Headwords, Roots and Lexical Sets’ (<italic>IJCL</italic> 9[2004] 69–81), Gerry Knowles and Zuraidah Mohd Don demonstrate that the definition of this concept is not an easy matter if one looks at languages like Malay or Arabic.</p>
<p>There is also a multitude of studies that contribute to the further development of theoretical models of language. Edwin Williams proposes a new syntactic architecture in his monograph <italic>Representation Theory</italic>, which capitalizes on the strong tendency of syntax to be structure-preserving: the positions of a verb and its arguments relative to each other are preserved in many syntactic and morphological operations; the Mirror Principle, equidistance, Holmberg's generalization, scope principles and the ‘faithfulness to input’ in OT all exhibit this strong drive towards ‘shape conservation’. In generative work, NPs and Vs move to functional projections as a way of interfacing between e.g. θ-role and case form, but this movement tends to be vacuous because the NPs and Vs end up in the same positions relative to each other. Even the systematic remnant movement advocated in ‘hyper-Kaynian’ theories ultimately leads to the same result. Williams therefore proposes to account for this persistent phenomenon of shape conservation by accomplishing the interface between e.g. θ-roles and case not by means of movement but by means of shape-conserving mapping of several distinct levels/components: θ-Structure, Case Structure [CS], Quantification Structure or Topic Structure [TS], Surface Structure [SS], Focus Structure [FS] and Accent Structure. This is Representation Theory: a Case Structure ‘represents’ a θ-structure it is paired with. Each level introduces new lexical or functional material. Focus-related phenomena like heavy NP shift or Scrambling follow from conflicting representation requirements (e.g. a mismapping of CS onto SS is tolerated because of the SS, FS match), and language differences are analysed as different choices in resolving such conflicts. Embedding happens at different levels, with corresponding differences between the degrees of clause union of the embedded clause, ranging from the very ‘small’ small clauses at TS to the very ‘large’ propositional clauses at FS. Similar divisions are proposed for anaphors: tight ‘co-argument’ anaphors are defined at TS, while long-distance anaphors are defined at SS, and the type of antecedent they can have varies correspondingly. Movement in the traditional sense breaks down into two types: ‘classical’ movement as in <italic>wh</italic>-movement which is part of a definition of the SS component, and misrepresentation, where an element might be seen to have moved because it occurs in a structure that stands in a representation relation with another structure that it is not strictly isomorphic to. This is an extremely interesting work.</p>
<p>This can also be said of Rizzi, ed., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B97"><italic>The Cartography of Syntactic Structures</italic></xref>, volume 2: <italic>The Structure of CP and IP</italic>. There is, however, an important difference: where Williams proposes an entirely new model of syntax, and uses examples to illustrate his ideas rather than provide exhaustive analyses, the authors in <italic>The Structure of CP and IP</italic> aim at full analysis of the complete data. As a result, the volume bristles with detail, in terms of data and also of CP and IP structure, both of which are exploded in some of the papers in order to fit in all the different types of elements that can (co-)occur in these domains. No broad brushstrokes here, but delicate pencil work, which strongly resists summary. Since some of the papers also concentrate on languages other than English, we merely identify titles and authors. Luigi Rizzi provides a general introduction ‘On the Cartography of Syntactic Structures’. ‘Aspects of the Low IP Area’ are examined by Adriana Belletti. Paola Beninca and Cecilia Poletto address ‘Topic, Focus, and V2: Defining the CP Sublayers’. Valentina Bianchi studies ‘Resumptive Relatives and LF Chains’. Anna Cardinaletti moves ‘Towards a Cartography of Subject Positions’. Carlo Cecchetto contributes ‘Remnant Movement in the Theory of Phases’. Alessandra Giorgi and Fabio Pianesi look at ‘Complementizer Deletion in Italian’. M. Rita Manzini and Leonardo M. Savoia write ‘Clitics: Co-occurrence and Mutual Exclusion Patterns’. Cecilia Poletto and Jean-Yves Pollock focus ‘On the Left Periphery of Some Romance <italic>Wh</italic>-Questions’. Ian Roberts grapples with ‘The C-System in Brythonic Celtic Languages, V2, and the EPP’. Ur Shlonsky, finally, examines ‘Enclisis and Proclisis’.</p>
<p>In <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B78"><italic>Minimalist Investigations in Linguistic Theory</italic></xref> [2003], Howard Lasnik presents a collection of articles of various syntactic phenomena that have implications for the minimalist approach to syntax. Chapter 2, ‘Patterns of Verb Raising with Auxiliary “Be” ’, presents an analysis of Infl as either a bundle of features or an affix, with the patterning of habitual <italic>be</italic> in AAE as a test case. Chapter 3, ‘Last Resort and Attract F’, discusses the nature of the ‘last resort’ restriction on movement. Chapter 4, ‘Levels of Representation and the Elements of Anaphora’, tackles the problem of anaphoric interpretation, which appears to hold at S-structure and therefore constitutes a problem for minimalism, which denies the existence of S-structure as a significant level of representation. Chapter 5, ‘Pseudogapping Puzzles’, proposes an analysis of pseudogapping (as in <italic>John will select me, and Bill will you</italic>) in which the right-hand remnant has raised to Spec,AgrO with the VP from which it has escaped subsequently undergoing deletion. Chapter 6, ‘On Feature Strength: Three Minimalist Approaches to Overt Movement’, compares several possibilities for the condition demanding that strong features must be checked in overt syntax. Chapter 7, ‘A Gap in an Ellipsis Paradigm: Some Theoretical Implications’, argues that the analysis put forward in chapter 2 accounts for the gap in the ellipsis paradigm exemplified by <italic>John slept and Mary will too/*John was here and Mary will too</italic>. Chapter 8, ‘On a Scope Reconstruction Paradox’, attempts to resolve the conflicting data on the scope of quantifiers. Chapter 9, ‘Some Reconstruction Riddles’, investigates binding theoretic reconstruction effects evident in the contrast between <italic>*Which report that John<sub>i</sub> was incompetent did he<sub>i</sub> submit?</italic> and <italic>Which report that John<sub>i</sub> revised did he<sub>i</sub> submit?</italic> Chapter 10, ‘Chains of Arguments’, delves deeper into the missing A-movement reconstruction effects of chapters 8 and 9 and proposes that there is no A-movement reconstruction because A-movement does not leave a trace (or copy).</p>
<p>More minimalism can be found in Hendrick, ed., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B58"><italic>Minimalist Syntax</italic></xref>, a collection of five articles [2003]. In each of the contributions, an older, government-binding-style, analysis of certain facts is carefully scrutinized and then rejected, being replaced by a more minimalist account. Thus, Norbert Hornstein writes ‘On Control’, in which he does away with the familiar analysis in terms of coindexing of PRO and proposes a movement account, with thematic roles acting as triggers. Danny Fox writes ‘On Logical Form’, in which he focuses on quantifier raising, suggesting that it is overt rather than covert, as has been the standard assumption since the mid-1980s. Howard Lasnik and Randall Hendrick take ‘Steps toward a Minimal Theory of Anaphora’, arguing that covert movement does not change affect anaphoric relations. In ‘Syntactic Variation, Historical Development, and Minimalism’, Höskuldur Thráinsson examines facts relating to the order of verb and adverb that have been analysed as being due to verb movement; Thráinsson proposes that such movement correlates with the presence of separate tense and agreement elements in the language. The volume is rounded off by Robert A. Chametzky, who takes a hard look at ‘Phrase Structure’ and suggests that its existence is not compatible with minimalism.</p>
<p>Kriszta Szendrői, in ‘Focus and the Interaction between Syntax and Pragmatics’ (<italic>Lingua</italic> 114[2004] 229–54), introduces a special issue on this subject by presenting the question whether focus is directly encoded in the syntactic computational system (e.g. by means of a Focus projection) or whether it is a separate domain, requiring a substantial interface. Margaret Speas, in ‘Evidentiality, Logophoricity and the Syntactic Representation of Pragmatic Features’ (<italic>Lingua</italic> 114[2004] 255–76), argues that the existence of evidential morphemes and logophoric (‘point of view’) pronouns in natural language requires a framework with syntactic projections bearing pragmatically relevant features. Sarah D. Kenelly, in ‘Pragmatics and Quantificational Dependencies’ (<italic>Lingua</italic> 114[2004] 367–88), analyses the dependency relation in quantificational dependencies as a non-assertive DP defining relation that maps from given to new information. Given information is bound and fixed at text level, whereas new information is a local phenomenon.</p>
<p>Toru Ishii, in ‘The Phase Impenetrability Condition, the Vacuous Movement Hypothesis, and <italic>That-t</italic> Effects’ (<italic>Lingua</italic> 114[2004] 183–25), argues for local evaluation of derivations at each ‘phase’ level. Jason Merchant, in ‘Fragments and Ellipsis’ (<italic>Ling&P</italic> 27[2004] 661–738), examines fragmented utterances such as short answers and sub-sentential XPs and argues that they derive from fully sentential syntactic structures. The fragment has first been A’-moved to a clause-peripheral position before the remainder of the sentence is deleted. ‘Verb-Second as vP-First’ by Gereon Müller (<italic>JCGL</italic> 7[2004] 179–234) argues for a remnant movement approach to verb-second constructions that does not employ head movement at any step of the derivation: the pre-verb-second (topic) position and the verb-second position collapse into a single fronted remnant vP. ‘Head-Final Effects and the Nature of Modification’ by José Luis González Escribano (<italic>JL</italic> 40[2004] 1–43) argues that such effects—*<italic>a keen on jazz student</italic>, *<italic>Bill's this morning lecture</italic>—do not require a filter but, given the fact that modification reduces to complementation, follow from Richard Kayne's Linear Correspondence Axiom. Silke Fischer, in ‘Optimal Binding’ (<italic>NL<</italic> 22[2004] 481–526), proposes a uniform theory of binding in terms of an optimality theoretical approach. Two constraint hierarchies—one to account for the fact that binding is sensitive to domains of different size, and one to prohibit elements of different anaphoric degree—then account for the occurrence of simplex and complex anaphors, pronouns and R-expressions. In ‘<italic>Wh</italic>-copying, Phase, and Successive Cyclicity’ (<italic>Lingua</italic> 114[2004] 543–74), Claudia Felser points out a number of problems for Chomsky's [1998 and later] successive-cyclic <italic>wh</italic>-movement approach and suggests some modifications. ‘Positive Polarity—Negative Polarity’ (<italic>NL<</italic> 22[2004] 409–52), by Anna Szabolcsi, proposes a unification of negative concord and positive and negative polarity items. Hiroyuki Tanaka, in ‘On the Minimality of Generalized Pied Piping [GPP]’ (<italic>Lingua</italic> 114[2004] 911–33), argues that movement, which reduces to GPP, is an automatic process, immune to minimality constraints. John Frederick Bailyn, in ‘Generalized Inversion’ (<italic>NL<</italic> 22[2004] 1–49), unifies inversion, A-scrambling and other constructions involving non-nominative first constituents. The cross-linguistic existence of such constituents is a reflex of a parameterized property which is related to the strength of nominative case features in I. In ‘Be Careful Where You Float Your Quantifiers’ (<italic>NL<</italic> 22[2004] 681–742), Željko Bošković argues that the ban on floating quantifiers in the object position of passive and ergative verbs can be generalized to a ban on floating quantifiers in θ-positions. Idan Landau, in ‘The Scale of Finiteness and the Calculus of Control’ (<italic>NL<</italic> 22[2004] 681–742), offers a persuasive analysis of the distribution of PRO not based on Case or government but on the features [Tense] and [Agr], resulting in a cross-linguistic typology of the ways in which finiteness and control interact.</p>
<p>After all this theoretical food, we now come to some lighter fare, in the form of corpus-based work. Diana Santos's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B101"><italic>Translation-Based Corpus Studies: Contrasting English and Portuguese Tense and Aspect Systems</italic></xref> discusses the problems inherent in trying to compare these systems in different languages: previous accounts seemed to have been biased towards one of the languages, say English, giving rise to claims, for instance, that the perfect match in that language between the perfective viewpoint (expressed by the simple past) and situation type is lacking in the other languages under comparison. Another problem is the collection of the data: with one language as exemplar, the parallel texts in the other language(s) are necessarily translations, with the risk that they represent ‘translationese’ rather than authentic language. How can languages be compared on their own terms, without pressing one into the mould of the other? Santos's solution is to use ‘translation networks’, a visual mapping of categories and relationships, which she, unfortunately, does not manage to present clearly to the uninitiated. The corpus used contained English novels and their Portuguese translations, and vice versa; the resulting translation pairs were then compared in their use of tense and aspect markers. This detailed comparison brought out a number of interesting facts about e.g. mistranslations and vagueness. Mistranslations are not random, but give important clues to the choices facing a translator, and hence to significant differences between the two tense and aspect systems. Vagueness is a key concept to understand translation and translation differences: while English is very often concerned with possibility, Portuguese concentrates on assigning properties resulting from habitual behaviour.</p>
<p>Translation equivalence is also the subject of ‘Units of Meaning, Parallel Corpora, and their Implications for Language Teaching’ by Wolfgang Teubert (in Connor and Upton, eds., pp. 171–89), who argues that lists of English collocations for EFL students are most efficiently compiled on the basis of a parallel corpus. František Čermák and Aleš Klégr, in ‘Modality in Czech and English: Possibility Particles and the Conditional Mood in a Parallel Corpus’ (<italic>IJCP</italic> 9[2004] 83–95), examine two kinds of modality exponents and their interlingual relationships, using an aligned parallel minicorpus of two contemporary Czech originals (drama and novel) and their English translations. Åke Viberg also used a parallel corpus in writing ‘Physical Contact Verbs in English and Swedish from the Perspective of Crosslinguistic Lexicology’ (in Aijmer and Altenberg, eds., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B3"><italic>Advances in Corpus Linguistics: Papers from the 23rd International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora</italic></xref>, pp. 327–52). In ‘A Corpus-Based View of Similarity and Difference in Translation’(<italic>IJCP</italic> 9[2004] 167–93), Mona Baker compares corpora of translated and non-translated texts in English with respect to frequency and distribution of recurring lexical patterns in order to investigate some methodological issues in corpus-based translation research. Another contrastive study, this time of English and Spanish, is proffered by JoAnne Neff, Francisco Ballesteros, Emma Dafouz, Francisco Martínez and Juan-Pedro Rica, in ‘Formulating Writer Stance: A Contrastive Study of EFL Learner Corpora’ (in Connor and Upton, eds., pp. 73–89). They look not only at the transfer of linguistic L1 features, but also at the influence of L1 rhetorical conventions. Sylviane Granger reviews the impact of learner corpora on second language acquisition and teaching in ‘Computer Learner Corpus Research: Current Status and Future Prospects’ (in Connor and Upton, eds., pp. 123–45). The construction of a learner corpus of undergraduate ESL students is the subject of two other articles: Eileen Fitzpatrick and M.S. Seegmiller's ‘The Montclair Electronic Language Database Project’ (in Connor and Upton, eds., pp. 223–37), and Pieter de Haan and Kees van Esch's ‘Towards an Instrument for the Assessment of the Development of Writing Skills’ (in Connor and Upton, eds., 267–79). John Osborne makes practical suggestions as to how learner and other corpora can be used as EFL tools in ‘Top-Down and Bottom-Up Approaches to Corpora in Language Teaching’ (in Connor and Upton, eds., pp. 251–65).</p>
<p>William H. Fletcher's ‘Making the Web More Useful as a Source for Linguistic Corpora’ (in Connor and Upton, eds., pp. 191–205) describes and evaluates linguistic methods and computing tools to identify reliable and useful texts from the World Wide Web. Also investigating the web as a corpus are Antoinette Renoef, Andrew Kehoe and David Mezquiriz in ‘The Accidental Corpus: Some Issues in Extracting Linguistic Information from the Web’ (in Aijmer and Altenberg, eds., pp. 403–19). They report on the search tool WebCorp, and discuss the problems and solutions they have identified during their web work. A third piece on this topic is ‘The World Wide Web as Linguistic Corpus’ (in Leistyna and Meyer, eds., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B79"><italic>Corpus Analysis: Language Structure and Language Use</italic></xref>, pp. 241–54), by Charles F. Meyer, Roger Grabowski, Hung-Yul Han, Konstantin Mantzouranis and Stephanie Moses. They carry out several searches using public search engines and argue that, in spite of the many uncertainties associated with web material, the results are worthwhile for linguistic study.</p>
<p>Oliver Mason and Susan Hunston, in ‘The Automatic Recognition of Verb Patterns: A Feasibility Study’ (<italic>IJCP</italic> 9[2004] 253–70), report on a pilot study to automatically recognize the syntactic behaviour of lexical items in a text. John Sinclair, in ‘Intuition and Annotation: The Discussion Continues’ (in Aijmer and Altenberg, eds., pp. 39–59), weighs the pros and cons of having either plain or annotated text. In ‘Concordancing Oneself: Constructing Individual Textual Profiles’ (<italic>IJCP</italic> 9[2004] 271–98), David Coniam discusses the construction and analysis of a corpus of an individual's own academic writing and presents analyses of lexical, syntactic and discourse features to show how a potential personal profile might emerge. In ‘Gravity Counts for the Boundaries of Collocations’ (<italic>IJCP</italic> 9[2004] 321–48), Vidas Daudaravičius and Rūta Marcinkevičiené present a method called Gravity Counts to deal with collocations. Pascaline Dury reports on the creation of a diachronic English corpus of ecology in ‘Building a Bilingual Diachronic Corpus of Ecology: The Long Road to Completion’ (<italic>ICAME</italic> 28[2004] 5–16). In ‘SST Speech Corpus of Japanese Learners’ English and Automatic Detection of Learners’ Errors’ (<italic>ICAME</italic> 28[2004] 31–48), Emi Izumi, Kiyotaka Uchimoto and Hitoshi Isahara report on a speech corpus of Japanese learners’ English, based on the audio recordings of an English oral proficiency interview test called the Standard Speaking Test. Dan McIntyre, Carol Bellard-Thomson, John Heywood, Tony McEnery, Elena Semino and Mick Short, in ‘Investigating the Presentation of Speech, Writing and Thought in Spoken British English: A Corpus-Based Approach’ (<italic>ICAME</italic> 28[2004] 49–76), describe the Lancaster Speech, Writing and Thought Presentation Spoken Corpus. General discussion of the importance of spoken corpora is offered by M.A.K. Halliday in ‘The Spoken Language Corpus: A Foundation for Grammatical Theory’ (in Aijmer and Altenberg, eds., pp. 11–38). He reviews some recent corpus work and highlights further data that shed new light on grammatical patterning.</p>
<p>In ‘Automatic Acquisition of Verb Subcategorization Information by Exploiting Minimal Linguistic Resources’ (<italic>IJCP</italic> 9[2004] 1–28), Katia Lida Kermanidis, Nikos Fakotakis and George Kokkinakis use statistical filtering methods on Modern Greek and English corpora in order to automatically acquire verb subcategorization frames. Joybrato Mukherjee, in ‘Corpus Data in a Usage-Based Cognitive Grammar’ (in Aijmer and Altenberg, eds., pp. 85–100), explores the lexico-grammar of <italic>give</italic>, arguing that the model of cognitive grammar offers a useful perspective on data like this. Caroline David has worked on ‘Putting “Putting Verbs” to the Test of Corpora’ (in Aijmer and Altenberg, eds., pp. 101–15), finding that the data do not exactly mirror traditional descriptions of this class of verbs. In ‘MICE: A Module for Named Entities Recognition and Classification’ (<italic>IJCP</italic> 9[2004] 53–68), Montserrat Arévalo Rodríguez, Montserrat Civit Torruella and Maria Antònia Martí Antonín describe their system, MICE, that is able to detect, analyse and classify Named Entities: proper names, date, time, etc. In ‘Phases of Translation Corpus: Compilation and Analysis’ (<italic>IJCP</italic> 9[2004] 195–224), Andrius Utka discusses the creation of an English–Lithuanian Phases of Translation Corpus and its uses in identifying problem areas in translation practice. In ‘Recent Grammatical Change in English: Data, Description, Theory’ (in Aijmer and Altenberg, eds., pp. 61–81), Geoffrey Leech examines the incidence of modal verbs and of several colloquial features (use of progressive, contractions, questions) in corpora from the 1960s and 1990s. It turns out that modal verbs have sharply declined in frequency while the colloquial features have become more common.</p>
<p>Ronald Carter's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18"><italic>Language and Creativity: The Art of Common Talk</italic></xref> is also based on corpus use, and is fully discussed in <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC12">Section 12</xref>. A work in a somewhat similar vein, though more elementary and general in its approach, is Hilary Hillier's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B60"><italic>Analysing Real Texts: Research Studies in Modern English Language</italic></xref>. It presents some thirty texts of different types (literary, journalistic, colloquial spoken, public spoken, broadcast, emailed, texted, and chatted) and guides the student towards developing an analysis of them. The concepts and methodology used are for the most part functional-systemic, with an emphasis on issues of register variation. Altogether, the work looks like a very accessible introduction to linguistic textual analysis which alerts students to what can go on in ordinary texts, suggesting a theoretical foundation for such analysis but without being top-heavy with theory.</p>
<p>In ‘ “Like the Wise Virgins and All that Jazz”: Using a Corpus to Examine Vague Categorisation and Shared Knowledge’ (in Connor and Upton, eds., pp. 1–20), Anne O’Keeffe employs a corpus of calls to an Irish radio phone-in show to explore vague category markers like <italic>things, and so on, all that kind of thing</italic>, the content of which emerges from shared knowledge. Douglas Biber, Eniko Csomay, James K. Jones and Casey Keck, in ‘A Corpus Linguistic Investigation of Vocabulary-Based Discourse Units in University Registers’ (in Connor and Upton, eds., pp. 53–72), tabulate the linguistic features of various spoken and written discourse types along four dimensions (oral versus literate discourse, procedural versus content-focused discourse, narrative orientation, and academic stance). Douglas Biber alone analyses the same type of material in a more provisional manner in ‘Variation among University Spoken and Written Registers: A New Multi-Dimensional Analysis’ (in Leistyna and Meyer, eds., pp. 47–70). Further application of Bibers's multi-dimensional model is found in ‘Linguistic Dimensions of Direct Mail Letters’ by Ulla Connor and Thomas Upton (in Leistyna and Meyer, eds., pp. 71–86), who establish that fundraising letters exhibit a unique constellation of dimension-values, reflecting their unique rhetorical methods and purpose.</p>
<p>Elizabeth Couper-Kuhlen, in ‘Analyzing Language in Interaction: The Practice of <italic>never mind</italic>’ (<italic>ELL</italic> 8[2004] 207–37), offers an interesting analysis of the various uses of the phrase <italic>never mind</italic> which highlights the procedural nature of such ‘lexicalized sentence stems’ and other prefabricated chunks of language. ‘Extending Collostructional Analysis: A Corpus-Based Perspective on “Alternations”’, by Stefan Th. Gries and Anatol Stefanowitsch (<italic>IJCP</italic> 9[2004] 97–129), tests a ‘distinctive-collexeme analysis’ on several often discussed alternations (the dative alternation, the active/passive alternation, the <italic>of</italic>/'s genitive and the <italic>will</italic>/<italic>be going to</italic> future), identifying, in each case, the semantic conditions that favour one option over the other.</p>
<p>We also fit in here volume 4 of M.A.K. Halliday's collected works, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B115"><italic>The Language of Early Childhood</italic></xref>, edited by Jonathan J. Webster. Containing sixteen papers spanning the period 1969–99, the book demonstrates how powerful and persuasive a functional-systemic approach to child language can be. There are no controlled experiments involving talking animals here—instead, Halliday focuses on the ordinary linguistic interactions that young children participate in and learn from. The emphasis on processes of meaning-making allows the reader to develop a good sense for the subtlety of interpretation that children are capable of. At the same time, Halliday's discussion of new developments in linguistics in general and child language studies in particular means that the book provides a convenient window on thirty years of linguistic work in this field.</p>
<p>We move on to studies of individual syntactic elements, beginning with NPs. Tracy Holloway King and Mary Dalrymple's ‘Determiner Agreement and Noun Conjunction’ (<italic>JL</italic> 40[2004] 69–104) present an analysis of sentences like <italic>This boy and girl are eating pizza</italic> (i.e. singular determiner but plural verb agreement). Ariel Cohen, in ‘Existential Generics’ (<italic>Ling&P</italic> 27[2004] 137–68), proposes a uniform analysis of the semantics of generics (as in <italic>Birds lay eggs</italic>) that accounts not only for their universal, but also for their existential, interpretations. The same author explores, in ‘Generics and Mental Representations’ (<italic>Ling&P</italic> 27[2004] 529–56), the extent to which generics tolerate exceptions. <italic>Ravens are black</italic> is tolerated despite the existence of albino ravens, but this is apparently not simply a question of quantification: even if a property may hold for the vast majority of individuals in the generic's domain, generic expressions like <italic>Chinese speak Mandarin</italic> or <italic>People are over three years old</italic> are still rejected. Generics apparently carry a homogeneity presupposition. Veneeta Dayal, in ‘Number Marking and (In)Definiteness in Kind Terms’ (<italic>Ling&P</italic> 27[2004] 393–450), proposes a universal scale of definiteness to account for the cross-linguistic variation with respect to plural/mass kinds.</p>
<p>Arto Anttila and Vivienne Fong, in ‘Variation, Ambiguity, and Noun Classes in English’ (<italic>Lingua</italic> 114[2004] 1253–90), argue that a partially ordered OT grammar provides a coherent account of apparently independent phenomena involving the English genitive, such as variation (<italic>my parents’ house</italic> vs. <italic>the house of my parents</italic>) and ambiguity (<italic>the performance of Aida</italic> can mean either ‘Aida performed something’ or ‘someone performed <italic>Aida</italic>’). Liesbet Heyvaert, in ‘Nominalization as Grammatical Metaphor’ (in Simon-Vandenbergen, Taverniers and Ravelli, eds., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B104"><italic>Grammatical Metaphor: Views from Semantic Functional Linguistics</italic></xref>, pp. 65–99) examines M.A.K. Halliday's suggestion that nominalizations are instances of a structural kind of metaphor. The headedness of NPs like <italic>loads/heaps/piles of money</italic> is examined by Lieselotte Brems in ‘Measure Noun Constructions: Degrees of Delexicalization and Grammaticalization’ (in Aijmer and Altenberg, eds., pp. 249–65). Her corpus data suggest that the measured noun is acquiring head status, due to a process of grammaticalization. Eric Hyman, in ‘The Indefinite <italic>You</italic>’ (<italic>ES</italic> 85[2004] 161–76), explores the various uses and functions of indefinite <italic>you</italic>. Göran Kjellmer, on the other hand, looks at ‘<italic>Yourself</italic>: A General-Purpose Emphatic-Reflexive?’ (in Aijmer and Altenberg, eds., pp. 267–77), finding that this form appears to be moving into second person plural and also into first/third-person territory (as in <italic>I ain't repeating yourself</italic>, used with clearly reflexive meaning). In ‘The Optimization of Discourse Anaphora’ (<italic>Ling&P</italic> 27[2004] 3–56), David I. Beaver proposes an account of the interpretation of accented pronouns based on OT. The category of vocatives does not often feature in these pages, but this year there are Michael McCarthy and Anne O’Keeffe wondering: ‘ “What's in a Name?”: Vocatives in Casual Conversations and Radio Phone-in Calls’ (in Leistyna and Meyer, eds., pp. 153–85). Using CANCODE and a radio corpus, they found that vocatives tend to behave differently in the two registers, both positionally and pragmatically.</p>
<p>Two articles investigate the frequency of different types of modification in NPs in media language. Yibin Ni looks at ‘Noun Phrases in Media Texts: A Quantificational Approach’ (in Aitchison and Lewis, eds., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B4"><italic>New Media Language</italic></xref>, pp. 159–68). The findings are that press editorials, press news reports and broadcast news can be stylistically differentiated on the basis of features such as use of pronouns vs. full NPs and the use of different types of premodifiers within NPs. For further facts and interpretation of newspaper NPs, there is Douglas Biber's ‘Compressed Noun-Phrase Structures in Newspaper Discourse: The Competing Demands of Popularization vs. Economy’ (in Aitchison and Lewis, eds., pp. 169–81). He considers noun–noun sequences, non-restrictive relatives, appositives and <italic>to</italic>-complements, and shows that newspapers have over the last century shown an increasing frequency of these elements, making them more densely information-packed than even academic prose.</p>
<p>Verbal matters have also been studied. Susi Wurmbrand, in ‘Two Types of Restructuring—Lexical vs. Functional’ (<italic>Lingua</italic> 114[2004] 991–1014), demonstrates that the view that restructuring verbs (e.g. verbs that may undergo clause union) are functional is untenable. John Newman and Sally Rice, in ‘Patterns of Usage for English <sc>sit</sc>, <sc>stand</sc>, and <sc>lie</sc>: A Cognitively Inspired Exploration in Corpus Linguistics’ (<italic>CogLing</italic> 15[2004] 351–96), demonstrate that these verbs, though not grammaticalized like many of their cross-linguistic correlates, show peculiarities of usage and frequency that could lead in time to grammaticalization. Sjef Barbiers and Rint Sybesma, in ‘On the Different Verbal Behavior of Auxiliaries’ (<italic>Lingua</italic> 114[2004] 389–98), introduce a special issue on the syntax of auxiliaries by presenting an overview of auxiliary properties. In ‘<italic>Is</italic> Isn't <italic>Be</italic>’ (<italic>Lingua</italic> 114[2004] 399–418), Misha Becker argues, on the basis of an interpretative difference (<italic>Max is a nuisance</italic> vs. <italic>Max is being a nuisance, Why aren't you my friend</italic> vs. <italic>Why don't you be my friend?</italic>), that there are two copulas in English: the copula <italic>be</italic> in V and the copula <italic>is</italic>/<italic>am</italic> etc. in Infl. Jorge Arús Hita, in ‘Ambiguity in Grammatical Metaphor: One More Reason Why the Distinction Transitive/Ergative Pays Off ’ (in Simon-Vandenbergen, Taverniers and Ravelli, eds., pp. 101–26), argues that transitive structures are Actor-centred whereas ergatives are Affected-centred, which explains why their nominalizations reconvert nuclear participants into Modifiers in different ways.</p>
<p>Rachel Nordlinger and Louisa Sadler, in ‘Tense Beyond the Verb: Encoding Clausal Tense/Aspect/Mood on Nominal Dependents’ (<italic>NL<</italic> 22[2004] 597–641), argue that Lexical-Functional Grammar captures the fact that nominals may contribute tense, aspect and mood features to the clause although they themselves do not have syntactically active TAM-features. In ‘Issues in Modeling Language Processing Analogically’ (<italic>Lingua</italic> 114[2004] 849–71), David Eddington reports on a study to evaluate the role of frequency, variable alignment and phonemic representation in analogical simulations to predict the form of the English past tense. Jürgen Bohnemeyer and Mary Swift, in ‘Event Realization and Default Aspect’ (<italic>Ling&P</italic> 27[2004] 263–96), argue for a property ‘event realization’, which is the ‘eventish’ equivalent of the existence of individuals. Gricean implicatures assign telecity-dependent viewpoints to clauses not overtly marked for aspect. In ‘A Corpus-Based Two-Level Model of Situation Aspect’ (<italic>JL</italic> 40[2004] 325–63), Zhonghua Xiao and Anthony McEnery argue for modelling situation aspect as verb classes at the lexical level and as situation types at the sentential level. The model is tested using an English and a Chinese corpus. Inger Lassen, in ‘Imperative Readings of Grammatical Metaphor: A Study of Congruency in the Imperative’ (in Simon-Vandenbergen, Taverniers and Ravelli, eds., pp. 279–308) concludes that metaphoricity in imperatives is often the result of the interplay of illocutionary forces. Peter Collins's corpus study, ‘<italic>Let</italic>-Imperatives in English’ (<italic>IJCP</italic> 9[2004] 299–319), shows that <italic>let</italic>-imperatives serve merely to mark illocutionary meaning. Cases like <italic>Let's me sit opposite you</italic> indicate that syntactic reanalysis has reached an advanced stage amongst some speakers. ‘Open’ <italic>let</italic>-imperatives, as used in wishes (e.g. <italic>Let the devil take the hindmost</italic>) have decreased in popularity in recent decades. Another article on the same topic is Bernard De Clerck's ‘On the Pragmatic Functions of <italic>Let's</italic> Utterances’ (in Aijmer and Altenberg, eds., pp. 213–33). His findings are that these utterances often serve to regulate the conversational flow or to introduce evaluative statements.</p>
<p>Several studies examine post-verbal elements. Åshild Næss, in ‘What Markedness Marks: The Markedness Problem with Direct Objects’ (<italic>Lingua</italic> 114[2004] 1186–1212), identifies the cross-linguistically observed opposition between subjects and objects crucially as the nature of the individual NPs’ involvement in the verbal event: an unmarked subject is controlling and unaffected, and an unmarked object is affected and non-controlling. Evelien Keizer, in ‘Postnominal PP Complements and Modifiers: A Cognitive Distinction’ (<italic>ELL</italic> 8[2004] 323–50), offers a prototype-based approach of the distinction between complements and modifiers that does justice to the fact that the boundary between the two categories is not clear-cut. Hubert Haider, in ‘Pre- and Postverbal Adverbials in OV and VO’ (<italic>Lingua</italic> 114[204] 779–807), offers an account for the correlation between the base order of a language and the restrictions this places on adverbial order, as well as for the fact that the order of post-verbal adverbials is a mirror image of their preverbal order. Adele E. Goldberg, Devin M. Casenhiser and Nitya Sethuraman, in ‘Learning Argument Structure Generalizations’ (<italic>CogLing</italic> 15[2004] 89–316), argue on the basis of corpus studies and experimental results that the acquisition of argument structure is guided by general categorization strategies. Kimihiro Yoshimua and John R. Taylor, in ‘What Makes a Good Middle? The Role of Qualia in the Interpretation and Acceptability of Middle Expressions in English’ (<italic>ELL</italic> 8[2004] 293–321), list some factors underlying the acceptability of expressions like <italic>The car drives smoothly</italic> or <italic>The book doesn't sell</italic> (see also <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC6">Section 6</xref>). Existentials like <italic>Tomorrow there will be the Christmas concert</italic>, with a definite NP, are studied in Peter Willemse's ‘Esphoric Reference and Pseudo-Definiteness’ (in Aijmer and Altenberg, eds., pp. 117–32): a classification of corpus examples is proposed and the motivation for the use of the definite article is explored.</p>
<p>Guglielmo Cinque, in ‘Issues in Adverbial Syntax’ (<italic>Lingua</italic> 114[2004] 683–710), argues against an adjunction analysis for adverbs. Instead, adverbs are argued to be specifiers of dedicated functional projections. Thomas Ernst, in ‘Principles of Adverbial Distribution in the Lower Clause’ (<italic>Lingua</italic> 114[2004] 755–77), proposes a semantically based theory of adverbial modification to account for word-order restrictions on adverbs. In ‘Domains for Adverbs’ (<italic>Lingua</italic> 114[2004] 809–47), Øystein Nilsen analyses speaker-oriented adverbs like <italic>possibly</italic> as domain-shrinking possible world quantifiers. ‘Adverbials in IT-Cleft Constructions’, i.e. sentences like <italic>It was just about fifty years ago that Henry Ford gave us the weekend</italic>, have been investigated by Hilde Hasselgård (in Aijmer and Altenberg, eds., pp. 195–211); it turns out that the adverbial rarely carries contrastive focus—instead, Hasselgård proposes that it has thematic focus.</p>
<p>We have seen more on subordination in other years than now, but there are still some studies to be mentioned. Zeki Hamawand, in ‘Determinants of Complement Clause Variation in English’ (<italic>ES</italic> 85[2004] 451–64), proposes a number of parameters—temporal, aspectual, and pragmatic—that govern the selection of a <italic>to</italic>-infinitive or a gerund. Patrick J. Duffley, in ‘Verbs of Liking with the Infinitive and the Gerund’ (<italic>ES</italic> 85[2004] 358–80), refines existing hypotheses about why these complements are selected on the basis of corpus data. Juhani Rudanko has explored the complementation patterns of the verbs <italic>pressure</italic> and <italic>prevent</italic> in ‘Comparing Alternative Complements of Object Control Verbs: Evidence from the Bank of English Corpus’ (in Leistyna and Meyer, eds., pp. 273–83). Teresa Fanego, in ‘Some Strategies for Coding Sentential Subjects in English: From Exaptation to Grammaticalization’ (<italic>SLang</italic> 28[2004] 321–61), examines two types of -<italic>ing</italic> subjects in English: the Late Modern English pattern <italic>The deceiving him was easy</italic> and constructions such as <italic>By trying to make her mother happy proved unlucky for Paul</italic>, which are becoming frequent in PDE. She proposes an analysis in terms of Roger Lass's ‘How To Do Things with Junk: Exaptation in Language Evolution’ (<italic>JL</italic> 26[1990] 79–102) concept of exaptation.</p>
<p>Toshiyuki Ogihara, in ‘Adjectival Relatives’ (<italic>Ling&P</italic> 27[2004] 555–608), accounts for the discrepancy between the past tense form of such relatives (including adjectival passives as in <italic>The paper is published</italic>), and the fact that they do not refer to a past event but to a state resulting from that event, by proposing a non-clausal structure for such relatives. In ‘Relative Clauses in Spoken English and German: Their Structure and Function’ (<italic>LingB</italic> 197[2004] 3–51), Regina Weinert shows that there are systematic differences between such clauses in spoken and written language.</p>
<p>We round off this section with some items on interrogation and coordination. Maribel Romero and Chung-Hye Han investigate embedded interrogatives in ‘The Syntax of <italic>whether/Q</italic> … <italic>or</italic> Questions: Ellipsis Combined with Movement’ (<italic>NL<</italic> 22[2004] 527–64) and demonstrate that they have a lot in common with the <italic>either</italic> … <italic>or</italic> construction. Two more articles on a rather similar topic by the same authors are discussed in <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC6">Section 6</xref> below. Mark de Vos, in ‘Pseudo Coordination Is Not Subordination’ (<italic>LIN</italic> 21[2004] 181–92), investigates the hendiadic construction <italic>What has John gone and done all day?</italic> and concludes that it is best analysed as a monoclausal complex predicate, especially in view of its similarities with the reduplicative co-ordinate construction <italic>John reads and reads all day</italic>.</p>
<p>Peter G. Peterson, in ‘Co-ordination: Consequences of a Lexical-Functional Account’ (<italic>NL<</italic> 22[2004] 643–79), proposes an analysis in which the central condition on co-ordination, the functional equivalence of the conjuncts, does not have to be stipulated but follows as an axiom from the theory.</p></sec>
<sec id="SEC5.2"><title>(b) Early Syntax</title>
<p>There is now a second edition of the young classic, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B63"><italic>Grammaticalization</italic></xref>, by Paul J. Hopper and Elizabeth Closs Traugott. Although this book is not about the history of English syntax, it is nevertheless compulsory reading for anyone planning to start work in that field. Compared to the first edition of 1993, not too much has changed. Obviously dated arguments and references have been removed and new material has been inserted (for this, there was of course a huge store to draw on, due to the great popularity of the concept of grammaticalization over the last fifteen years). But the basic outlines are still there: chapters on the history of the concept, the role of reanalysis and analogy, the importance of pragmatic factors, the notion of unidirectionality, morphological changes, clause-combining phenomena, and grammaticalization in language contact. Throughout, the discussion remains comprehensible to non-specialists and the authors do an excellent job of keeping the focus firmly on argument rather than intricate example.</p>
<p>Several researchers address general issues in the area of dialects, data, theory, and modelling in Dossena and Lass, eds., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B42"><italic>Methods and Data in English Historical Dialectology</italic></xref>. Roger Lass, in ‘Ut Custodiant Litteras: Editions, Corpora and Witnesshood’ (pp. 21–48), argues against the accepted practice of editing Old and Middle English texts for, for example, teaching purposes. For linguistic research, a historical text should be treated like a crime scene: ‘no contamination, explicit stratigraphy, and an immaculately preserved chain of custody’ (p. 46). Margaret Laing's ‘Multidimensionality: Time, Space and Stratigraphy in Historical Dialectology’ in the same volume (pp. 49–93), shows in detail how the varying relationships between exemplar, scribe and copy may affect the mapping of text languages in the dimensions of time, space and scribal milieu. Keith Williamson, in ‘On Chronicity and Space(s) in Historical Dialectology’ (pp. 97–136), discusses the role of linguistic selection and language games in the complex adaptive system of dynamic dialectology, the result of interactions between individuals across time. Peter R. Kitson, in ‘On Margins of Error in Placing Old English Literary Dialects’ (pp. 219–39), attempts to locate OE authors by linguistic means. Finally, Richard Hogg (pp. 241–55) argues that the differences between the Lindisfarne Gospels and the Northumbrian part of the Rushworth Gospels do not point to dialect differences (North Northumbrian versus South Northumbrian) but are purely orthographic.</p>
<p>Olga Fischer, in ‘What Counts as Evidence in Historical Linguistics?’ (<italic>SLang</italic> 28[2004] 710–40), argues that the historical linguist should concentrate on data-gathering and remain independent of theories on how internal grammars change. Lightfoot, in ‘Abstraction and Performance: Commentary on Fischer’ (<italic>SLang</italic> 28[2004] 741–4), argues that historical linguists need theories in order to know what to compare if they are charting variants. Fischer, in her ‘Author's Response’ (<italic>SLang</italic> 28[2004] 745–7), does not deny this but stresses that there is a risk of moulding data to fit a theory. (For more information on the special volume of <italic>SLang</italic> in which this dialogue takes place, see <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC1">Sections 1</xref> and <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC5">5</xref>) In ‘Grammar Change versus Language Change’ (in Kay, Horobin and Smith, eds., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B69"><italic>New Perspectives on English Historical Linguistics I</italic></xref>, pp. 31–63), Fischer also argues against explaining linguistic change in terms of a Chomskyan innate grammar. April McMahon and Robert McMahon, in ‘Family Values’ (in Kay, Horobin and Smith, eds., pp. 103–23) show how programs developed to draw and select biological trees can be used in various ways to model language relatedness. David Denison suggests that graduated change is a plausible alternative to reanalysis for some kinds of diachronic change in ‘Do Grammars Change When They Leak?’ (in Kay, Horobin and Smith, eds., pp. 15–29).</p>
<p>In ‘Economy, Innovation, and Prescriptivism: From Spec to Head and Head to Head’ (<italic>JCGL</italic> 7[2004] 59–98), Elly van Gelderen argues that cyclical changes in negative and <italic>wh</italic>-constructions constitute a change from Specifier to Head that is triggered by an economy principle that says ‘if possible, be a head’. This idea is worked out more fully in her monograph <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B112"><italic>Grammaticalization as Economy</italic></xref>, where this principle—‘be a head, rather than a phrase’—is argued to provide the ultimate explanation of the general unidirectionality of grammaticalization. Another economy principle at work here is ‘Merge over Move’ (i.e. Move is less economical, more ‘costly’, than Merge) which reduces to ‘Merge as late as possible’, i.e. non-θ-marked elements (non-arguments) that do not need to merge in the VP will ‘wait’ to merge outside the VP, in higher positions (IP or CP), instead of merging in the VP and moving out at a later stage. When it stopped being fully lexical, but came to express a future orientation of purpose, the preposition <italic>for</italic>, or rather the PP of which it is the head, moved outside the VP to Spec,CP; at a later stage, it came to be merged in C as a complementizer. The book presents an impressive array of examples, ranging from the introduction of complementizers and the incorporation of topics into the clausal structure to changes in (deontic) modals and perception verbs, which both are argued to be recategorized as merging in ASP(ect) rather than V. In <italic>I saw him crossing the street</italic>, the verb <italic>see</italic> is in V, whereas in <italic>I saw him cross the street</italic> it is in ASP. The changes affecting aspect are bound up with a general diachronic change in English: PDE has become tense-based rather than aspect-based, which is why the simple present, the unmarked form, requires overt marking (by progressive -<italic>ing</italic>) to express aspect; in earlier stages of the language, the simple present could be used for progressive aspect without further marking. This switch is argued to be responsible for a range of changes, from the loss of aspectual prefixes (<italic>ge</italic>-, <italic>for</italic>- etc.) and the introduction of the auxiliary <italic>have</italic> and the morpheme –<italic>ing</italic>, to changes in <italic>to, do</italic> and the incompatibility of the PE perfect with time adverbials: *<italic>I have made him ill yesterday</italic>.</p>
<p>Jennifer Smith, in ‘Accounting for Vernacular Features in a Scottish Dialect: Relic, Innovation, Analogy and Drift’ (in Kay, Horobin and Smith, eds., pp. 177–93), argues on the basis of a quantitative analysis of the distributional patterns of these features that they are the result of many different processes. In ‘Consumers of Correctness: Men, Women and Language in Eighteenth-Century Classified Advertisement’ (in Kay, Horobin and Smith, eds., pp. 153–76), Carol Percy assesses the impact of prescriptivism by noting how the linguistic accomplishments demanded by employers or offered by teachers change as the century wears on. ‘Romantic English’, by Andrew Elfenbein (<italic>MP</italic> 102[2004] 56–89), explores the impact of the standardization of English in the eighteenth century on literary language and includes a corpus study of <italic>will</italic> and <italic>shall</italic>, the ‘correct’ use of which developed into a shibboleth to triumphantly distinguish native English from that of foreign speakers (including Scots and Irish). Susan Fitzmaurice has examined ‘The Grammar of Stance in Early Eighteenth-Century English Epistolary Language’ (in Leistyna and Meyer, eds., pp. 107–31). The use of modal auxiliaries and lexical stance expressions turns out to partly follow conventional lexico-grammatical patterns and to partly show individual idiosyncrasies. In ‘Profaning Margery Kempe's Tomb or the Application of a Constraint-Grammar Parser to a Late Middle English Text’ (<italic>IJCP</italic> 9[2004] 225–51), Dolores González-Álvarez and Javier Pérez-Guerra investigate the extent of grammatical variation between late ME and PDE by comparing the automatic outputs of the English Constraint Grammar Parser of an updated medieval text from <italic>The Book of Margery Kempe</italic> and of its corresponding modern version. Christer Geisler has carried out a Biberian multi-dimensional analysis of ‘Gender-Based Variation in Nineteenth-Century English Letter Writing’ (in Leistyna and Meyer, eds., pp. 87–106). The frequency calculations for the various features show that there were indeed considerable differences between men's and women's letters, with women also showing more change along several dimensions in the course of the century.</p>
<p>Nominal matters are studied by Cynthia L. Allen in ‘A Note on “Elliptical”, “Absolute”, and “Independent” Genitives in Earlier English’ (<italic>ELL</italic> 8[2004] 351–4). She argues that the erroneous statements in the literature, to the effect that genitives such as <italic>this is Mary's</italic> or <italic>Mary's is red</italic> do not occur before 1250, are due to different interpretations of the term ‘absolute genitive’. Mikko Laitinen, in ‘Indefinite Pronominal Anaphora in English Correspondence between 1500 and 1800’ (in Kay, Horobin and Smith, eds., pp. 65–81), presents a historical corpus study of the use of <italic>he</italic> and <italic>they</italic> to refer back to gender-free or indefinite pronouns (as in … <italic>this news which</italic> <bold><italic>nobody</italic></bold> <italic>would believe till</italic> <bold><italic>they</italic></bold> <italic>saw the event</italic>).</p>
<p>On the way to verbal issues, we meet Kirsti Peitsara, who in ‘Variants of Contraction: The Case of “It's” and “Tis” ’ (<italic>ICAME</italic> 28[2004] 77–94) examines the contractions of <italic>it</italic> and <italic>be</italic> in various corpora. <italic>Tis</italic>, once the standard form, declines sharply after 1800; today it survives as a dialectal feature (south-western varieties of BrE and Newfoundland English). On firmly verbal ground is Ohkado Masayuki's ‘On the Structure and Function of V1 Constructions in Old English’ (<italic>ES</italic> 85[2004] 2–16), where some aspects of the function of V1 in OE are noted that are not found in the other Germanic languages. Hironori Suzuki, in ‘On MV/VM Order in Beowulf’ (in Kay, Horobin and Smith, eds., pp. 195–213), demonstrates that the only factor favouring selection of Modal–Verb over Verb–Modal order in subordinating clauses appears to be alliteration; none of the factors identified in OE prose texts appears to play a role. Martine Taeymans, in ‘<italic>DARE</italic> and <italic>NEED</italic> in British and American Present-Day English: 1960s–1990s’ (in Kay, Horobin and Smith, eds., pp. 215–27) shows that both forms are firmly set on the path to being used as semi-modals only, although at first sight <italic>dare</italic> still occurs as a true modal in British English; the data are skewed, however, by ‘frozen’ constructions with bare infinitives in <italic>I dare say/Dare I say (it)</italic> and <italic>How dare you V</italic>. In ‘What Drove DO?’ (in Kay, Horobin and Smith, eds., pp. 229–42), Anthony Warner concludes that there is a stable incidence of <italic>do</italic> across question subtypes throughout the period 1400–1710, with no evidence of generational change; in its spread, a mechanism may be implicated whereby hearers accommodate their usage to their (subliminal) misperception of the level of <italic>do</italic> used by speakers. Carson T. Schütze, in ‘Synchronic and Diachronic Microvariation in English <italic>Do</italic>’ (<italic>Lingua</italic> 114[2004] 495–516), argues against spurious <italic>do</italic> (unemphatic <italic>he did visit</italic>) being a last-resort device. It is generated in an (indicative) Mood head, and so made freely available by the grammar although languages and dialects differ on the extent to which they make use of this option. Ilse Wischer, in ‘The HAVE-“Perfect” in English’ (in Kay, Horobin and Smith, eds., pp. 243–55) argues that the grammaticalization of <italic>have</italic>, already a perfective auxiliary in OE, is not driven by functional needs but by syntactic ambiguities. In ‘Verbal -<italic>s</italic> Reconsidered: The Subject Type Constraint as a Diagnostic of Historical Transatlantic Relationship’ (in Kay, Horobin and Smith, eds., pp. 1–13), Sandra Clarke argues that the variation between -<italic>s</italic> and ø cannot be used as evidence in the AAVE origins debate. Thomas Kohnen looks at ‘Methodological Problems in Corpus-Based Historical Pragmatics: The Case of English Directives’ (in Aijmer and Altenberg, eds., pp. 237–47). He finds that, from <italic>c</italic>.1500, there is a diachronic movement away from the use of imperatives to more indirect directive speech acts.</p>
<p>Arnoldus Hille, in ‘On the Distribution of the Forms <italic>To</italic> and <italic>Till</italic> in the Ormulum’ (<italic>ES</italic> 85[2004] 22–32), suggests that the distribution of these forms depends not only on phonetic considerations but also on spatial direction (<italic>till</italic>) versus purpose (<italic>to</italic>). Wim van der Wurff, in ‘The Word <italic>Withal</italic>: Some Remarks on its Historical Development’ (in Fisiak, ed., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B48"><italic>Studies in English Historical Linguistics and Philology</italic></xref>, pp. 469–84), asks how this word came to function as a stranded preposition—the answer, he suggests, lies in a process of reanalysis. Gwang-Yoon Goh, in ‘The Difficulty of Preposition Stranding and Relative Obliqueness in Old English’ (<italic>ES</italic> 85[2004] 481–97), argues—not very convincingly—that preposition stranding was restricted in OE for functional reasons. In ‘From Resultative Predicate to Event-Modifier: The Case of <italic>Forth</italic> and <italic>On</italic>’ (in Kay, Horobin and Smith, eds., pp. 83–102), Bettelou Los argues that these durative, non-perfective particles have developed from resultative predicates. Anneli Meurman-Solin's ‘From Inventory to Typology in English Dialectology’ (in Kay, Horobin and Smith, eds., pp. 125–51) investigates the dramatic changes in adverbial connectives evident in historical Scots corpora, and outlines problems presented by diplomatic editions and reanalysis of category membership. In ‘Towards a Variationist Typology of Clausal Connectives: Methodological Considerations Based on the Corpus of Scottish Correspondence’ (in Dossena and Lass, eds., pp. 171–97), the same author constructs a variationist typology of connectives based on a detailed examination of the discourse strategies that trigger the selection of a particular connective in her corpus, and of the considerable gap that exists between the linguistic and stylistic competence of its authors. Aimo Seppänen, in ‘The Old English Relative <italic>þe</italic>’ (<italic>ELL</italic> 8[2004] 71–102), argues that <italic>þe</italic> may have started out as a subordinating particle, but came to be reanalysed as a relative pronoun already in OE.</p></sec></sec>
<sec id="SEC6"><title>6. Semantics</title>
<p>Elsevier has published a fine collection in its CRiSPI series again, Kamp and Partee, eds., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B68"><italic>Context-Dependence in the Analysis of Linguistic Meaning</italic></xref>, which consists of papers presented at two workshops at the beginning of the 1990s, organized by the editors, supplemented by the comments of the other participants as well as the authors’ responses. One of central themes investigated is how contextual information, which has traditionally been assumed to belong to the domain of pragmatics, can be described with the help of the theoretical tools and assumptions of semantics (given the fact that in dynamic semantic theories meanings are equated with context-change potential) in the analysis of anaphora, indexicality, the domain restriction of quantifiers, tense and aspect. Further topics include the analysis of discourse, as compared to the analysis of the interpretation of individual sentences, and the issue of how encyclopaedic knowledge enters into linguistic analysis. Turning now to some of the individual contributions, Tanya Reinhart (‘Topics and the Conceptual Interface’) as well as Dorit Abusch and Mats Rooth (‘Empty-Domain Effects for Presuppositional and Non-Presuppositional Determiners’) address the issue of why speakers are less willing to give truth value judgements on sentences containing a strong determiner with an empty restriction, as in <italic>Every/Most American king(s) lived in New York</italic> than on those containing a weak determiner, as in <italic>Two/No American kings lived in New York</italic>. Nicholas Asher (‘From Discourse Macro-Structure to Micro-Structure and Back Again: Discourse Semantics and the Focus-Background Distinction’) studies the interaction of the focus/background structure of sentences and the structure of the discourse context, David Beaver (‘Accommodating Topics’) argues for taking into account sentence topics and discourse topics when investigating the interpretation of sentences introducing presuppositions, with special attention to sentences with quantificational determiners and conditionals, while Paul Dekker (‘On Context and Identity’) is concerned with the interpretation and information content of identity statements. Kai von Fintel's ‘A Minimal Theory of Adverbial Quantification’ argues that adverbs of quantification quantify over situations, and that their domain is an anaphor subject to pragmatic anaphora resolution, the apparent semantic partition of the sentence into restrictor and scope being an epiphenomenon. Manfred Krifka's ‘Focus and/or Context: A Second Look at Second Occurrence Expressions’ offers a comparison of two theories on the interpretation of focus on the basis of data concerning second occurrence expressions, the ‘association with focus’ theories (cf. Jackendoff [1972] <italic>Semantic Interpretation in Generative Grammar</italic>, Rooth [1985] <italic>Association with Focus</italic>) and the contextual theory of Mats Rooth [1992] <italic>A Theory of Focus Interpretation</italic>. Arthur Merin (‘Why not Kim Basinger? On the “Art des Gegebenseins” of a Contextually Given Set’) discusses the structure of contextually given sets of alternatives. Jaroslav Peregrin and Klaus von Heusinger (‘Dynamic Semantics with Choice Functions’) propose a modification of Jeroen Groenendijk and Martin Stokhof's dynamic logic by using choice functions, which is claimed to be able to resolve linguistically detectable anaphoric links and to avoid the problem of a uniform representation of anaphoric expressions. Thomas Ede Zimmermann's ‘Tertiumne Datur? Possessive Pronouns and the Bipartition of the Lexicon’ reconsiders the idea, presented in Zimmermann [1991] ‘Kontextabhängigkeit’, that lexical items are always deictic or absolute, with special attention to possessive pronouns.</p>
<p>Blackwell launched a fascinating new series called Explorations in Semantics (series editor Susan Rothstein) in 2004, featuring (primarily) monographs presenting important new research in the field of semantics by leading authorities, simultaneously serving as self-contained introductions to the topic under discussion, and thus being useful to students and non-experts alike. Familiarity with the aims, tools and assumptions of present-day formal semantics is nevertheless required.</p>
<p>Susan Rothstein's own contribution to the series, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B100"><italic>Structuring Events</italic></xref>, is a study in the semantics of lexical aspect. She argues that lexical aspect, sometimes referred to as Aktionsart, is to be distinguished from grammatical aspect in that the former concerns distinctions of event-types denoted by verbal expressions (resulting in classifications of verbs—among which Zeno Vendler's [1957], four-way distinction is the best known while the latter deals with the distinctions in the perspective on events (like the perfective–imperfective opposition). The most important questions in this area are: the issue of whether the aspectual properties (e.g. the distinction between states, activities, accomplishments and achievements) are properties of linguistic expressions or properties of events; what the status of lexical aspectual classifications is; and what the relation is between the telic/atelic distinction and the classification of predicates into lexical aspectual classes. Rothstein defends the position that aspectual properties are properties not of events themselves, but of descriptions of events; the lexical classes reflect that the events described with the help of the relevant structures are assumed to share certain properties, and that telicity and atelicity are properties of VPs, where the telicity/atelicity of a VP depends on properties of the verb, as well as on those of the other elements in the VP. After introducing the verb classes traditionally assumed and the properties taken to underlie the classification, the author discusses two constructions that involve non-accomplishment verbs, which are interpreted as if they were accomplishments. These are: (a) the progressive uses of achievement verbs as in <italic>The tram is arriving at the tram stop</italic>, and (b) resultative constructions, as in <italic>Mary hammered the metal flat *for an hour/in an hour</italic>. She claims that the above uses reflect independently characterizable aspectual shifting operations, which leads to a discussion of the structure of accomplishments. She argues, <italic>contra</italic> Krifka [1989] ‘Nominal Reference, Temporal Constitution, and Quantification in Event Semantics’, and Krifka [1992] ‘Thematic Relations as Links between Nominal Reference and Temporal Constitution’, that telicity means being able to identify the atomic parts of the event corresponding to the VP, and thus being able to count them.</p>
<p>Fred Landman's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B77"><italic>Indefinites and the Type of Sets</italic></xref> in the same series contributes to the semantic classification of NPs. Its empirical focus is on definiteness effects, the proper analysis of which, it is argued, has to be developed in terms of formal tools such as Boolean algebra (essential in fine-structuring the domain of individuals), types and type-shifting, and in regulating the behaviour of NPs in argument, predicate, and modifier positions. The author puts forward an ‘adjectival theory’ of indefinites, according to which these denote sets of individuals. This distinguishes indefinites from quantificational and referential NPs. One major application of the theory concerns <italic>There</italic>-insertion in English and Dutch. Here Landman defends his views against influential analyses in terms of the presuppositions introduced by NPs or Milsark's [1977] ‘Toward an Explanation of Certain Peculiarities of the Existential Construction in English’ famous distinction of ‘weak’ vs. ‘strong’ determiners. NPs in <italic>there</italic>-environments are assumed to be adjuncts syntactically. The semantics then singles out indefinites as the only class of NPs able to undergo the required type-shift into adjunct-like modifier denotations. This route is blocked for quantifiers and referential expressions by constraints on type-lowering and secondary type-raising respectively. Additional new ground is broken in the domain of relational indefinites (<italic>a sister</italic>) and possessive constructions (<italic>have a sister</italic>) as well as adverbial uses of NPs (as in <italic>call every day</italic>). The former issue is dealt with by means of semantic incorporation, that is, fusion of the verbal and nominal meanings. The latter is tackled on the basis of measuring and counting operations defined on the algebraically structured domain of events.</p>
<p>The aim of Carsten Breul's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B14"><italic>Focus Structure in Generative Grammar: An Integrated Syntactic, Semantic and Intonational Approach</italic></xref> is to defend the author's FocP-hypothesis, according to which root clauses are to be divided into three categories: those that manifest categorical, identificational and thetic focus structures. This threefold division of clauses corresponds to the classification of focus types into predicate focus, argument focus and sentence focus, proposed by Knud Lambrecht [1994] <italic>Information Structure and Sentence Form</italic>. According to Breul, in sentences with categorical or identificational focus structures there is a functional phrase FocP that immediately dominates IP, whose head contains the feature [−foc] or [+foc], respectively. The XP that checks its [−foc] feature in Spec,FocP position is referred to as the topic, and the XP that checks its [+foc] feature in Spec,FocP as the identificational focus expression. In the third type of root clause, the thetic root clause, the topmost node is the IP. According to the author, languages differ as to whether the movement to Spec,FocP position happens overtly or covertly, and whether the [±foc] features are manifested morphologically or intonationally.</p>
<p><xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B107"><italic>The Composition of Meaning: From Lexeme to Discourse</italic></xref>, edited by Alice ter Meulen and Werner Abraham, is devoted to phenomena that belong to the syntax–semantics or syntax–pragmatics interface. Helen de Hoop (‘The Problem of Unintelligibility’) investigates cases within OT semantics when syntactically well formed expressions do not obtain a felicitous interpretation, i.e. where there does not seem to be an optional one in the candidate set of interpretation outputs for certain inputs. Petra Hendriks, ‘<italic>Either, Both</italic> and <italic>Neither</italic> in Coordinate Structures’, challenges the common view that the above lexical items are to be analysed as conjunctions, and argues for their being considered focus particles. Klaus von Heusinger (‘Focus Particles, Sentence Meaning, and Discourse Structure’) claims that the strategy of contemporary semantic theories of information structure, i.e. the Structured Meanings approach and Alternative Semantics (von Stechow [1982] <italic>Structural Propositions</italic>, Jacobs [1983] <italic>Fokus und Skalen</italic>, Rooth [1985] <italic>Association with Focus</italic>, Krifka [1991] ‘A Compositional Semantics for Multiple Focus Constructions’), to partition a sentence into disjunctive informational units (focus vs. background) leads to problems with compositionality in complex cases, and proposes that information structure should be represented by two overlapping units instead, in a system that he calls Foreground-Background Semantics. The foreground part corresponds to the whole sentence, whereas the background part relates to the whole sentence minus the focused expressions.</p>
<p>A two-volume collection from last year, Coene and D'Hulst, eds., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B21"><italic>From NP to DP</italic></xref>, presents the results of current research about the syntax and semantics of NPs. The first volume is devoted to studies addressing the internal syntax of the DP, the syntax and semantics of bare nouns and indefinites, and the expression of measurement in the NP, complemented by the editors’ introduction about the way the NP was analysed syntactically in the course of generative theorizing. The second volume is about the expression of possession in NPs, discussing aspects of the typological variation of possessors in syntax and semantics, the DP-internal representation of possessors, and different aspects of external possessor constructions. One of the most interesting contributions to the collection for this section is Greg Carlson's ‘Weak Indefinites’, which proposes a system of semantic interpretation that unites certain aspects of event semantics and propositional semantics. He argues that the meaning of verbs combined with that of the indefinite arguments provides a core input, best described in terms of event semantics, into the more usual propositional semantics, which is about the interpretation of entire sentences in context. The proposal receives strong motivation from syntax, since, as discussed by Molly Diesing [1992] <italic>Indefinites</italic>, weak indefinite expressions are the only argument types that do not have to be ‘moved out’ of the VP. Fred Landman's ‘Predicate-Argument Mismatches and the Adjectival Theory of Indefinites’ compares two powerful theories of argument and predicate NPs. The first one, the Montague–Partee theory, assumes that all NP interpretations are born at argument types, and that predicate interpretations of NPs are derived from argument interpretations with a type lowering operation. The other, the Adjectival Theory, assumes that indefinite NPs are born at the predicate type, and argument interpretations of indefinite NPs are derived from predicative interpretations through type lifting with existential closure. Giuseppe Longobardi (‘Determinerless Nouns: A Parametric Mapping Theory’) investigates the syntax-semantics mapping in the case of bare common nouns that seem to have a constant syntax and a variable semantics among the Romance and the Germanic languages. Finally, Almerindo E. Ojeda (‘A Russellian Interpretation of Measure Nouns’) proposes a model-theoretic approach to the semantics of measure nouns, which interprets measure nouns analogously to the way in which Russell interpreted numerals, as sets of metrically equivalent entities.</p>
<p>The interpretation and syntactic behaviour of another syntactic class is discussed in Austin, Engelberg, and Rauh, eds., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B7"><italic>Adverbials: The Interplay between Meaning, Context, and Syntactic Structure</italic></xref>. This volume summarizes the results of a (so far) less intensively studied field, presents some original pieces of work, and formulates a programme for further research. The editors’ introduction identifies the following themes as central to the investigation of the syntactic, semantic and discourse properties of adverbials: (a) the effects of positional variance on interpretation (adverbials with stable vs. variable orders and their interpretational properties, and the effect of change of position on interpretation); (b) the possible syntactic positions of adverbials, partly motivated by their semantic behaviour; and (c) the syntactic and semantic classification of adverbials. The most interesting contributions from a semantic point of view include ‘Optimizing Adverb Placement in Gap Constructions’ by Eva Engels, which analyses the behaviour of a wide range of adverbials in front of various types of VP gaps in English and French in terms of OT, showing that a purely semantic theory cannot account for their distribution; ‘Domain Adverbs and the Syntax of Adjuncts’ by Thomas Ernst, which provides a new semantic analysis of domain adverbs such as <italic>financially</italic> or <italic>physically</italic>; and ‘Depictives and Transparent Adverbs’ by Wilhelm Geuder, which outlines the semantic differences between VP-adjoined adjectives called <italic>depictives</italic> (<italic>John left the meaning</italic> <bold><italic>angry</italic></bold>), manner adverbials (<italic>She walked</italic> <bold><italic>carefully</italic></bold>), and transparent adverbs (<italic>He discovered</italic> <bold><italic>sadly</italic></bold> <italic>that the solution was incorrect</italic>). Finally, Dagmar Haumann (‘Degree Phrases versus Quantifier Phrases in Prenominal and Preverbal Positions: A Hybrid Explanation for Some Distributional Asymmetries’) studies the distribution of adjectival and adverbial Degree Phrases (<italic>so clumsy</italic>/<italic>so clumsily</italic>) and Quantifier Phrases (<italic>less gloomy</italic>/<italic>gloomily</italic>) in preverbal and prenominal position, while Benjamin Shaer's ‘Left/Right Contrasts among English Temporal Adverbials’ proposes an account of the interpretational contrasts between temporal adverbials on the left vs. right periphery of the English sentence, claiming that left-peripheral adverbials have an unspecified position in the clause, and that their interpretation is mediated through their role as <italic>links</italic> (relating information to the prior context) in an information-structural sense (cf. Enric Vallduví [1990] <italic>The Informational Component</italic>).</p>
<p>The primary aim of Alastair Butler and Eric Mathieu, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B16"><italic>The Syntax and Semantics of Split Constructions: A Comparative Study</italic></xref>, is to give an account of the fact that constructions that involve the splitting of an operator from its restriction (cf. the <italic>combien</italic> ‘how many’ split in French) are more limited in their distribution than corresponding constructions without splitting. According to the current view, unacceptable constructions involving splitting are deficient if they are separated by a particular class of interveners called weak islands. The authors reverse the above argumentation by saying that all constructions exhibiting weak islands are in fact split constructions, in which a bare operator is separated from its restrictor, thus claiming that a wide range of phenomena, including the locality effects of French N-words, negative polarity items (e.g. <italic>*Anyone did not arrive</italic>), split <italic>combien</italic> DPs in French, <italic>Wh</italic>-in-situ in French, Korean, Chinese, German, English (e.g. <italic>Which book did which person not read?</italic> vs. *<italic>Which book didn't which person read?</italic>), <italic>Wh</italic>-adjuncts (*<italic>Why don't you think John talked to Mary?</italic>, as opposed to <italic>Who don't you think John talked to?</italic>) can be analysed in a uniform manner. The account is in accordance with minimalist assumptions on syntax, and is formalized in terms of a dynamic logic, Predicate Logic with Barriers.</p>
<p>Monika Rathert, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B93"><italic>Textures of Time</italic></xref>, discusses the interpretation of the English present perfect and the German perfect in a parallel fashion, and their interactions with durative adverbials like <italic>until, since</italic> and <italic>for</italic> on the one hand, and Extended-Now adverbs like <italic>ever since</italic> on the other, on the basis of real-life examples from the web. Having compared the two standard analyses of these perfects on the market, i.e. the Reichenbachian Anteriority-based semantics (which holds that the event time properly precedes the reference time), and the Extended-Now Theory, she argues for the latter, partly based on the compatibility of the (present) perfect with Extended-Now adverbs. The difference between the English and German perfects under investigation, then, lies in the fact that in English the reference time is included in the Extended-Now interval, whereas in German it is excluded from it. The author also takes a fresh look at phenomena that have been claimed to show an ambiguity between universal and existential readings of durative adverbials. One of them arises in English in adverbials introduced by <italic>for</italic>, as in <italic>John has been in Boston for two weeks</italic>, and pertains to whether <italic>two weeks</italic> in the above sentence can refer to any period of two weeks in the past, or only to the two weeks immediately preceding the speech time, which should be analysed as a case of underspecification. The other involves <italic>since</italic> adverbials, as in <italic>John has been in Boston since Tuesday</italic>, and pertains to whether this sentence means that John has been in Boston the whole time, or only once within the interval specified, which is accounted for by positing an ambiguity concerning the relative scope of the durative adverbial and a covert frequency adverb.</p>
<p>The monographs <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B94"><italic>Literal Meaning</italic></xref>, by François Recanati, and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B10"><italic>Renewing Meaning: A Speech-Act Theoretic Approach</italic></xref>, by Stephen J. Barker, provide in-depth studies of foundational issues in the theory of meaning. In particular, both authors argue for an irreducible and non-trivial pragmatic contribution to the computation of meanings. Recanati defends a ‘contextualist’ position—not unlike Dan Sperber and Deirdre Wilson's [1986] <italic>Relevance: Foundations of Pragmatic Theory</italic>, Relevance Theory—according to which truth-conditional content only arises at the level of utterances (not sentences) and is inextricably part of ‘speaker's meaning’. Special effort is put into characterizing varieties of ‘literalism’, i.e. alternatives to contextualism that take a more modular view on the semantics/pragmatics interaction, taking into account the way such alternatives have been defended in the literature. Contextualism is found to affect a broad empirical domain, ranging over lexical semantics (polysemy, metaphorical use), the treatment of indexical expressions, modality and quantification over situations, as well as sentence connectives. One weakness of the book, however, is the rather low degree of formal explicitness, which is a strength of many of the frameworks criticized. This is where Barker's study comes in. <italic>Renewing Meaning</italic> does not only defend a variant of the classical Wittgensteinian ‘meaning-as-use’ approaches to semantics, but it also manages to put forward a formally worked out speech-act theoretic analysis of meaning according to which ‘semantics is entirely subsumed by pragmatics’ (p. vii). The first part of the book is devoted to criticizing the currently dominant ‘Frege Model’ with its appeal to a clear divide between semantics and pragmatics, its reliance on word-to-object reference as central semantic mechanism, and its approach to quantification in terms of the logical tools of quantifiers, variables and assignments. Instead, Barker proposes a reconstruction of meanings from building blocks called ‘proto acts’, all of which are taken to relate to utterances with communicative intentions. Within a framework partly reminiscent of Jon Barwise and John Perry's [1983] <italic>Situations and Attitudes</italic>, situation semantics, Barker undertakes to analyse the full range of NP and quantifier types, proper names and plurals among them, as well as sentence connectives and conditionals. Each step of the analysis is developed against the background of ‘Fregean’ alternatives, an expository strategy which is likely to substantially deepen the reader's understanding of the aims and tools of formal semantics.</p>
<p>Michele Prandi's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B91"><italic>The Building Blocks of Meaning: Ideas for a Philosophical Grammar</italic></xref> is concerned with the construction and communication of complex meanings, and argues for a paradigm, referred to as a ‘philosophical grammar’, that aims to combine the advantages of the formal and the functional approaches to grammar. Prandi claims that ‘the ideation of complex meanings is the outcome of a variable interplay of language-specific formal structures and consistent conceptual structures’ (p. viii), and illustrates the above types of interaction for constructions that involve ‘conflictual complex meanings’, such as oxymoron, synecdoche, metonymy and metaphor.</p>
<p>We now turn to journal articles. In the field of nominal semantics, Friederike Moltmann, ‘The Semantics of <italic>Together</italic>’ (<italic>NLS</italic> 12[2004] 289–318), challenges the view that the function of the modifier <italic>together</italic> in adnominal position is to prevent a distributive reading of the predicate, and proposes instead that it introduces a cumulative measurement of the group that <italic>together</italic> is associated with. The account is claimed to be extendable to adverbial uses of <italic>together</italic> with slight modifications. In a different paper, she argues for a distinction between ‘Two Kinds of Universals and Two Kinds of Collections’ (<italic>Ling&P</italic> 27[2004] 739–76), the first of which are to be treated like ordinary individuals allowing predicates to be predicated of them in the familiar ways, whereas the second allow predicates to be predicated of them only on the basis of properties fulfilled by their instances (in the case of universals) and the individual members constituting them (in the case of collections). In a third paper, ‘Nonreferential Complements, Nominalizations, and Derived Objects’ (<italic>JSem</italic> 21[2004] 1–43), she argues that certain complements, particularly predicative and clausal complements and intensional NPs, do not provide arguments for a relation established by the verb but should be considered as forming a complex predicate together with the verb. Still on the topic of nominal semantics, Veneeta Dayal, ‘Number Marking and (In)Definiteness in Kind Terms’ (<italic>Ling&P</italic> 27[2004] 393–450), reports the results of a cross-linguistic study of the morphology, syntax and interpretation of kind-denoting terms, and Ad Neeleman, Hans van de Koot and Jenny Doetjes, ‘Degree Expressions’ (<italic>TLR</italic> 21[2004] 1–66), investigate the syntax and semantics of degree expressions, arguing that the mapping between the syntactic subclasses (functional heads versus modifiers) and the semantic subclasses within them is partially arbitrary.</p>
<p>Turning to verbal semantics, Veerle van Geenhoven, ‘<italic>For</italic>-Adverbials, Frequentative Aspect, and Pluractionality’ (<italic>NLS</italic> 12[2004] 135–90), considers some puzzles related to a type of aspect shift that is manifested in the compatibility of <italic>for</italic>-adverbials with accomplishment and achievement verbs that take indefinite, bare plural, and mass noun complements, proposing that the adverbials above get licensed through frequentative aspect. Zhonghua Xiao and Anthony McEnery put forth a ‘Two-Level Model of Situation Aspect’ (<italic>JL</italic> 40[2004] 325–63), which is developed and tested with the help of an English and a Chinese corpus. Sheila Glasbey, ‘Event Structure, Punctuality, and <italic>When</italic>’ (<italic>NLS</italic> 12[2004] 191–211), reconsiders the temporal interpretation of constructions of the form <italic>When A B</italic>, where <italic>A</italic> and <italic>B</italic> both describe events (as opposed to states), and are both in the simple past tense. She argues that the issue of whether the events described by <italic>A</italic> and <italic>B</italic> are interpreted as preceding each other or as temporally overlapping does not depend on whether <italic>A</italic> describes an accomplishment or an achievement, as proposed in earlier accounts, but on the thematic structure, i.e. on whether the corresponding event has a prototypical agent or not. Hans Smessaert and Alice ter Meulen, in ‘Temporal Reasoning with Aspectual Adverbs’ (<italic>Ling&P</italic> 27[2004] 209–62), propose an analysis of human reasoning about temporal relations between events reported in natural language with the help of aspectual adverbs such as <italic>not yet, still</italic>, or <italic>finally</italic>, which combine factual content with speakers’ attitudes and presuppositions, in terms of Discourse Representation Theory, ‘in which components of truth conditional content are combined with information regarding the speaker's attitudes towards possible past alternative courses of events and future continuations of the current state’ (p. 210). Kimihiro Yoshimura and John R. Taylor, ‘What Makes a Good Middle? The Role of Qualia in the Interpretation and Acceptability of Middle Expressions in English’ (<italic>ELL</italic> 8[2004] 293–321), investigate the factors that contribute to the acceptability of middles in English, emphasizing the importance of the fact that the subject referent has to be construed in such constructions as having properties that facilitate the unfolding of the process in question. These properties are then investigated with reference to the qualia structure (cf. James Pustejovsky [1991] ‘The Syntax of Event Structure’, [1995] <italic>The Generative Lexicon</italic>) of the subject nominal.</p>
<p>Philippe Schlenker, ‘Context of Thought and Context of Utterance: A Note on Free Indirect Discourse and the Historical Present’ (<italic>M&Lang</italic> 19[2004] 279–304), discusses the interpretation of indexicals in various types of contexts. He argues that, whereas in ordinary discourses they are evaluated with respect to the actual physical context in which the speech act is taking place, in free indirect discourse and in the historical present tense, two types of context have to be distinguished for the interpretation of indexicals: person and tense are evaluated with respect to the Context of Utterance, all other indexicals (e.g. demonstratives) are evaluated with respect to the Context of Thought. In ‘Person and Binding (A Personal Survey)’ (<italic>RLing</italic> 16[2004] 155–218), he investigates two problems related to the semantics of person, the Bindability Problem (indexical pronouns sometimes behave as bound variables) and the Shiftability Problem (some indexicals may be re-evaluated with respect to the context of a reported speech act).</p>
<p>On the semantics of polarity items, Anna Szabolcsi's ‘Positive Polarity–Negative Polarity’ (<italic>NL<</italic> 22[2004] 409–52) presents an ingenious account of positive polarity items (PPIs) of the <italic>someone</italic>/<italic>something</italic> type, calling into question the traditional characterization of PPIs as items incapable of occurring in the scope of negation, and arguing for the view that they are in a sense ‘double NPIs’, requiring the licensing conditions of two different classes of NPI. Elena Guerzoni's ‘Even-NPIs in Yes/No Questions’ (<italic>NLS</italic> 12[2004] 319–43) reconsiders the puzzle of why a certain class of NPIs (the so-called ‘minimizers’ like <italic>lift a finger</italic> or <italic>the faintest idea</italic>) force a question to be biased towards a negative answer, as opposed to other NPIs like <italic>any</italic> or <italic>ever</italic>, by claiming that the above effect is due to the presence of a silent <italic>even</italic> (proposed in Irene Heim [1984] ‘A Note on Negative Polarity and DE-ness’) in minimizers, which triggers a presupposition that reduces the set of possible answers to a question to the singleton containing the negative answer.</p>
<p>Some further papers discuss the interaction between logical operations like conjunction, disjunction, and negation. Anna Szabolcsi and Bill Haddican, in ‘Conjunction Meets Negation: A Study in Cross-Linguistic Variation’ (<italic>JSem</italic> 21[2004] 219–49), investigate the interpretation of constructions containing negated definite conjunctions cross-linguistically. In widely different languages like Hungarian, Russian, Serbian, Italian and Japanese, negated definite conjunctions are naturally and exclusively interpreted as ‘neither’, that is, counterparts of <italic>Mary didn't take hockey and algebra</italic> are taken to mean ‘Mary didn't take hockey and didn't take algebra’. In English and German, however, the above sentence is ambiguous (at least for some speakers and in some contexts) between the above reading and a reading that can be paraphrased as ‘It is not the case that Mary took both hockey and algebra’. Chung-Hye Han and Maribel Romero, in ‘Disjunction, Focus and Scope’ (<italic>LingI</italic> 37[2004] 179–217), study the lack of ambiguity of negative non-<italic>wh</italic>-questions and declaratives containing disjunction with preposed negation, as opposed to their counterparts with non-preposed negation. Whereas the interrogative sentence <italic>Did John not drink coffee or tea?</italic> can be interpreted both as a yes/no question and an alternative question (with focus stress on <italic>coffee</italic> and <italic>tea</italic>), its variant with preposed negation, <italic>Didn't John drink coffee or tea?</italic> only has the yes/no question reading. A parallel contrast is observed between the declarative <italic>John has never drunk coffee and tea</italic>, ambiguous between a wide-scope negation and wide-scope disjunction reading, and its unambiguous variant <italic>Never has John drunk coffee or tea</italic>, which only has the first interpretation. The authors attribute the contrast to the interaction of the verum focus, carried by the preposed negative element, and the LF-syntax of disjunctive structures. The same authors but in reverse order, Maribel Romero and Chung-Hye Han, in ‘On Negative Yes/No Questions’ (<italic>Ling&P</italic> 27[2004] 609–58), look at the source of the implicature introduced by yes/no questions with preposed negation that these questions should be answered in the positive (e.g. the question <italic>Doesn't John drink?</italic> carries the implicature that the speaker thinks that John drinks) and the ambiguity of such questions between a ‘double-checking p’ and a ‘double-checking non-p’ readings, as in <italic>Isn't Jane coming too?</italic> and <italic>Isn't Jane coming either?</italic> They attribute both facts to the presence of an epistemic conversational operator (VERUM).</p>
<p>On the semantics of generic expressions, Ariel Cohen argues, in ‘Generics and Mental Representations’ (<italic>Ling&P</italic> 27[2004] 529–56), that in the course of the evaluation of the truth of generic sentences, exceptions are only tolerated if they do not violate homogeneity, i.e. when they are not concentrated in a salient chunk of the domain of the generic. He offers support for his views from results of psychological experiments concerned with the salient partitions of domains. In ‘Existential Generics’ (<italic>Ling&P</italic> 27[2004] 137–68), he takes up the issue of the existential interpretation of generics, illustrated by the second sentence of the following discourse: (A) <italic>Birds lay eggs</italic>; (B) <italic>Mammals lay eggs too</italic>. Cohen proposes that the domain of generics is restricted by a set of alternatives, which may be provided by focus, i.e. they are focus-sensitive operators. Their speciality lies in the fact that they do not need to be associated with focus as other focus-sensitive operators do: when alternatives are introduced by focus or by other means, quasi-universal readings come about, otherwise, they get existential readings.</p>
<p>Still on the semantics of focus, Ron Arstein's ‘Focus Below the Word Level’ (<italic>NLS</italic> 12[2004] 1–22) investigates the interpretation of constructions that involve intonational focus on parts of words, and thus provides a generalization of focus theories. He claims that focused word parts denote their own sound, and the unfocused parts are functions from sounds to word meanings. He shows that the focusability of a word part does not depend on semantic factors, only on its prosody.</p>
<p>The two 2004 issues of <italic>Theoretical Linguistics</italic> feature target articles discussing the interpretation of focus and discourse topic, respectively, and commentaries on them. In the first issue (edited by Manfred Krifka), Bart Geurts and Rob van der Sandt outline their theory on ‘Interpreting Focus’ (<italic>TL</italic> 30[2004] 1–44), the central claim being that focus induces existential presuppositions and that the interrelations between the presupposition and the focus can be described with the help of what they call the Background-Presupposition Rule. The commentators of the target article include David I. Beaver, Daniel Büring, Regine Eckardt, Jean Marc Gawron, Joachim Jacobs, Gerhard Jäger, Angelika Kratzer and Roger Schwarzschild. The second issue (edited by Michael Grabski) contains Nicholas Asher's target article on ‘Discourse Topic’ (<italic>TL</italic> 30[2004] 163–201), with commentaries by Henk Zeevat, Jon Oberlander, Andrew Kehler and Manfred Stede. Asher argues against the view that discourse topics are among the organizing principles of discourse structure, showing that they are constructed only for a limited number of discourse relations between sentences in discourse, including Narration, also discussing how the information sources in language, particularly contrastive topics, affect discourse topics.</p>
<p>Some studies investigating the structure of the LF of utterances also deserve attention. Carlo Cecchetto, ‘Explaining the Locality Conditions of QR: Consequences for the Theory of Phases’ (<italic>NLS</italic> 12[2004] 345–97), addresses the question why Q(uantifier) R(aising) tends to be more local than other types of A-bar movement. He identifies an Italian construction, the counterpart of A(ntecedent) C(ontained) D(eletion) that involves a QR taking place long-distance, and argues that the apparent locality of QR can be accounted for in terms of Chomsky's [2001] ‘Derivation by Phase’) Phase Impenetrability Condition and a principle of economy. Uli Sauerland, ‘The Interpretation of Traces’ (<italic>NLS</italic> 12[2004] 63–127), claims that parts of the lexical content of an A-bar moved phrase must be interpreted in the base position of movement, on the basis of a study of deletion of a phrase that contains the base position of movement, thus providing evidence for the existence of traces and giving semantic content to the A/A-bar distinction. Daniel Büring, ‘Crossover Situations’ (<italic>NLS</italic> 12[2004] 23–62), proposes a compositional account of binding out of DP, using e-type pronouns and situation semantics.</p>
<p>Before rounding off, two papers on further topics need to be acknowledged. David I. Beaver, ‘The Optimization of Discourse Anaphora’ (<italic>Ling&P</italic> 27[2004] 3–56), offers a reformulation of the Centering model of anaphora resolution and discourse coherence in terms of OT, while Jean Mark Gawron and Andrew Kehler, in ‘The Semantics of Respective Readings, Conjunction, and Filler-Gap Dependencies’ (<italic>Ling&P</italic> 27[2004] 169–207), propose an account of respective readings in algebraic semantics.</p></sec>
<sec id="SEC7"><title>7. Lexicography, Lexicology and Lexical Semantics</title>
<p>I will begin with publications dealing with thesauruses, particularly Roget's, of which there were several this year. R.W. Holder's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B61"><italic>The Dictionary Men: Their Lives and Times</italic></xref> is a readable and lively account of the lives of six lexicographers. The first five are obvious choices: Samuel Johnson, Noah Webster, Peter Mark Roget, James Murray and Joseph Wright. The sixth is less so: George Smith, editor of the <italic>Dictionary of National Biography</italic>. Holder's approach is often personalized and subjective, but he provides an unusual amount of background information about the historical, political and social contexts. For example, the chapter on George Smith devotes several pages to the lives of authors whose works he published, including Charlotte Brontë and Mary Gaskell. The dictionaries themselves receive some attention, but are secondary to the biographical accounts. There is no general introduction or conclusion, with each lexicographer being treated entirely separately, although Holder does provide a joint chronology and emphasizes overlaps in social contact and influence. Holder notes that he ‘find[s] footnotes distracting’ (p. ix), and so does not include any, but the notes on ‘Further Reading’ are some compensation.</p>
<p>It is clear from the title alone that Werner Hüllen's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B65"><italic>A History of Roget's Thesaurus: Origins, Development, and Design</italic></xref> takes a different approach. It builds on Hüllen's earlier monograph, <italic>English Dictionaries 800–1700: The Topical Tradition</italic>, to place the thesaurus in a long tradition of English lexicography, but also to emphasize Roget's innovations. Hüllen deals briefly with Roget's life, noting that ‘it is truly very difficult to find any illuminating links between his life and his linguistic work’ (p. 11), and, also briefly, with the bibliographical history of the thesaurus. Chapter 3 is an account of semantic theories necessary to understand the structure and purposes of Roget's work. Chapter 4 looks at early treatments of synonymy, beginning with those of Prodikos and Plato, and including the use of synonymy as a literary resource in <italic>Beowulf</italic> and by Shakespeare. The fifth chapter considers ‘The Beginnings of Practical Synonymy’, and covers the use of synonyms for definition in dictionaries from the <italic>Promptorium</italic> to Johnson. A consideration of synonym dictionaries, from that of Abbé Gabriel Girard to George Smith, puts Roget's <italic>Thesaurus</italic> into its lexicographical context. But, as Hüllen emphasizes, Roget's is not just a synonym dictionary but also belongs to the topical tradition; that is, words are arranged not just by synonymy, but also thematically: ‘It is the outstanding property of Roget's <italic>Thesaurus</italic> to combine the onomasiological macrostructure with an onomasiological microstructure’ (p. 283). The final chapter is a detailed analysis of the structure of the <italic>Thesaurus</italic>, using a variety of the semantic theories introduced earlier. This volume presents a thorough and interesting account of Roget's work and his contribution to an ongoing tradition. No summaries or conclusions are provided, however, which means that it demands great concentration from the reader. Hüllen deals with some of the same themes in ‘Roget's Thesaurus, Deconstructed’ (in Coleman and McDermott, eds., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B24"><italic>Historical Dictionaries and Historical Dictionary Research</italic></xref>, pp. 83–93).</p>
<p>Andreas Fischer's ‘The Notional Structure of Thesauruses’ (in Kay and Smith, eds., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B71"><italic>Categorization in the History of English</italic></xref>, pp. 41–58) also deals briefly with Roget's <italic>Thesaurus</italic> and compares its structure with more recent thesauruses by Franz Dornseiff, Jane Roberts and Christian Kay, and Rudolf Hallig and Walther von Wartburg. Natascia Leonardi's focus is ‘An Analysis of a Seventeenth Century Conceptual Dictionary with an Alphabetical List of Entries and a Network Definition Structure: John Wilkins’ and William Lloyd's <italic>An Alphabetical Dictionary</italic> (1668)’ (in Coleman and McDermott, eds., pp. 39–52). ‘When Ignorance is Wisdom: Some Day-to-Day Problems of Classification’ (in Kay and Smith, eds., pp. 59–69) is Christian Kay's account of work on <italic>The Historical Thesaurus of English</italic> (<italic>HTE</italic>). In the same volume (pp. 179–91), Cerwyss O’Hare explores the ‘Folk Classification of Plants in the <italic>HTE</italic> “Plants” Category’. Louise Sylvester compares the <italic>HTE</italic> with the electronic lexical database WordNet in ‘Categories and Taxonomies: A Cognitive Approach to Lexicographical Resources’ (in Kay and Smith, eds., pp. 236–64).</p>
<p>Dictionary research concentrating on alphabetical lists includes Reiko Takeda's ‘Cambridge, Trinity College Library MS O.5.4: A Fifteenth-Century Pedagogical Dictionary?’ (in Coleman and McDermott, eds., pp. 11–18). Ian Lancashire takes a broader view of ‘Lexicography in the Early Modern Period: The Manuscript Record’ (in Coleman and McDermott, eds., pp. 19–30), and demonstrates that the printed record alone misrepresents lexicographical activity during this period. In the same volume, Joan Beal's ‘An Autodidact's Lexicon: Thomas Spence's <italic>Grand Repository of the English Language</italic> (1775)’ (pp. 63–70) examines Spence's dictionary in the light of his background and politics, and in ‘Text and Meaning in Richardson's Dictionary’ (pp. 52–62), Rowena Fowler argues that, by his selection and presentation of citations, Richardson ‘aims to create [his] own ideal reader’ (p. 53).</p>
<p>Julie Coleman's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B22"><italic>A History of Cant and Slang Dictionaries</italic> (volume 1: <italic>1567–1784</italic></xref> and <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B23">volume 2: <italic>1785–1858</italic></xref>) is an account of the early years of the cant and slang dictionary traditions. She analyses the contents of the dictionaries to determine their relationships with each other, and uses statistical analysis to pinpoint exactly how each lexicographer made use of his sources (selecting, for example, in favour of or against terms belonging to particular semantic fields or marked with specific usage labels). Coleman also places the dictionaries in their socio-historical context, explaining why there was a market for cant dictionaries in the early period, and that the later period was more interested in the slang of marginal social groups. She also looks at the use of cant and slang dictionaries by novelists, playwrights and film-makers attempting to create a convincing picture of underworld characters and relationships. Finally, the volumes also consider the use made of these dictionaries by the <italic>OED</italic>. Some dictionaries that fall outside the indicated periods are included. For instance, the Carew lists are all treated in volume 1, although they continued to appear until 1882. Similarly, Matsell's <italic>Vocabulum</italic>, though published in 1859, is included in volume 2 because of its dependence on the work of Francis Grose and others.</p>
<p>Coleman provides two further articles on related topics. In ‘Cant and Slang Dictionaries: A Statistical Approach’ (in Kay, Hough and Wotherspoon, eds., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B70"><italic>New Perspectives on English Historical Linguistics</italic>, vol. 2: <italic>Lexis and Transmission</italic></xref>, pp. 41–7), she uses the group of dictionaries based on B.E.'s <italic>New Dictionary Ancient and Modern of the Canting Crew</italic> [<italic>c.</italic>1698] to demonstrate that numerical study can identify methods used by dictionary compilers when selecting from early dictionaries. In a second article, ‘The Third Edition of Grose's <italic>Classical Dictionary of the Vulgar Tongue</italic>: Bookseller's Hackwork or Posthumous Masterpiece’ (in Coleman and McDermott, eds., pp. 71–81), Coleman argues that Partridge is mistaken in treating the third edition as the culmination of Grose's own work.</p>
<p>Judith Robertson's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B98"><italic>Plagiarism in Australian Lexicography</italic></xref> is an interesting pamphlet published by the Menzies Centre for Australian Studies in London. She discusses the use by lexicographers of earlier dictionaries, and explores some of the errors that have arisen from such uncritical dependence. She traces dictionary words found in early Australian slang dictionaries and thence in later collections, notably dictionaries by Eric Partridge and Jonathon Green. Some of the early Australian lexicographers, moreover, appear to have used the dictionaries of John Camden Hotten and John S. Farmer and William E. Henley in their compilations. She demonstrates that words otherwise unattested have survived in dictionaries for over a century, labelled as if they were still in use. The use of dictionaries, particularly Sidney Baker's, in travel writing has also complicated the documentation of Australian English.</p>
<p>Studies of bilingual dictionaries include ‘Influence in Lexicography: A Case Study. Abel Boyer's <italic>Royal Dictionary</italic> (1699) and Captain John Stevens’ <italic>Dictionary English and Spanish</italic> (1705)’ (<italic>IJL</italic> 17[2004] 291–308), by Monique C. Cormier and Heberto Fernandez, who conclude that Boyer's entries account for about 20 per cent of those that Stevens added. In conjunction with Aline Francœur, Monique C. Cormier also reported on ‘French–English Bilingual Dictionaries in the 16th and 17th Centuries: Achievements and Innovations by French-Speaking Protestants’ (<italic>Dictionaries</italic> 25[2004] 77–106). They look at the work of Claudius Holyband, Guy Miège, and Abel Boyer, who all drew on their experience as teachers of French in England.</p>
<p>Studies of historical dictionaries still under way or recently completed include Marace Dareau's ‘<italic>DOST</italic>: A Significant Instance of Historical Lexicography’ (in Kay, Hough, and Wotherspoon, eds., pp. 49–64), which explores the contribution that <italic>DOST</italic> has made to ‘the craft of historical lexicography’ (p. 49). Antoinette diPaolo Healey's ‘Polysemy and the Dictionary of <italic>Old English</italic>’ (in Coleman and McDermott, eds., pp. 137–47), and, in the same volume, Robert E. Lewis's ‘Aspects of Polysemy in the <italic>Middle English Dictionary</italic>’ (pp. 149–56) and Eric Stanley's ‘Polysemy and Synonymy and How these Concepts were Understood from the Eighteenth Century Onwards in Treatises, and Applied in Dictionaries of English’ (pp. 157–83) are companion pieces looking at the decision-making processes of various dictionary writers and teams.</p>
<p>This year also saw the publication of several interesting papers on the <italic>OED</italic>. In ‘The “Electronification” of the <italic>Oxford English Dictionary</italic>’ (<italic>Dictionaries</italic> 25[2004] 1–43), Charlotte Brewer provides a lengthy and critical account of the <italic>OED</italic>'s history from the beginning, with particular attention to its online form. She considers editorial changes in the three editions, and explores the inconsistencies in style and content that have resulted. Her insights into current <italic>OED</italic> practice are especially welcome. Peter Gilliver's ‘ “That Brownest of Brown Studies”: The Work of the Editors and In-House Staff of the <italic>Oxford English Dictionary</italic> in 1903’ (<italic>Dictionaries</italic> 25[2004] 44–64) is an exploration of how some of these inconsistencies arose. This paper revisits the <italic>OED</italic> quotation files in order to determine how <italic>OED1</italic> entries reached their final form. Gilliver finds that assistants, even those in largely clerical roles, selected citations and even began the process of definition. In ‘Pinning Them Down’ (<italic>OEDNews</italic> 2:xxviii[2004] 1–2), Veronica Hurst looks at the use of citations from Johnson's <italic>Dictionary</italic> by the original compilers of the <italic>OED</italic>. Jesse Sheidlower's ‘Where in the Multiverse … ? Researching the Vocabulary of Science Fiction for the <italic>OED</italic>’ (<italic>OEDNews</italic> 2: xxviii[2004] 3–4) examines the use of an online database to collect <italic>OED</italic> citations. Jeremy Marshall describes the <italic>OED</italic>'s use in a trade description case in ‘Court in Controversy: A Lexicographer's Brush with the Law’ (<italic>OEDNews</italic> 2:xxx[2004] 3). Greg Crossan provides more <italic>OED</italic> ante-datings in ‘Beddoes Words for <italic>OED</italic> from Texts Supplementary to the Kelsall Corpus’ (<italic>N&Q</italic> 51[2004] 421–6).</p>
<p>Other types of dictionary also received attention this year. Elizabeth Knowles explores ‘Intelligent Elasticity: The Early Years of the <italic>Oxford Dictionary of Quotations</italic>’ (<italic>Dictionaries</italic> 25[2004] 65–76). This is an interesting account of the genesis of a little-studied dictionary. Olga Karpova looks at ‘Author's Lexicography with Special Reference to Shakespeare Dictionaries’ (in Coleman and McDermott, eds., pp. 31–8), and in the same volume N.F. Blake describes his own editorial processes in ‘Ordering a Historical Dictionary: The Example of Shakespeare's Informal English’ (pp. 213–21).</p>
<p>There have also been several interesting publications in the area of dictionary-user research. Jenny Thumb's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B108"><italic>Dictionary Look-up Strategies and the Bilingualised Learner's Dictionary</italic></xref> examines the use of the <italic>Oxford Advanced Learner's English–Chinese Dictionary</italic> and the <italic>Longman English–Chinese Dictionary of Contemporary English</italic> in Hong Kong's tertiary education system. She concentrates specifically on how these learners make decisions while they are looking up words in dictionaries, and what kind of strategies they adopt. Subjects were recorded in ‘think-aloud’ sessions, and Thumb identified seven look-up strategies: ‘Ignoring’, ‘Assuming’, ‘Minimizing’, ‘Checking’, ‘Paraphrasing’, ‘Stretching’ and ‘Maximizing’. She explores factors that might influence the students’ use of the bilingualized dictionaries, such as language preference and language proficiency, and finds that all seven look-up strategies tend to use only one part (i.e. English or Chinese) of the dictionary entries. Finally, Thumb confirms that ‘[l]earners were found to have common as well as different patterns of strategy use’ (p. 106).</p>
<p>Willy Martin concentrates on how bilingual dictionaries can be derived from monolingual dictionaries in ‘SIM<italic>u</italic>LLDA, The Hub-and-Spoke Model and Frames, or How To Make the Best of Three Worlds?’ (<italic>IJL</italic> 17[2004] 175–87). Rafael C. Monroy asks, ‘New Transcription Policies in the Latest English Pronunciation Dictionaries: A Help or Hindrance to the Foreign Learner?’ (<italic>IJL</italic> 17[2004] 275–90). Rosamund Moon looks at the treatment of metaphor in monolingual English dictionaries in ‘On Specifying Metaphor: An Idea and its Implementation’ (<italic>IJL</italic> 17[2004] 195–222), with specific reference to the <italic>Macmillan English Dictionary for Advanced Learners</italic>. Patrick Hanks's ‘The Syntagmatics of Metaphor and Idiom’ (<italic>IJL</italic> 17[2004] 245–74) discusses some of the ways in which conventional metaphors can be distinguished from literal senses. Andrea R. Nagy's ‘Life or Lexicography: How Popular Culture Imitates Dictionaries’ (<italic>Dictionaries</italic> 25[2004] 107–21) is an interesting account of the use of dictionary formats in other media, particularly in advertising and humour. These parodies both demonstrate the pervasiveness of ‘the’ dictionary's authority, and demonstrate contemporary irreverence towards it.</p>
<p>Orin Hargraves discusses the recent past and the future of independent lexicography in the UK and the US in ‘Long-Distance Lexicography: A View from the Field’ (<italic>Dictionaries</italic> 25[2004] 137–47). In ‘EuroWordNet: A Multilingual Database of Autonomous and Language-Specific Wordnets Connected via an Inter-Lingual Index’ (<italic>IJL</italic> 17[2004] 161–73), Piek Vossen describes the design of the EuroWordNet database. Maarten Janssen looks specifically at ways of dealing with lexical gaps in ‘Multilingual Lexical Databases, Lexical Gaps, and SIM<italic>u</italic>LLDA (<italic>IJL</italic> 17[2004] 137–54). In ‘Definitional Attributes and Practical Usability’ (<italic>IJL</italic> 17[2004] 189–94), Maarten Janssen considers the two main issues that raise concern about the set-up of the SIM<italic>u</italic>LLDA system. Diane Looser writes about the use of sociolinguistic interviews in data-collection, in ‘Lexicography on the Inside: Doing Time in Every New Zealand Prison’ (<italic>IJL</italic> 17[2004] 69–87).</p>
<p>Jean Atchison's ‘The Rhinoceros's Problem: The Need to Categorize’ (in Kay and Smith, eds., pp. 1–17) is an account of developments in the treatment of categorization in linguistic theory in recent years. Also in Kay and Smith, eds., Carole Biggam picks up the theme with the emphasis on ‘Prototypes and Foci in the Encoding of Colour’ (pp. 19–40); in ‘Anger in Polish and English: A Semantic Comparison with some Historical Context’ (pp. 159–78), Agnieszka Mikołajczuk considers systemic and textual perspectives; and Hans Peters looks at the historical development of ‘The Vocabulary of <sc>pain</sc>’ (pp. 193–220). Andreas Fischer's ‘ “Non olet”. Euphemisms We Live By’ (in Kay et al., eds., 91–107) examines the vocabulary for <italic>toilet</italic> in the history of English. Grzegorz A. Kleparski looks at ‘CDs, Petticoats, Skirts, Ankas, Tamaras and Sheilas: The Metonymical Rise of Lexical Categories Related to the Conceptual Category <italic>Female Human Being</italic>’ (in Kay and Smith, eds., pp. 71–84).</p>
<p>Turning now to historical studies, William Cooke's ‘ “Aluen swiðe sceone”: How Long Did OE <italic>ælfen</italic>/<italic>elfin</italic> survive in ME?’ (<italic>ELN</italic> 41[2004] 1–7) argues that Layamon is the only ME writer who clearly used the word, and that, contrary to <italic>MED</italic> and <italic>OED</italic> definitions, it appears to have been restricted to female elves. He argues that many citations for <italic>elfin</italic> in those two dictionaries should be under different headwords. Carole Hough's ‘New Light on the Verb “Understand” ‘(in Kay et al., eds., pp. 139–49) considers the etymology and thus the interpretation of <italic>understandan</italic> in OE, and concludes that it is derived from OE <italic>standan</italic>, with the sense ‘shine’. Philip G. Rusche contests the current dictionary definitions of ‘Play-Shields and Play-Ships in Old English’ (<italic>N&Q</italic> 51:iii[2004] 225–8). Javier E. Díaz Vera's ‘Image Schemata and Light. A Study in Diachronic Lexical Domains in English’ (in Kay et al., eds., pp. 65–77) uses the Functional-Lexematic Model to analyse the field of <sc>light</sc> in OE and later.</p>
<p>Sölve Ohlander and Gunnar Bergh's ‘Taliban—a Rogue Word in Present-Day English Grammar’ (<italic>ES</italic> 85[2004] 206–29) includes an account of the word's history in Arabic and Persian. It is grammatically versatile in English, as singular, plural, and collective (which can, itself, be constructed as singular or plural), occurring sometimes with and sometimes without the definite article. In ‘Holy Crapola!’ (<italic>Verbatim</italic> 29:ii[2004] 19–21), Mark Peters explores the use and derivatives of <italic>crap.</italic> Gerald Eskenazi's ‘Offending Words’ (<italic>Verbatim</italic> 29:ii[2004] 21–3) reveals linguistic censorship in the pages of the <italic>New York Times.</italic> Nick Humez's ‘Whatsisnames and Thingamajigs’ (<italic>Verbatim</italic> 29:ii[2004] 26–9) considers terms used to replace forgotten words or avoid naming them.</p>
<p>Susie Dent's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B39"><italic>Larpers and Shroomers. The Language Report</italic></xref> is a lively and entertaining account of recent additions to the lexis. It is written for a general audience, but is, nevertheless, carefully researched, if occasionally inaccurate in terminology. Dent estimates that only 1 per cent of neologisms are created ‘entirely from scratch’ (p. 2). The lists of neologisms included are valuable and interesting in themselves, but the analytical sections are more thought-provoking. Chapter 2, for example, compares neologisms of 2004 with those of 1904, when the latest technological craze was the motor car and the most far-reaching social trend was the spread of psychology into everyday life. Some interesting developments include the use of <italic>spinach</italic>, in compounds like <italic>spinach television</italic>, to designate ‘something which is not particularly palatable but which is good for you’ (p. 22), and of the prefix <italic>Franken</italic>- ‘denoting something freakish, ugly, or unnatural’ (p. 22), demonstrating how this could be used as a source book in teaching or research. It will, of course, become more useful as it dates. There are short chapters dealing with business, political and computer jargon, street slang and brand names, with the language of food, clothes and fitness also receiving attention. Although the main focus of the book is changing lexis, there are sections on grammar, pronunciation, headline-writing and world Englishes. The ‘A Word a Year’ list is an attention-grabbing account of changes in the lexis and in society in the century 1904–2004, but it is a shame that there is no index allowing reference to the various mini-glossaries included in the volume.</p>
<p>Julie Anne Zorn's ‘Making FUDGE: Testing Metcalf's Predictive Method for New-Word Success’ (<italic>Dictionaries</italic> 25[2004] 122–36) uses the ‘Among the New Words’ column in <italic>American Speech</italic> as its source for neologisms, and turns to online dictionaries and Google to determine their ongoing currency. She discovers that, for a sample of those first documented in the late 1980s, Metcalf's method is successful in predicting which neologisms will persist.</p>
<p>In the field of etymology, Alexander Tulloch's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B111"><italic>Word Routes: Journeys through Etymology</italic></xref> presents an etymological study of a selected number of English words. This book does not present a straightforward dictionary or a linear history of language; rather, it is a light but scholarly work that delves into the meaning and history of more than 500 entries of mostly everyday vocabularies. Tulloch gives his readers informative vignettes behind these commonly used words by tracing their roots through time (e.g. <italic>ambulance, candidate, family, folk, idea, nice</italic>, etc.) and across many languages, notably Latin, Greek, French, Spanish, German, Irish Gaelic, and Russian. Even though the treatment of entries is uneven in its coverage (see for example <italic>asylum, bless, news</italic>), Tulloch's investigation manages for the most part to show us the surprising and amusing twists that exist among words on their long journeys into modern English. There are also a number of articles on etymology. William Sayers's ‘<italic>Sog, Soggy</italic>: Etymology’ (<italic>N&Q</italic> 51[2004] 124–6) posits a Celtic origin for the adjective <italic>soggy</italic> and its related, now obsolete, forms. In ‘Loanword Etymologies in the Third Edition of the <italic>OED</italic>: Some Questions of Classification’ (in Kay et al., eds. pp. 79–90), Philip Durkin explores how changes in the <italic>OED</italic>'s presentation of etymologies might affect its use as the basis for studies of changes in the language. Tania Styles also considers changing <italic>OED</italic> practice in ‘Culinary Exchanges: An Investigation of the Etymologies of Some Loanwords in the Third Edition of the <italic>Oxford English Dictionary</italic>’ (in Coleman and McDermott, eds., pp. 185–200). Douglas G. Wilson's ‘Bacronymic Etymythologies’ (<italic>Verbatim</italic> 29:ii[2004] 5–8) looks at acronyms representing phrases devised purely to produce a good acronym, and then concentrates on those used in folk etymology, like <italic>posh</italic> and ‘the F-word’. David Galef examines ‘R.A. Acronyms’ (<italic>Verbatim</italic> 29:iv[2004] 10): those acronyms for which at least one of the constituent words is usually added. For example, <italic>ATM machine, PIN number</italic>, and <italic>PDF format</italic>. Richard Lederer's ‘Presidential Words’ (<italic>Verbatim</italic> 29:ii[2004] 8–9) revisits the etymologies of <italic>ok</italic> and <italic>teddy bear</italic>.</p></sec>
<sec id="SEC8"><title>8. Onomastics</title>
<p>A bit of background. I have been involved with onomastics for more than twenty-five years and for at least the last fifteen years I have tried to keep up-to-date with onomastic publications, at least those in English. Therefore I speak from some experience when I say that 2004 was an outstanding year for onomastics, the best in recent years. Especially noteworthy was the publication of a number of outstanding reference works which will be staples of research for the next several decades, and onomasts of modest means (surely the great majority of us) should make an effort to procure at least one of these relevant to their own area of interest for their personal library, for these are major publishing events indeed and will be consulted time and again.</p>
<p>To begin, 2004 saw publication of the long-awaited <italic>Cambridge Dictionary of English Place-Names</italic> (<italic>CDEPN</italic>), a magnificent book of which Cambridge University Press can be justifiably proud, edited by the late Victor Watts of Durham University, assisted by John Insley, with Margaret Gelling as Advisory Editor. Lamentably, Victor Watts, who had worked on this project for more than fifteen years, died shortly before its publication, but the dictionary is a fitting tribute to his dedication to onomastics and to his enduring contribution to the discipline. The dictionary does not replace the previous standard work, Eilert Ekwall's <italic>Concise Oxford Dictionary of English Place-Names</italic>, now nearly a half-century old, nor is it an updating or revision. Rather the <italic>CDEPN</italic> is a different book, with a different focus. While Ekwall's purpose was to consider primarily names of some antiquity or of some intrinsic historical or etymological interest, Watts chose to concentrate on contemporary place names regardless of their age or lineage. Thus, for all practical purposes, all of the names found on the 1983 <italic>Ordnance Survey Road Atlas of Great Britain</italic> are considered, as well as a number of others, bringing the total number of entries to about 20,000. Included in the usual prefatory material is a helpful eight-page glossary of several dozen frequently encountered place name elements (<italic>halh</italic>, -<italic>ingas, ofer</italic>, etc.), made all the more useful by a number of accompanying line drawings illustrating certain geographical features, a great help in distinguishing, for instance, between items such as <italic>denu</italic> and <italic>cumb</italic>, both meaning ‘valley’. Entries in the <italic>CDEPN</italic> take the following form: headword (without prefix or prefixes); location by county, national grid square and reference number; gloss (with comments); a chronological list of historical spellings; etymology; comments; pronunciation (for some entries); and sources. In all respects this is a major scholarly achievement, and the <italic>CDEPN</italic> will be the standard reference work on English place names for many years to come. There are very few errors of fact which I could determine. Reviewers are by nature nitpickers, and I made a point to search until I found at least one error. After looking through 109 pages I was able to find, on page 110 in the entry for California, that the reference given to S.R. Stewart's <italic>American Place-Names</italic> should have been to G.R. Stewart, my point being that at this rate there may be up to seven typographical or other errors in the entire book, another tribute to the care with which this volume was created. I would also point out that Cambridge University Press has gone the extra mile and created a handsome, well-made book whose quality appearance matches the quality text inside its covers. In every way the <italic>CDEPN</italic> is an outstanding publication. It is, unfortunately, priced out of reach of most individual onomasts (the original price was £175, but according to the CUP website this has now been increased to £200, while the original $US200 has been increased to $250), but it should certainly be a part of every institutional scholarly library.</p>
<p>Adrian Room, that indefatigable compiler of reference works, had two significant publications in 2004. The first one, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B99"><italic>Placenames of France</italic></xref>, does not really belong in a section on English onomastics but is clearly intended for an English audience, most of whom are familiar with French place names. Also it contains a number of items of general onomastic interest, such as the revolutionary name changes as well as place names associated with English or American citizens. It consists of about 4,000 entries of names of French communities large and small, natural features, regions and departments, as well as a few items technically not French but which through long association seem a part of France (Monaco, Monte Carlo). The entries are fulsome, complete, and scholarly. The only thing lacking is a reference: it is hard to know from where the information for particular entries was gathered. Very useful features are the five appendices which Room provides. The first, ‘French Habitative Names’, is a list of nearly 1,500 names of denizens of cities, towns, and villages, many of which are non-intuitive and hark back to a community name which may not have been used for centuries. Appendix 2 is an interesting compilation of more than 3,000 names (exclusive of those in Paris) which were changed during the 1789–92 revolution. There is a great deal of onomastic food for thought here: is ‘village without a name’ really a name, or, to paraphrase Leonard R.N. Ashley, is ‘village without a name’ in the same class as ‘the corner store that stays open until midnight’, not really a name at all? Appendix 3 is a list of 160 or so names of stations on the Paris Métro, a surprising number of which, in apparent contrast to some other similar transportation systems and to what one might expect, are commemorative rather than locational. Appendix 4, ‘Major Placenames in Paris’, is an account of the names of about a hundred of the more familiar places and sites in Paris. Here Room is at his best, and these entries are filled with marvellous historical and cultural snippets and anecdotes which add immeasurably to an understanding of not only the origin but the significance of the name. The book is rounded out by appendix 5, ‘Common Words and Elements in French Placenames’, about fifty place-name formatives, most of which are generally known (<italic>aqua, castellum, villa</italic>), others less so (<italic>briua</italic> ‘bridge’, <italic>fraxinum</italic> ‘ash tree’, <italic>cambo</italic> ‘curve’). Again Room adds interesting and edifying material. He even includes an ‘American footnote’ telling us that <italic>ialon</italic>, Gaulish for ‘clearing’, is related to Welsh <italic>iâl</italic>, the source of the name of the community in Wales and also the name of Elihu Yale, the founder of Yale University in Connecticut. Enlightening indeed.</p>
<p>It is a pleasure to report the publication of the fourth edition of Adrian Room's <italic>Dictionary of Pseudonyms</italic>, the gold standard of reference works on pseudonyms and name changes first published in 1981 as <italic>Naming Names</italic>. This edition is enlarged by several thousand entries, bringing the total to about 11,000. Not only has the number of entries been increased, but the coverage has been enhanced by adding more recent pseudonyms such as those of rap artists Snoop Doggy Dogg (Calvin Broadus), Eminem (Marshall Bruce Mathers III), and Puff Daddy (Sean Combs). Warning: this is a highly addictive book; I defy anyone to pick it up, look up a single entry, and then put it down. It has taken me some twenty minutes (so far) to write this brief summary; most of the time was spent (very pleasantly) just browsing. Room has done an amazing amount of research for this book. The entries are filled with the circumstances surrounding the choice of the pseudonym, historical, cultural, and personal backgrounds, anecdotes, and asides. To take but one example, Room includes a list of people whose names appear so contrived that they simply must be pseudonyms but are actual given, birth-certificate names such as actors Sydne Rome, Dustin Hoffman and Bradford Dillman, names which Shmuel Gelbfisz (whoops, Samuel Goldwyn) would have been proud to coin; and playwright Timberlake Wertenbaker (female, by the way). Open this book to any page and you will be richly rewarded: barbarian Genghis Khan (Temujin), Native American Sequoyah (George Guess, who devised the Cherokee syllabary), movie director Elia Kazan (Elia Kazanjoglou), actor Ray Milland (Reginald Truscott-Jones), folk singer Odetta (Odetta Holmes Felious Gordon), highwayman Rob Roy (Robert MacGregor), African explorer Henry Morton Stanley (John Rowlands), crossword puzzler Torquemada (Edward Powys Mathers). The only problem with this book is the price ($75). We can only hope that McFarland will issue a paperback edition shortly.</p>
<p>A comprehensive dictionary of place names derived from and associated with Native Americans and Native American languages has long been a lacuna in onomastics. William Bright's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B15"><italic>Native American Placenames of the United States</italic></xref> fills the void remarkably well. This is the first extensive collection of US place names of Native American origin and contains a wealth of information which sheds considerable light on not only the linguistic background of the names but also the social and historical encounters (usually confrontations, often hostile) which brought them about. The coverage is extensive, ranging from what we might call ‘true Native American names’, that is, names used by Native Americans to refer to particular features of the landscape, such as the Kishwaukee and Kankakee rivers; to names given by whites ‘in honour’ of Native Americans, such as Sakakawea (Sacagawea) Lake in North Dakota, named after the Shoshoni woman who accompanied the Lewis and Clark expedition of 1804–6; to names derived from literature, such as Dahinda, Illinois, which was taken from Longfellow's poem <italic>Hiawatha</italic>, where Dahinda is the Ojibwa name for the bullfrog; to derivatives formed from the primary names, such as Ovapa in West Virginia, a blend of the names Ohio, Virginia, and Pennsylvania, where only the first has any Native American associations. Each entry of Bright's dictionary begins with the name, followed by its location by state and county, pronunciation (for most entries), etymology, and references. I should point out that Bright has been a student of Native American languages for more than fifty years; even so, he realized early on that the task of incorporating names from so many different language groups was impossible for one person, so he wisely gathered a team of twelve ‘consulting editors’, each one a specialist in a particular Native American language family. In addition, more than a hundred other individuals are acknowledged as contributors. Only in this way did an authoritative book of this magnitude become possible. The result is the most reliable and extensive treatment available of the US place names in forty-nine states (Hawai’i is excluded) derived from native languages. I would add that the University of Oklahoma Press has done an excellent job in preparing this volume. It is well designed, not cramped, easy to read, and of appropriate size. The quality of the binding, composition, and format matches the quality of the scholarship. A subset of the entries in the book, those Native American names which appeared in the Lewis & Clark journals as well as those which replaced the English names given by Lewis & Clark, was reprinted as ‘A Glossary of Native American Toponyms and Ethnonyms from the Lewis and Clark Journals’ in the September 2004 issue of <italic>Names</italic> (52[2004] 163–237). (Here as elsewhere usage between ‘Lewis and Clark’ and ‘Lewis & Clark’ is inconsistent).</p>
<p>Very welcome to the canon of onomastic literature is Detro and Walker, comps., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B40"><italic>The Wonderful World of Geographic Names</italic></xref>, a collection of writings by Meredith F. (Pete) Burrill, for many years a leading figure in toponymy, as the subtitle of the book puts it, ‘toponymist extraordinaire’, president of the American Name Society, Executive Secretary of the US Board on Geographic Names, and president of the Association of American Geographers. Burrill's career and publication record was long and distinguished, and seventy of his articles, reviews and other writings are reprinted here. The book is divided into three sections, each one dealing with a particular aspect of Burrill's expertise and interest. The first, ‘Geographic Names’ (thirty entries), includes some of Burrill's better-known descriptive and theoretical papers dealing with the US Board on Geographic Names and especially with toponymic generics; the second, ‘Standardization of Geographical Names’ (seventeen entries), includes his work related to establishing the first UN Conference on Geographical Names held in 1967, with Burrill serving as first president; and the third, ‘Weather, Fire, Industry, and Other Topics’ (twenty-three entries), a miscellaneous collection of shorter pieces, book reviews, and articles not appropriate for the other sections. These are followed by a comprehensive listing of Burrill's publications and convention addresses. With Burrill's passing in 1997 an important and in many ways invaluable link to the methods and theory which evolved during a crucial developmental stage of North American and indeed world toponymy was broken. Since a number of his important convention papers and addresses have never previously been published, this is an important collection and a significant contribution not only to the toponymic literature but to the development of onomastic theory and practice in general.</p>
<p>It is impossible to determine how many there are of what we loosely call brand names or product names, but according to Steve Rivkin and Fraser Sutherland, authors of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B96"><italic>The Making of a Name: The Inside Story of the Brands We Buy</italic></xref>, there are more than 4.5 million website names and about 3.5 million brand and product names registered in the US alone. This was at the time of writing, several years ago; there are undoubtedly several million more today. One of the authors (Rivkin) is proprietor of the ‘naming consultancy’ Rivkin & Associates and the author of several books on ‘branding’, a word I am unable to see or hear without picturing in my mind a smouldering fire, and a cowboy in chaps, boots, and a wide-brimmed hat bowleggedly approaching a trussed calf with a red-hot iron in hand. The authors begin with a typology of product/brand names. First, acronyms and initialisms such as IBM (previously International Business Machines) and RBC (previously the Royal Bank of Canada). Interestingly, changes in technology and/or industrial focus often force corporations to either change their name or—as many do—initialize their former name. Thus American Telephone and Telegraph is now AT&T, now that the telegraph has joined the dodo in (technological) extinction. In other instances, changing social perspectives and public concerns motivate a change from name to initials, as when Kentucky Fried Chicken heard the social wind whispering ‘Fried food is not good food’. So KFC was born. The second category is ‘descriptive names’, which come in two flavours: the first is based on an existing geographical or personal name, often of the founder or prime mover, or an associated country or community, for example Canada Dry (even though the beverage sold under that name is produced by a US company), Land O’ Lakes dairy products, Oldsmobile (named after Ransom E. Olds, who, through acronymy, gave his name to REO trucks as well), Ben & Jerry's, and even Aunt Jemima, from a vaudeville song of that name; the second highlights a quality of the product by which the manufacturer wishes it to be known. These names range from the bland and mundane (Corn Flakes, The Movie Channel) to the extravagantly blatant (Payless, Hygrade). The third category is allusive names, which suggest associations otherwise not immediately apparent, exemplified by such deodorant names as Hush, Mum, and Ban. The first section of <italic>Making of a Name</italic> is rounded out by a chapter on neologisms (pure and simple such as Teflon, Exxon, and Tylenol, and those made up of otherwise meaningless but highly suggestive morphemes such as Accura, Aleve, and Compaq). Sections on the process of brand name creation and the agencies which create both successful and unsuccessful names follow. <italic>Making of a Name</italic> is an authoritative book, engagingly written with many stories and anecdotes, and will be of interest to a range of people interested in names, both academically and commercially.</p>
<p>In 2004 Ken Tucker (Carleton University, Ottawa) continued his investigations into large-scale name corpora, particularly the British Electoral Roll of 1998 (more than 47 million entries) and the 1881 UK Census. In ‘The Forenames and Surnames from the GB 1998 Electoral Roll Compared with those from the UK 1881 Census’ (<italic>Nomina</italic> 27[2004] 5–40) and ‘What Happened To the UK 1881 Census Surnames by 1997’ (<italic>Nomina</italic> 27[2004] 91–118), Tucker makes several important theoretical and methodological advances in the study of personal names, and shows as well the usefulness of large-scale corpora for determining outlines of the distributions of names and the structure of societal naming patterns. In the first article Tucker shows how names (particular surnames) changed in Britain from the beginning to the end of the twentieth century. To take but one example, the surname Patel had not a single instance in the 1881 census but in the electoral roll of 1998 had 88,110 tokens, making it the forty-fourth most common surname in Britain. One of Tucker's major theoretical advances is the identification of a ‘break point’, the point at which a log-log regression line ceases to be strictly linear and begins to descend in a dog-leg fashion as the name rank increases. Societally the break point, according to Tucker, defines the boundary of the currently popular group of given names. As we might expect, the specific names in the popular group differ from generation to generation but the patterns of distributions are remarkable. For males the break point was at about rank 15 for the 1881 census and at about 60 for the electoral roll, meaning that there were fifteen ‘fashionable’ male names in the 1881 census and about sixty for the 1998 electoral roll, suggesting that male names had become more diverse by a factor of three during the intervening 100+ years. For females the break point was also at about 15 for the Census data, matching that of the males exactly; however the break point for the Census data was about 100, indicating that the group of fashionable female names had become even larger from 1881 to 1998. Tucker's second paper deals with the issue of why more surnames disappeared between 1881 and 1998 than carried over; in fact more than two-thirds of the surnames listed in the 1881 census did not appear on the 1998 election roll. After pointing out the theoretical and practical problems involved in attempting to account for the missing names, and after accounting for the probable typographical errors, Tucker concludes that more than half of the 272,327 surnames found on the 1881 census but missing from the 1998 election roll could be accounted for as surnames of females who did not pass on the family name, by apparent out-migration, where the last holder(s) of the surname migrated, primarily to the US and/or Canada, or ‘others’ who were otherwise identifiable as actual people with actual surnames by ancestory.com. These are important articles and should be read carefully by everyone interested in general patterns of names and naming. We are seeing that names and naming practices conform to their own logic and Tucker's work is moving onomastics past the preliminary stages of defining the discipline and providing a rudimentary taxonomy into genuine onomastic theory.</p>
<p>Michael Falk (<italic>OnCan</italic> 86[2004] 17–40) continues his investigation into the names of days of the week in European languages. In a previous article, Falk reported that in most of Europe day names were reflexes of the pagan names used in the Roman empire: the seven divinities associated with the sun, moon, and the five then known planets (the Germanic languages provided a notable exception). In the present article Falk considers languages and cultures on the whole little influenced by the Roman empire (Albanian, Slavic, Latvian, etc.) and finds that here day names are largely numerical, following the pattern established by the Church, itself based upon the day names of the Hebrew Bible. In many cases these appear to have been imposed by the Church, but in others (e.g. Hungary and Lithuania) they were apparently adopted before the coming of Christian missionaries.</p>
<p>Marc Picard's ‘Explaining the “Unexplained” French Surnames in the <italic>Dictionary of American Family Names</italic>’ (<italic>OnCan</italic> 86[2004] 75–106) is noteworthy for several reasons beyond the fact that Picard has provided evidence for the origins of several hundred surnames with etymologies labelled ‘unidentified’ or ‘uncertain’ in the <italic>Dictionary of American Family Names</italic>. In particular, Picard points out the tremendous value of the genealogical databases now available on the internet, such as FamilySearch and ancestory.com, in determining the linguistic and cultural sources of family names. He also calls into question the uncritical use of given names as diagnostic tools in determining the source of family names, one of the foundations of the <italic>Dictionary.</italic> In his sample Picard found that in more than 25 per cent of the cases (here French) given names did not match surnames in language of origin.</p>
<p>In ‘Nicknames of American Civil War Generals’ (<italic>Names</italic> 52[2004] 243–85) Ernest L. Abel reports on 317 nicknames of generals on both sides of the American Civil War of 1860–5. Noteworthy is the fact that Abel categorizes the nicknames along two dimensions, a semantic (referential) dimension and an expressive dimension, reflecting how those who knew the nickname felt about the nicknamee. Abel's classification scheme includes ‘biographical’, such as the ‘Wily Dutchman’ (William Starke Rosecrans); ‘physical appearance’, such as the ‘One-Armed Devil’ (George Nathan Evans); ‘affection’, such as ‘Ted’ (Edmund Kirby Smith); and ‘character’, such as ‘Guts’ (Louis Malesherbes Goldsborough) and the well-known ‘Stonewall’ (Thomas Johnathan Jackson). As Abel points out, not only do nicknames reflect the attitudes of the namer towards the namee, they also provide insights into the culture and the general public attitude toward the nickname itself. Abel is quite right; I can't imagine, given today's socio-political climate, that any general officer would by nicknamed ‘Froggy’ as was Philippe Regis Denis Dekeredern de Trobriand during the Civil War. Privately perhaps, but in nothing remotely approaching a public manner.</p>
<p>David L. Gold (<italic>OnCan</italic> 86[2004] 41–53) evaluates three proposed sources for the place name Cape Nome, Alaska, viz. that the name resulted from <italic>?name</italic>, a note handwritten on an Admiralty chart dating from the 1850s; that it is derived from <italic>nuum</italic>, an Iñupiak village in the area; and that it is derived from Iñupiak <italic>Kno-no-me</italic>, ‘I don't know,’ given in response to an explorer's question ‘What's the name of that cape?’ Gold finds that the first is by far the most plausible explanation and that there is little evidence to support the other two.</p>
<p>The origin of the Native American name ‘Kankakee’, the river which heads in Indiana and joins with the Des Plaines River to form the Illinois River near Chicago, is tackled by Michael McCafferty, a Miami-Illinois language specialist, in ‘“Kankakee”: An Old Etymological Puzzle’ (<italic>Names</italic> 52[2004] 287–304). Earlier investigators had claimed that the name meant ‘wolf land’, others that it derived from a Potawatomi word meaning ‘swampy ground’. McCafferty argues the source lies in a Miami-Illinois form reconstructed as <italic>teeyaahkiki</italic>, meaning ‘open country’ or ‘exposed land’, an interpretation supported by reconstructions of the river's eighteenth- and even nineteenth-century biological and botanical ecosystems. For McCafferty, <italic>Théakiki</italic>, as the name was first recorded by La Salle, became Kiakiki through regressive assimilation, and subsequently <italic>Kinkiki</italic> and <italic>Kankakee</italic>.</p>
<p>Richard Coates published several investigations into place names of obscure or unknown origin. In one, ‘The Lyme’ (<italic>EPNS</italic> 36[2003–4] 39–50), of which there are a few more than twenty occurrences (including historical references and variants), Coates offers the ‘probability’ that the name derives from a metaphorical use of Latin <italic>līmen</italic> ‘threshold’ and the possibility that it derives from <italic>līmes</italic> ‘boundary’, adding this to the very short list of surviving Latin place names in England.</p>
<p>Readers will have noticed my apparently random use of ‘placename’, ‘place name’, and ‘place-name’. There is no agreement. In general, British publications use the form ‘place-name’, articles in <italic>Onomastica Canadiana</italic> use ‘place name’, and those in <italic>Names</italic> use ‘placename’. This makes for a most awkward situation, since, when incorporating direct quotations, all three forms are often found in the same article. I have in this review reproduced the form as used by the author; until there is some general agreement, this seems the only sensible course. The year 2004's work in onomastics can be neatly summarized by a line from the Frank Sinatra song of forty years ago, ‘It was a very good year.’ A very good year indeed.</p></sec>
<sec id="SEC9"><title>9. Dialectology and Sociolinguistics</title>
<p>This year's overview of publications in the field of dialectology and sociolinguistics starts with general publications. Joan Swann, Ana Deumert, Theresa Lillis and Rajend Mesthrie have compiled <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B106"><italic>A Dictionary of Sociolinguistics</italic></xref>. After a semester of using it extensively the reviewer has not found fault with it yet. Besides all the micro- and macro-sociolinguistic terms one would expect, the dictionary also includes headwords from pragmatics (e.g. maxims of conversation, conversational implicatures), language acquisition and conversational analysis, as well as short biographical sketches of many leading figures in the field. Entries are concise and extensively cross-referenced. This is the perfect reference work for looking up <italic>scaffolding, habitus</italic>, or the <italic>zone of proximal development</italic> should they temporarily have left one's memory.</p>
<p>This year also sees the second edition of Peter Trudgill's very basic <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B110"><italic>Dialects</italic></xref>, aimed at A-level students [first edition 1994]. Trudgill gives some features of old and new (British) dialects, discusses prestige, dialect maps and isoglosses, invites students to ‘spot [their] dialect area’ and even discusses differences in dialect grammar, as well as hyperadaptations (‘overdoing things’). Each chapter contains a two-sentence overview at the beginning and a great number of exercises that are designed to give students a taste of ‘doing dialectology’. It is not intended for use in the university, and probably not recommended either.</p>
<p>Guy Bailey and Jan Tillery discuss a general question of methodology in ‘Some Sources of Divergent Data in Sociolinguistics’ (in Fought, ed., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B49"><italic>Sociolinguistic Variation: Critical Reflections</italic></xref>, pp. 11–30), such as the effects of different interviewers, differences in sample populations, and different analytical strategies, cautioning the discipline that paying less attention to methodological questions ‘seems to have had a detrimental effect’ (p. 11). Particularly striking is their discussion of several (hotly debated) topics such as zero copula in AAVE, where they claim that ‘results in sociolinguistic research are sometimes as much a consequence of the methodology used as of the behaviour of informants’ (p. 27). (More on AAVE below.) In the same volume, Barbara Johnstone casts a new light on the variable probably most basic to dialectology, namely place, in ‘Place, Globalization, and Linguistic Variation’ (pp. 65–83). She calls for a change in perception, following humanist geography, from <italic>place</italic> as ‘Location’ (the positivist, commonsense view of place: places can be viewed objectively, are associated with physical attributes, etc.) to place as ‘Meaning’, clearly a postmodern concept: place, like many other extralinguistic variables, is socially constructed, discourses about place are jointly formulated, and discourse also constructs dialects (what is perceived as locally meaningful). For dialectologists, this may mean a shift in investigation to more ethnographic questions (how are a specific area and its linguistic characteristics locally imagined?). On a similar subject, Penelope Eckert, in ‘Variation and a Sense of Place’ (pp. 107–18), shows how the local and the non-local are inextricably linked, going back to her study in ‘Belten High’ school: ‘social practice within each school merges with geography itself’ (p. 112), as the burnouts are oriented towards urban, the jocks towards suburban, life. Interestingly, social meaning varies slightly from high school to high school so that one school's jocks may be another school's burnouts. Natalie Schilling-Estes deals with the interesting topic of intertextuality, so far not investigated in the realm of sociolinguistics, in ‘Exploring Intertextuality in the Sociolinguistic Interview’ (pp. 44–61). While she shows persuasively that ‘remembered bits of linguistic material are prevalent throughout the interview’ (p. 45) under investigation (and, quite likely, in most conversation), this raises the important question of whether we can really assume that each speaker's voice is always her own. However, Schilling-Estes does not address the equally important methodological question of how the analyst can in fact identify intertextual elements, other than through her own intuition. Finally, Dennis R. Preston discusses ‘Three Kinds of Sociolinguistics: A Psycholinguistic Perspective’ (pp. 140–58), the three kinds being concerned with extralinguistic correlations, intralinguistic correlations, and language change. From the evidence available so far, Preston concludes that grammars must be variable.</p>
<p>From a more dialectological point of view, Beat Glauser examines ‘Dialect Geography: Demise or Mutation’ (in Lenz, Radtke and Zwickl, eds., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B80"><italic>Variation im Raum: Variation and Space</italic></xref>, pp. 53–73), claiming that ‘weaker dialects mean that the remaining differences gain more weight’ (p. 58) and thus merit closer investigation.</p>
<p>Lesley Milroy, in ‘Language Ideologies and Linguistic Change’ (in Fought, ed., pp. 161–77), argues that ‘natural change’ can only occur when speakers are not constrained by language ideologies (e.g. indexing individual features with social meaning). This already leads us to one of the main topics this year: identity, arguably the central topic of all sociolinguistic work but usually left more implicit. John E. Joseph investigates <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B67"><italic>Language and Identity: National, Ethnic, Religious</italic></xref>—as the subtitle indicates, Joseph is concerned more with group than with individual identities (although individual identities are of course always shaped by group identities). In a very personal and accessible way, Joseph carefully leads the reader to acknowledge that language and identity are inextricably linked and indeed constitute each other, simultaneously giving an overview of the history of thought on identity in philosophy and linguistics, including sociolinguistics ‘proper’ (chapter 3), and laying the groundwork for his constructivist approach, based on social identity theory. Chapter 5, ‘Language in National Identities’, asks ‘When did nationalism begin?’, and traces the constitutive role of language from Dante to nineteenth-century philosophers. In a first case study, Joseph discusses the possible emergence of a ‘national’ variety of English in Hong Kong, linking this to the ‘myth’ of declining standards in English (apparently a much-bewailed topic in Hong Kong). The second main chapter (chapter 7) looks at ‘Language in Ethnic/Racial and Religious/Sectarian Identities’ and is followed by a case study on Christian and Muslim identities in Lebanon. Joseph summarizes his ideas persuasively by saying that ‘Language … is central to individual identity. It inscribes the person within national and other corporate identities … it constitutes a text, not just of what the person says, but <italic>of the person</italic>, from which others will read and interpret the person's identity in the richest and most complex ways’ (p. 225), indeed often ‘over-reading’ it. This book is a profound introduction to a complex topic, yet eminently enjoyable and thus a very welcome addition to the field.</p>
<p>Linking identity and gender, our next topic, Mary Bucholtz and Kira Hall discuss the question of ‘Theorizing Identity in Language and Sexuality Research’ (<italic>LSoc</italic> 33[2004] 469–515), advocating a concept of identity as ‘the outcome of intersubjectively negotiated practices and ideologies’ (p. 469) based on feminist and queer theories, rather than a desire-based view of sexuality, because ‘a focus on sexual desire may marginalize issues of gender, power, and agency’ (p. 485). They discuss identity in the context of the dichotomies of adequation vs. distinction, authentication vs. denaturalization, and authorization vs. illegitimation. Jennifer Coates's standard textbook, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B20"><italic>Women, Men and Language: A Sociolinguistic Account of Gender Differences in Language</italic></xref>, is now in its third edition [first edition 1986] and is a thoroughly updated and partly rewritten account that tries to incorporate new theoretical approaches, especially constructionist ones, in the course of this enterprise also reinterpreting many of the earlier findings. This book is probably the best overview and summary of the major quantitative sociolinguistic studies done on gender differences that has come on the market to date, with chapters that are well structured and accessible enough for undergraduate reading, yet at the same time detailed and accurate enough to serve as a short overview for researchers. The author's theoretical stance (firmly rooted in the ‘difference’ approach) should be kept in mind. Britta Mondorf discusses <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B87"><italic>Gender Differences in English Syntax</italic></xref> on the basis of the—unfortunately a little dated—London–Lund corpus of spoken British English (80 per cent of which was recorded before 1976), investigating tag questions and finite adverbial clauses in much syntactic, pragmatic and extralinguistic detail. She finds that, in her data, women do in fact favour tag questions, but only if they ask for verification or if they are employed for purposes of (negative or positive) politeness. In general, women use epistemic downtoners more prolifically than men, and Mondorf stresses that syntactic behaviour is in fact gender-differentiated. (A shorter version has appeared in 2002, cf. <italic>YWES</italic> 83[2004] 64.) As one of the few researchers investigating men's talk, Scott F. Kiesling this year contributes a study of the address term ‘Dude’ (<italic>AS</italic> 79[2004] 281–305), mainly used by (white, Anglo) men to address other (white, Anglo) men, a term that has been on the rise since the 1980s. Kiesling identifies a combination of meanings in <italic>dude</italic>: ‘solidarity’ but also ‘distance’ (in the sense of non-intimacy), summarizing this as ‘cool solidarity’. Kiesling claims that the use of <italic>dude</italic> may have risen sharply as a counter-image to the 1980s hard, aggressive, power- and status-driven yuppies.</p>
<p>Moving to historical sociolinguistics, Keith Williamson shares his thoughts ‘On Chronicity and Space(s) in Historical Dialectology’ (in Dossena and Lass, eds., pp. 97–136), reporting on the Edinburgh medieval projects (<italic>A Linguistic Atlas of Early Middle English</italic> and the <italic>Linguistic Atlas of Older Scots</italic>). Williamson notes that Saussure's dichotomy of synchrony vs. diachrony can of course not be maintained in historical dialect studies, and he therefore introduces the (rather Einsteinian-sounding) notion of <italic>spacetime</italic> for his atlas projects. Less time depth is reported on by Joan C. Beal, who in her book <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B11"><italic>English in Modern Times 1700–1945</italic></xref> has a chapter ‘Beyond Standard English: Varieties of English in the Later Modern Period’, where she looks at the emerging dialect societies at the end of the nineteenth century, collects remarks on regional dialects of British English since Sheridan (1780), surveys the use of dialect features in literature, and presents some of the first dialect studies. The final chapter, ‘Beyond the British Isles’, is concerned with the ‘burgeoning of new varieties of English in the course of the later modern period’ (p. 209), i.e. American, Australian, New Zealand and South African English, making this a useful short overview. Gabriella Mazzon, in her study of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B86"><italic>A History of English Negation</italic></xref>, has a short chapter on negation in the ‘Varieties of English’ (pp. 118–32), briefly mentioning such varied features as multiple negation, use of <italic>ain't, never</italic> as a past tense negator, invariant <italic>don't</italic>, and uncontracted <italic>not</italic> in both British and American dialects, in the Celtic Englishes and in pidgins and creoles. Unfortunately, Mazzon does not seem to have taken into account more recent findings from Edgar W. Schneider 2000 (cf. <italic>YWES</italic> 81[2002] 86) or Lieselotte Anderwald 2002 (cf. <italic>YWES</italic> 82[2003] 24, 68), which would have been highly relevant here, and her short overview thus seems rather dated.</p>
<p>Starting our regional overview, the major publication that dwarfs all others this year is the massive 2,000-page (actually, a few hundred more) <italic>Handbook of the Varieties of English</italic>, edited by Bernd Kortmann and Edgar W. Schneider. It covers both phonology (volume 1, edited by Edgar W. Schneider, Kate Burridge, Bernd Kortmann, Rajend Mesthrie and Clive Upton) and morphology/syntax (volume 2, edited by Kortmann, Burridge, Mesthrie, Schneider and Upton) in varieties of English around the world, which are conveniently divided geographically into four world regions: ‘The British Isles’, ‘The Americas and the Caribbean’, ‘The Pacific and Australasia’, and ‘Africa, South and Southeast Asia’, only the first two of which will be relevant for this section (the remainder of the <italic>Handbook</italic> is presented in the section below). The <italic>Handbook</italic> has gathered together an impressive number of eminent scholars with—in most cases—a long publication record on the variety at hand. The phonology chapters in particular are characterized by overall comparability, as they discuss the phoneme system of a given variety with the help of Wells's lexical sets; overall historical and socio-cultural introductions are also situated in the phonology chapter, providing more individual reading. Although the authors of the morphology and syntax chapters had also been given guidelines to ensure similarity of coverage, contributions here are much more individual: not all topics are consistently addressed and sometimes even left out, making the grammar chapters somewhat less comparable. Particularly interesting are the editors’ synopses at the end of each volume, with regional synopses by the regional editors, and two global synopses on ‘Phonetic and Phonological Variation in English World-Wide’ by Edgar W. Schneider (volume 1, pp. 1111–37), ‘Morphological and Syntactic Variation in English’ by Bernd Kortmann and Benedikt Szmrecsanyi (volume 2, pp. 1142–1202). With the help of questionnaires that were additionally sent out to all authors, the editor here tries to draw a global picture of pervasive, occasional and rare features of all varieties of English, finding interesting clusters of L1 features (‘dialects’ proper), L2 features and features of pidgins and creoles, which might be a first step in the quest for ‘vernacular universals’ (Chambers's term). Individual regional contributions will be briefly reviewed below.</p>
<p>The regional section ‘The British Isles’ is roughly ordered north to south, and we will follow this order in this section, beginning with English Spoken in Orkney and Shetland. Both chapters—‘Phonology’ (1, pp. 35–46) and ‘Morphology, Syntax and Lexicon’ (2, pp. 34–45)—are written by Gunnel Melchers, who stresses the Scandinavian background of these varieties and also points out areas for further research. The ‘Celtic Englishes’ proper start with Raymond Hickey describing ‘Irish English: Phonology’ (1, pp. 68–97), distinguishing the east coast, the south and west, the Midlands for Southern Irish English, and Ulster Scots and Ulster English for Northern Irish English, also contrasting the two regions and giving possible sources for some key features (transfer from Irish Gaelic, convergence of English input and Irish Gaelic, or input from Scotland). His contribution is aided by a map of the dialect areas. Markku Filppula discusses ‘Irish English: Morphology and Syntax’ (2, pp. 73–101), concentrating on regional dialects and urban working-class varieties (as educated Irish English apparently mainly follows the pattern of Standard English). Naturally, the perfective, progressive and habitual aspects (his terms) take up much space, but Filppula also notes that <italic>amn't I</italic> occurs in tag questions (which might distinguish it from <italic>amn't</italic> in Scots, see Miller below). Filppula discusses the Northern Subject Rule, pointing out that, for Southern Irish English, ‘the picture is not at all so clear’, as most frequently standard concord is found, and -<italic>s</italic> also seems to occur with plural personal pronouns. The Celtic Englishes also play a major role in this year's review because Tristram, ed., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B109"><italic>The Celtic Englishes III</italic></xref>, could not be reviewed last year. Again, Tristram has collected eminent scholars in Potsdam for a symposium, of which this volume, purportedly the last in the series, is the proceedings. In contrast to the earlier two volumes, many contributions concentrate on the history or even the pre-history of English, but there are also some very original studies of present-day dialectological interest, reviewed below.</p>
<p>Raymond Hickey has edited the rather monumental 700-page <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B59"><italic>Legacies of Colonial English: Studies in Transported Dialects</italic></xref>, but perhaps it would be fairer to say that he authored this book, as he has written six of the twenty-one contributions, three appendices, and the glossary as well as introduction and preface. Not surprisingly, all of his contributions have a strong emphasis on Irish English. If readers are interested in even the slightest connection Irish English has had with overseas varieties, they are recommended to have a look at the introduction (pp. 1–30). In fact, Hickey even goes so far as to mention historical situations where Irish English probably had <italic>no</italic> influence on another variety (e.g. Singapore English). An astonishing amount of references to Irish English can also be found in his chapter on ‘Dialects of English and their Transportation’ (pp. 33–58), not to mention his chapter ‘Development and Diffusion of Irish English’ (pp. 82–117). Here Hickey details the historical circumstances that have led to the spread of Irish English beyond the ‘Emerald Isle’ and also supplies a useful list of features of Irish English. The time depth of several Irish English features is the topic of Hickey's contribution, ‘Standard Wisdom and Historical Dialectology: The Discrete Use of Historical Regional Corpora’ (in Dossena and Lass, eds., pp. 199–216). Hickey discusses the second person plural pronoun <italic>youse</italic> (which probably originated in analogy with Irish Gaelic), and habitual marking, which, at least for inflected <italic>be</italic>, cannot be dated before the nineteenth century. As Hickey concedes, ‘it is … difficult to say what conclusions should be drawn from this’ (p. 213), but it is clear that superficial similarities between varieties may actually be due to independent developments. Hickey also points out ‘What's Cool in Irish English: Linguistic Change in Contemporary Ireland’ (in Tristram, ed., pp. 357–73), or more precisely in the phonological system of Dublin English, where he observes retraction of low vowels and raising of back vowels. As before, Hickey claims that dissociation is the motivating factor for this chain shift: ‘fashionable’ Dublin speakers want to distance themselves from speakers of traditional forms of Dublin English.</p>
<p>John Kirk discusses that status of Ulster Scots (even less than a <italic>halbsprache</italic>, as Kirk argues; in fact he calls it a <italic>farlleid</italic> ‘quarter language’) in the enigmatically entitled ‘Archipelagic Glotto-Politics: The Scotstacht’ (this translates as: ‘Language Politics in the British Isles: Where Scots Is Spoken’; in Tristram, ed., pp. 339–56). Kirk claims that Scots dialects form a continuum across Scotland and Northern Ireland—probably much to the consternation of any Ulster Scots activists who campaign to have their variety acknowledged as a ‘minority language’ under EU legislation.</p>
<p>Moving to Irish English more generally, Antonio Lillo reports on ‘Exploring Rhyming Slang in Ireland’ (<italic>EWW</italic> 25[2004] 273–85), a feature perhaps associated more with London Cockney, but apparently present in most (urban) varieties in England and beyond, and compiles a useful first glossary. Also on the topic of lexis, Simone Zwickl examines ‘Spatial and Social Variation in the Dialect Vocabulary across the Northern Ireland Border: A Multidimensional Approach’ (in Lenz, Radtke, and Zwickl, eds., pp. 189–210), claiming that along the Irish border dialects now diverge. This is the case especially for traditional dialect words (preserved mainly in Armagh, north of the border) as opposed to dialect words derived from Irish (preserved mainly in Monaghan), and the border plays a more important role than religious (i.e. ethnic) affiliation.</p>
<p>Kevin McCafferty discusses a notorious morphosyntactic phenomenon, briefly touched upon in the <italic>Handbook</italic> articles mentioned above, in ‘ “thunder storms is verry dangese in this contrey they come in less than a minnits notice”: The Northern Subject Rule in Southern Irish English’ (<italic>EWW</italic> 25[2004] 51–79). As McCafferty finds this complicated rule (a combination of subject type and proximity constraints) alive and well in nineteenth-century emigrants’ letters from Southern Ireland to Australia, he argues against a diffusion of this feature from Ulster Scots. Instead, West Midlands and northern English settlers must have brought this feature with them to Southern Ireland. McCafferty also investigates the history of another well-known syntactic feature of Irish English, the <italic>after</italic>-perfect, in ‘ “I’ll bee after telling dee de raison …”: <italic>Be After V-ing</italic> as a Future Gram in Irish English, 1601–1750’ (in Tristram, ed., pp. 298–317) (the subtitle says it all, really). On the basis of historical literary data, McCafferty argues that the <italic>after</italic>-construction had a future meaning first (or rather, was multiply polysemous), while perfect senses were ‘a minority semantics’, only taking over between 1750 and 1850.</p>
<p>Astrid Fiess examines ‘<italic>Do Be</italic> or not <italic>Do Be</italic>: Generic/Habitual Forms in East Galway English’ (in Tristram, ed., pp. 175–82), which is unfortunately based on only eighteen tokens of the construction, but which calls into question the traditional north/south division of the habitual markers in Irish English (<italic>do</italic> purportedly used only in Southern Irish English, <italic>be</italic> in Northern Irish English), as both constructions occur in her corpus. Still on the verb but moving away from TMA categories, Karen Corrigan investigates ‘<italic>For-to</italic> Infinitives and Beyond: Interdisciplinary Approaches to Non-Finite Complementation in a Rural Celtic English’ (in Tristram, ed., pp. 318–38), i.e. in south Armagh. While this structure is also found in other English dialects, Corrigan argues that since there are no indications of levelling, influence from the source language may have been ‘sufficiently strong to ensure that the construction in NIrE has a rather different social and linguistic distribution to that which obtains in other varieties’ (p. 336).</p>
<p>An interesting ‘pan-Celtic’ question is raised by Markku Filppula in ‘Dialect Convergence or “Dialektbünde” in the British Isles’ (in Lenz, Radtke and Zwickl, eds., pp. 177–87). Clearly leaning on the typological concept of <italic>Sprachbund</italic> (language convergence area), Filppula argues that those features of the ‘Celtic’ Englishes (Irish English, Scottish English, Welsh English and Manx English) that cannot be convincingly explained by substrate influence (use of the progressive with stative verbs, use of the definite article, absolute use of reflexive pronouns, subordinating <italic>and</italic>) may be due to more general adstratal influences. Against this position, Andrea Sand, in ‘The Definite Article in Irish English and Other Contact Varieties of English’ (in Tristram, ed., pp. 413–30), points out that a wider use of the definite article (for generic reference, non-count abstract nouns, concrete mass nouns, gerunds, etc.) is paralleled in other Englishes. On the basis of this evidence Sand argues against a clear substrate (or adstratal) influence for this phenomenon and points out a language-typological motivation instead.</p>
<p>Moving across the Irish Sea, historical Scots is the subject of Anneli Meurman-Solin's ‘From Inventory to Typology in English Historical Dialectology’ (in Kay, Horobin and Smith, eds., pp. 125–51), where she reports on a range of corpora on Older Scots, pointing out the importance of accurate transcriptions (checked against the actual manuscripts) and low-level annotation, in order not to pre-empt a linguistic analysis, as her example of clause combinations through adverbial subordinators illustrates.</p>
<p>Turning to more contemporary matters in Scots, Jane Stuart-Smith's contribution on ‘Scottish English: Phonology’ (in Kortmann and Schneider, eds., 1, pp. 47–67) is complemented in the second volume by Jim Miller on ‘Scottish English: Morphology and Syntax’ (2, pp. 47–72). While Stuart-Smith points out the continuum character of Scottish English between Scots and Scottish Standard English and tries to do justice to the phonology of both, Miller explicitly only deals with the Scots end of the range. His overview is very wide-ranging, even taking into account discourse features, but at the same time leaves some questions unanswered. While he notes, for example, that ‘plural subject nouns usually combine with <italic>is</italic> and <italic>was</italic>’ (p. 49), he does not discuss the interesting question whether this distribution still follows the Northern Subject Rule or not. He does not explicitly state that <italic>ain't</italic> is not used in Scots, but notes that ‘educated speakers [NB] occasionally use <italic>amn't</italic>’ (p. 51), throwing an interesting light on this under-researched dialect feature. Carolin Macafee, in ‘Scots and Scottish English’ (in Hickey, ed., pp. 59–81) gives a lucid introduction to the Scottish Vowel Length Rule but—considering the title—her contribution remains curiously restricted to phonology, even though the dialect grammar of Scots is by no means negligible or uninteresting, as the contribution by Miller above has shown. Ronald Macaulay cautions researchers, in ‘The Radical Conservatism of Scots’ (in Fought, ed., pp. 178–97), to listen to <italic>what</italic> their informants are saying (rather than just <italic>how</italic> they are saying it). Macaulay's data from lower-class Scots informants show no sign at all of linguistic insecurity; indeed he characterizes their language as ‘generally more expressive’ than that of ‘most middle-class respondents’ (p. 195) and comparisons with a preconceived standard language may thus not always be appropriate.</p>
<p>Jonathan Marshall has investigated ‘the Doric’ (the archaic rural north-eastern dialect of Scots) of the small village of Huntly in Aberdeenshire in his book-length study <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B85"><italic>Language Change and Sociolinguistics: Rethinking Social Networks</italic></xref>, concentrating almost exclusively on ten phonological variables almost exclusively (the only morpho-syntactic variable discussed briefly is the preterite ending). Grounded in picture- and task-based elicitations, Marshall correlates the linguistic data with age and sex (chapter 4), finding that almost all variables are gradually lost for female speakers, while they experience quite a ‘revival’ for the youngest male speakers (aged 8–12), who consistently use the Scots forms more than their teenage counterparts. The interesting chapter 5 correlates the data with other social variables, such as the speaker's ‘mental urbanization’ (measuring openness to supra-local norms), his or her social network, social class, attitudes to the dialect as well as ‘national pride’ (in Scotland). Especially mental urbanization seems to be ‘a strong predicator of dialect use’ (p. 161), while the speaker's social network, <italic>contra</italic> Milroy, is not seen to be correlated with any other variable. Multiple regression statistics confirm that ‘age’ is the most important factor influencing linguistic variation, followed by mental urbanization. Staying with the same dialect area, Danielle Löw contributes a study of ‘Variation in Social Space: Knowledge and Use of Dialect Words in Pitmedden (Aberdeenshire)’ (in Lenz, Radtke and Zwickl, eds., pp. 163–75), finding—consistent with Marshall's investigation above—that ‘it is mainly older and native [and male] people who use most dialect words’ (p. 169). Jennifer Smith uses data from Buckie (also in Aberdeenshire) in ‘Accounting for Vernacular Features in a Scottish Dialect: Relic, Innovation, Analogy and Drift’ (in Kay et al., eds., pp. 177–93), asking how these last four analyses can be disentangled. Smith analyses <italic>was</italic> (for StE <italic>were</italic>), which seems to follow the subject type constraint (used after full NPs, not used after <italic>they</italic>), as an example of the retention of this historical form; non-standard past tense forms as an example of analogical levelling, and variable <italic>do</italic>-support as an independent innovation.</p>
<p>The stepchild of (British Isles) dialectology, Welsh English is the topic of several publications this year, due to the publication of the <italic>Handbook</italic>, but also due to Hildegard Tristram's <italic>Celtic Englishes III</italic>. Robert Penhallurick presents both the phonology and morphology and syntax of ‘Welsh English’ (in Kortmann and Schneider, eds., 1, pp. 98–112; 2, pp. 102–13) based on the Survey of Anglo-Welsh Dialects (SAWD), also adding a brief paragraph on the (intuitively) distinctive prosody of Welsh English. Grammatical features standing out are the invariant tag <italic>isn't it, there's</italic> for <italic>how</italic> and word order in indirect questions, which can be traced to ‘a general Celtic influence’ (2, p. 105), but many features seem to be due to non-standard English influence. Penhallurick also notes predicate fronting, discussed in more detail by Williams (see below), and periphrastic and progressive VPs, discussed in more detail by Heli Pitkänen in ‘Non-Standard Uses of the Progressive Form in Welsh English: An Apparent Time Study’ (in Tristram, ed., pp. 111–28), unfortunately based on comparatively few tokens of the non-standard progressive. Magnus Huber reports on plans for ‘The Corpus of English in South-East Wales and its Synchronic and Diachronic Implications’ (in Tristram, ed., pp. 183–200). Based on a huge number of oral history recordings from the South-West Wales Coalfield, this corpus will contain over 3 million words from speakers born between 1870 and 1960 from over 120 locations in south-east Wales, and this reviewer is looking forward to seeing the first studies based on this magnificent new resource. Based on fewer data but dealing with very much the same area, Malcolm Williams examines ‘Information Packaging in Rhondda Speech: A Second Look at the Research of Ceri George’ (in Tristram, ed., pp. 201–23). Williams looks at the invariant tag <italic>isn't it</italic>, which functions as a focusing device, the thematizing particle <italic>now</italic> (as in ‘I’ll show it to you now afterwards’, indicating the theme) and predicate fronting, which Williams argues is not really fronting (as no movement is involved), and does not serve topicalization purposes as it simply mirrors Welsh word order: ‘Where there is no choice, there is no intention’ (p. 212). J. Roderick Walters, in ‘A Study of the Prosody of a South East Wales “Valleys Accent” ’ (in Tristram, ed., pp. 224–39), finds strong evidence for substratal influence in the realm of intonation, based on acoustic measurements.</p>
<p>Moving to English in England, ‘English Dialects in the North of England’ are discussed by Joan Beal with respect to both their phonology and their morphology and syntax (in Kortmann and Schneider, eds., 1, pp. 113–33; 2, pp. 114–41). Beal discusses the difficult question of delineating the north, pointing out that for southerners (but also some linguists) the north includes the Midlands, but restricts her account to the ‘core’ north, coterminous with Anglo-Saxon Northumbria. Beal notes that rhoticity is increasingly being lost in the north, and that the Northumbrian burr (uvular /r/) is used as a ‘party trick’ by speakers who would not usually use it in everyday speech. Interestingly, Beal finds pronoun exchange for the first person plural (<italic>we</italic> as the object, <italic>us</italic> as the subject form) in the north, not just the south-west (on pronouns in the south-west see Klemola's contribution below), and she discusses the Northern Subject Rule in detail, finding that in Tyneside it still operates with lexical verbs, though not with <italic>be</italic>. Double modals are probably a recessive feature of Tyneside and Northumberland, as they are rare and also structurally restricted (the second modal has to be <italic>can</italic> or <italic>could</italic>). Gillian Sankoff looks at ‘Adolescents, Young Adults, and the Critical Period: Two Case Studies from “Seven Up” ’ (in Fought, ed., pp. 121–39). Investigating two speakers from the north of England between the ages of 7 and 35, she finds that, due to social and geographic mobility, ‘these speakers have made some significant phonetic, and possibly phonemic, alterations to their speech after adolescence’ (p. 136), changing highly salient features like /Ʊ/ in <italic>butter</italic> very quickly, but short /a/ in <italic>dance</italic> hardly at all. Sali Tagliamonte investigates ‘<italic>Have To, Gotta, Must</italic>: Grammaticalization, Variation and Specialization in English Deontic Modality’ (in Lindquist and Mair, eds., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B82"><italic>Corpus Approaches to Grammaticalization in English</italic></xref>, pp. 33–55) in material from York. Tagliamonte finds that <italic>must</italic> (in its deontic sense) is decreasing, and neither <italic>got to</italic> nor <italic>gotta</italic> are used instead (as in southern England). Instead, the favoured obligation markers are <italic>have to</italic> and <italic>have got to</italic>.</p>
<p>Turning to the Midlands and the south, Urszula Clark presents ‘The English West Midlands: Phonology’ (in Kortmann and Schneider, eds., 1, pp. 134–62), the only contribution in the British Isles section of the <italic>Handbook</italic> that does not have a corresponding chapter in the morphology and syntax volume. Clark concentrates in particular on the Birmingham conurbation and the Black Country, pointing out that the West Midlands share features both with the north (no <sc>foot</sc>–<sc>strut</sc> or <sc>trap</sc>–<sc>bath</sc> distinction) and with the south (a broad diphthong for <sc>face</sc> and <sc>goat</sc>), the one distinguishing feature being the retention of /g/ in <italic>long</italic> or <italic>sing</italic>. Alicia Beckford Wassink and Judy Dyer report once more on dialect mixture data from Corby (and, incidentally, compare it to Kingston, Jamaica) in ‘Language Ideology and the Transmission of Phonological Change: Changing Indexicality in Two Situations of Language Contact’ (<italic>JEngL</italic> 32[2004] 3–30). As before (cf. <italic>YWES</italic> 83[2004] 68), the authors note that in Corby, the third generation (after Scottish immigration) has reallocated the original Scottish variants to index local identity (vs. neighbouring towns), rather than to index Scottish vs. English heritage.</p>
<p>‘The Dialect of East Anglia’ is discussed by Peter Trudgill both for phonology, and in morphology and syntax (in Kortmann and Schneider, eds., 1, pp. 163–77; 2, pp. 142–53). He notes in particular diphthong smoothing, which seems to progress from north to south in this (comparatively) small dialect area, such that <italic>do it</italic> becomes homophonous with <italic>dirt</italic>, and total yod-dropping (after all consonants, i.e. even in <italic>music, beauty</italic> or <italic>few</italic>), which is quite distinctive for this region. Morphosyntactically, Trudgill argues for <italic>that</italic> (used as a pronoun instead of <italic>it</italic>) being the result of independent grammaticalization, rather than a Scandinavian feature, and (similarly to Beal above) notes pronoun exchange outside the south-west. A very interesting feature is the use of <italic>do</italic> and <italic>time</italic> as conjunctions (already noted last year, cf. <italic>YWES</italic> 84[2005] 78). Ulrike Altendorf and Dominic Watt present ‘The Dialects in the South of England: Phonology’ (in Kortmann and Schneider, eds., 1, pp. 178–203), discussing both the south-east and the south-west. The authors point out that the south-east in particular is characterized by extensive dialect levelling, caused by ‘centrifugal migration’ (out-migration from London), ‘centripetal migration’ (to the south-east in general), and internal migration within the south-east. The topic of levelling is taken up by Eivind Torgersen and Paul Kerswill, who report on an anti-clockwise short vowel shift in Ashford, Kent, in ‘Internal and External Motivation in Phonetic Change: Dialect Levelling Outcomes for an English Vowel Shift’ (<italic>JSoc</italic> 8[2004] 23–53). They argue that the chain shift in Ashford is not internally motivated, but the result of regional dialect levelling radiating from London, which is supported by data from Reading, where only those vowels shift that do not already have the London position. Lieselotte Anderwald summarizes features of ‘The Varieties of English Spoken in the Southeast of England: Morphology and Syntax’ (in Kortmann and Schneider, eds., 2, pp. 175–95), another surprisingly under-researched dialect area of England. Most of the morphosyntactic features she notes probably have a wider regional distribution, raising the interesting question of whether the south-east may have been the source for these more general non-standard features.</p>
<p>In the phonology of the south-west, Altendorf and Watt (see above) come to the conclusion that one of the most stereotyped features of this dialect area, initial fricative voicing (<italic>varmer, zee</italic> etc.) is recessive ‘and virtually extinct in urban areas’ (p. 198). The grammar of this variety is discussed by Susanne Wagner in ‘English Dialects in the Southwest: Morphology and Syntax’ (in Kortmann and Schneider, eds., 2, pp. 154–74). Wagner examines in particular peculiarities in the pronoun system, viz. pronoun exchange, the details of which ‘differ from region to region’ (p. 158) (cf. Klemola's discussion below), and gender diffusion (gendered pronouns used in places where Standard English does not permit them), reporting on new findings from the SED fieldworker notebooks. Other traditional dialect features, e.g. intransitive infinitives ending in -<italic>y</italic> (<italic>I do diggy</italic>), seem to be almost eradicated—much like the stereotypical accent features discussed by Altendorf and Watt. Periphrastic <italic>do</italic>, another defining characteristic of the south-west, seems to be omnipresent with some speakers today, while others do not have it at all. Periphrastic <italic>do</italic> is also discussed in detail by Megan Jones and Sali Tagliamonte, which will be reviewed in the next section. Staying with the south-west, Juhani Klemola investigates ‘Personal Pronouns in the Traditional Dialects of the South West of England’ (in Tristram, ed., pp. 260–75). On the basis of the newly available SED recordings, Klemola finds that true pronoun exchange is found only in a very restricted area of the south-west, while syncretism of object- and subject-forms is much more widespread. Instead of the Standard English natural gender system, the system in the south-west is characterized by a mass/count distinction, for which Klemola tentatively suggests Brythonic parallels.</p>
<p>A variety otherwise very rarely studied is ‘Channel Island English’, the phonology of which is presented by Heinrich Ramisch (in Kortmann and Schneider, eds., 1, pp. 204–15) as a mixture of non-standard English (contributing e.g. T-glottaling or TH-fronting) and influence from Channel Island French, perhaps most noticeable in the suprasegmentals.</p>
<p>Across the ocean, but in fact directly linked to the south-west of England, Sandra Clarke gives an introduction to ‘The Legacy of British and Irish English in Newfoundland’ (in Hickey, ed., pp. 242–61), claiming that this conservative dialect preserves the language of its settler communities (one from the south-west of England, one Irish) to a considerable extent. Clarke distinguishes those features that can be traced back to a south-western background and those that are due to Irish English influence, and finally discusses some shared features that may be due to dialect contact, retention or independent innovation. One of the features designated a ‘historical puzzle’ is the <italic>bin</italic> perfect, otherwise only attested in pidgins and creoles, which also in (some varieties of) Newfoundland English represents an event ‘at a further remove in the past’ (p. 257). Another interesting feature of Newfoundland English is discussed by the same author in ‘Verbal -<italic>s</italic> Reconsidered: The Subject Type Constraint as a Diagnostic of Historical Transatlantic Relationship’ (in Kay et al., eds., pp. 1–13). In Newfoundland Vernacular English, the subject-type constraint is missing (verbal -<italic>s</italic> is just as likely with an adjacent personal pronoun as with a full NP). Clarke claims that ‘at the time of early New World settlement, a subject-type constraint had not been consistently adopted across southern British vernacular varieties’ (p. 7); the proximity constraint could have arisen independently for cognitive reasons. This challenges one of the main arguments for the Anglicist position on AAVE, viz. a direct transmission of the constraints (cf. Tagliamonte and Poplack, below). In the <italic>Handbook</italic>, Sandra Clarke presents both the phonology, and morphology and syntax of ‘Newfoundland English’ (in Kortmann and Schneider, eds., 1, pp. 66–82; 2, pp. 303–18). For many phonological features, such as Canadian Raising, mainland Canadian features seem to be making inroads, while grammatical markers ‘have survived remarkably well as markers of local identity’ (p. 303). Also on the subject of Newfoundland English, Graham Shorrocks investigates ‘Pulmonic Ingressive Speech in Newfoundland English: A Case of Irish-English Influence’ (in Tristram, ed., pp. 374–89), a phenomenon rarely discussed even in the general phonological literature. Ingressive pulmonic speech seems to be used in the special context of ‘mumming’, but also occurs outside it, in particular in <italic>yeah</italic> and <italic>no</italic>, where it may function to signal meanings quite different from ‘confident, unrepentant’ egressive speech—probably a promising area of further research.</p>
<p>Quotatives in CanE are the subject of two closely related contributions. Sali Tagliamonte and Alex D’Arcy discuss ‘<italic>He's like, she's like</italic>: The Quotative System in Canadian Youth’ (<italic>JSoc</italic> [2004] 493–514). In their Toronto Youth Corpus, sampling informal conversations among 10- to 19-year-olds, they find that quotative <italic>be like</italic> is in fact the most frequent quotative these days (used in almost 60 per cent of all cases, dwarfing <italic>say, think</italic> and <italic>go</italic>). <italic>Be like</italic> is still favoured with the first person (<italic>I’m like, we’re like</italic>) and used in particular for the rendition of non-lexicalized sounds and internal thoughts. In contrast to these findings, quotatives in the speech of Newfoundland youth seem to be much more progressive, as Alex D’Arcy points out in ‘Contextualizing St. John's Youth English within the Canadian Quotative System’ (<italic>JEngL</italic> 32[2004] 323–45). D’Arcy investigates quotatives in the speech of young girls (between 8 and 17 years old) and finds that <italic>be like</italic> is in fact favoured with third-person subjects and is also used predominantly to introduce direct speech, in fact showing signs of accelerated grammaticalization. Still in Canada, Charles Boberg contributes the <italic>Handbook</italic> article on ‘English in Canada: Phonology’ (in Kortmann and Schneider, eds., 1, pp. 351–65) (there is no corresponding grammar article), discussing the status of Canadian English as a British or an American English variety. In fact, it has been influenced by both, but younger Canadians tend to shift towards more American forms. Canadian Raising is still distinctive, but not uniform across Canada, and Canadians can also still be distinguished from the US inland north because they lack the low back merger. J.K. Chambers looks at ‘ “Canadian Dainty”: The Rise and Decline of Briticisms in Canada’ (in Hickey, ed., pp. 224–41), giving an interesting overview of its settlement history from both Europe and the US. Although, as Chambers puts it, ‘the conviction of the superiority of things British lasted more than a century’ (p. 232), i.e. up to the Second World War, Chambers's own dialect survey from the Golden Horseshoe has shown for a number of features (e.g. pronunciation of <italic>leisure</italic>, yod-deletion in <italic>news, student</italic>) that British features are now rapidly declining and will probably disappear ‘as soon as the first two decades of this century’ (p. 233). Charles Boberg extends Chambers's dialect survey to Montreal and discusses ‘The Dialect Topography of Montreal’ (<italic>EWW</italic> 25[2004] 171–97). In contrast to earlier findings, Boberg finds that Montreal English is not more American than Ontario's; instead there are idiosyncratic differences in syntax, Gallicisms and phonological variables. Boberg looks in more detail at ‘Real and Apparent Time in Language Change: Late Adoption of Changes in Montreal English’ (<italic>AS</italic> 79[2004] 250–69). Especially for lexical variables (here: <italic>bath</italic> vs. <italic>bathe, dove</italic> vs. <italic>dived</italic>, and <italic>couch</italic> vs. <italic>sofa</italic>), Boberg finds that older speakers, rather than becoming more conservative with age, actually accelerate linguistic change by adopting the newer variables themselves later in life, as real time comparisons show. Phonological variables may pattern differently, however. Moving to phonetics, the same author also investigates ‘Ethnic Patterns in the Phonetics of Montreal English’ (<italic>JSoc</italic> 8[2004] 538–68). Pointing out that Montreal English is in fact a minority variety (depending on one's way of counting, ranging from 11 to 26 per cent of the population), Boberg finds clear ethnic variation between speakers of Irish, Jewish and Italian backgrounds in the vowel variants; perhaps not surprisingly the Italian Montreal English speakers are the most different, probably due to residential segregation and their more recent immigration.</p>
<p>South of the border, Merja Kytö gives a detailed historical introduction to ‘The Emergence of American English: Evidence from Seventeenth-Century Records in New England’ (in Hickey, ed., pp. 121–57), discussing the thorny issues surrounding early American morpho-syntax as well as phonology on the basis of her new early AmE corpus (consisting of early New England texts from 1620 to 1720), and also comparing her evidence with older dialect material in the UK. Peter Grund, Merja Kytö and Matti Rissanen go into some more detail concerning one part of this corpus in their report on ‘Editing the Salem Witchcraft Records: An Exploration of a Linguistic Treasury’ (<italic>AS</italic> 79[2004] 146–66). These records (from 1692), especially the examinations and depositions, are some of the most important linguistic records that we have of early AmE, and a new edition is necessary as the old ones do not satisfy linguistic principles. Straddling studies on AmE and BrE, Laura Wright investigates ‘The Language of Transported Londoners: Third-Person-Singular Present-Tense Markers in Depositions from Virginia and the Bermudas, 1607–1624’ (in Hickey, ed., pp. 158–71). Based on evidence from the Court Minute Books of Bridewell and Bethlem in London, Wright argues that 3 sg -<italic>s</italic> vs. -<italic>th</italic> vs. zero was highly variable in London speech in the 1500s and 1600s, which must have served as input to the new colonies.</p>
<p>A publication that the reviewer had no chance to look at last year is Preston, ed., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B92"><italic>Needed Research in American Dialects</italic></xref>, which collects a range of important state-of-the-art articles. Michael Montgomery summarizes research on ‘The History of American English’ (pp. 1–23), cautioning researchers ‘to identify and respect the limitations … of one's … data’ (p. 2). William A. Kretzschmar gives an overview of ‘Linguistic Atlases of the United States and Canada’ (pp. 25–48); Joan Houston Hall once more reports on DARE in the chapter on the ‘Regional Lexicon: <italic>DARE</italic> and Beyond’ (pp. 49–56); Sharon Ash gives ‘A National Survey of North American Dialects’ (pp. 57–73), reporting on progress on ANAE (the Atlas of North American English) (which really should have been published by now!), while Barbara Johnstone presents research on more qualitative topics in ‘Conversation, Text, and Discourse’ (pp. 75–98). Penelope Eckert summarizes findings on ‘Social Variation in America’ (pp. 99–121), while Richard W. Bailey discusses results from studies of ‘Ideologies, Attitudes, and Perceptions’ (pp. 123–50). Ralph W. Fasold looks at ‘Language Change in Variation and Formal Syntax’ (pp. 231–55), certainly a topic that still deserves more attention. Finally, Connie C. Eble found not much previous research on ‘Slang, Metaphor, and Folk Speech’ (pp. 151–61), concluding that these terms ‘are not overworked topics’ (p. 151). In sum, however, it has to be said that this collection of overviews by mostly very well-known contributors is mainly a state-of-the-art review of their own work, but does not provide completely new perspectives for American dialectology in the twenty-first century. In stark contrast, Jan Tillery, Guy Bailey and Tom Wikle contribute a programmatic paper on ‘Demographic Change and American Dialectology in the Twenty-First Century’ (<italic>AS</italic> 79[2004] 227–49), pointing out that this century can already be characterized by massive urbanization (and metropolization), increasing immigration from Latin America and Asia, and a rapidly growing non-Anglo population, and that dialectologists should rephrase their research questions accordingly.</p>
<p>Naomi Nagi and Julie Roberts, in their <italic>Handbook</italic> article, discuss a dialect area otherwise rarely in the focus of dialectologists, ‘New England: Phonology’ (in Kortmann and Schneider, eds., 1, pp. 270–81; no grammar counterpart). This area is by no means uninteresting, however, as it probably provided the initial conditions that favoured the Northern Cities Chain Shift, because it lacked the <italic>cot–caught</italic> merger, and kept /æ/ as a unified phoneme. New England is still non-rhotic, but, perhaps due to increasing migration, not as consistently so as it used to be. Matthew J. Gordon writes on ‘New York, Philadelphia, and Other Northern Cities: Phonology’ (in Kortmann and Schneider, eds., 1, pp. 282–99), the other northern cities comprising Chicago, Detroit, Cleveland and Buffalo, i.e. cities in the inland north. Gordon notes that the New York accent is one of the most recognizable, but adds dryly that ‘unfortunately … this salience comes from stigmatization’ (p. 284). One of these heavily stigmatized features is of course non-rhoticity. Philadelphia on the other hand is probably ‘the most richly documented and thoroughly studied speech community’ (p. 289) in the US or even world-wide, due to the work of William Labov, showing a mix of northern and southern features. The inland north cities on the other hand are characterized by the Northern Cities Shift (affecting six short vowels), although the exact conditioning may differ across communities.</p>
<p>On the topic of dialect recognition, Cynthia G. Clopper and David B. Pisoni report on ‘Homebodies and Army Brats: Some Effects of Early Linguistic Experience and Residential History on Dialect Categorization’ (<italic>LVC</italic> 16[2004] 31–48). Perhaps not entirely unexpectedly, children who have lived in different states are generally better at identifying American dialects, and, perhaps even less unexpectedly, children who have lived in a state are better at identifying speakers from that region.</p>
<p>On the topic of slang, Robert L. Moore contributes an intelligent analysis of the two most widespread ‘basic slang terms’ of the last century, <italic>swell</italic> and <italic>cool</italic>, in ‘We’re Cool, Mom and Dad are Swell: Basic Slang and Generational Shifts in Values’ (<italic>AS</italic> 79[2004] 59–86). Tracing the history and the meanings of these two terms, Moore claims that their rise (and fall) can be linked to more general shifts in values, <italic>swell</italic> with the anti-Victorian movement after the First World War, countering values such as ‘earnestness, propriety, and prudishness’, while <italic>cool</italic> embodied the qualities of ‘knowingness, detachment, and control’ coming into mainstream culture in the 1960s, the period of the second great adolescent revolt in the twentieth century. Only by becoming the counterword of the parent generation did <italic>swell</italic> (in retrospect, so to speak) get the connotation of ‘being out of the loop, earnest, naïve, and foolishly excitable’.</p>
<p>Peter Slomanson and Michael Newman discuss ‘Peer Group Identification and Variation in New York Latino English Laterals’ (<italic>EWW</italic> 25[2004] 199–216) in a New York City high school, where they find an apical /l/, a Spanish feature. Moving south a little from New York, Michael Montgomery tries his hand at ‘Solving Kurath's Puzzle: Establishing the Antecedents of the American Midland Dialect Region’ (in Hickey, ed., pp. 310–25), the ‘puzzle’ consisting of the contradiction that while the Scottish–Irish settlement of the Midland region cannot be doubted, its linguistic consequences have remained, in Kurath's words, ‘surprisingly intangible’. Montgomery argues that the clue lies not in the lexicon or in pronunciation, but in grammar, and identifies the following Midland features that are used identically in Ulster: <italic>who all</italic>/<italic>what all, need</italic> with the past participle, <italic>wait on</italic> instead of <italic>wait for, want</italic> with a preposition (<italic>the dog wants out</italic>), <italic>till</italic> in the sense ‘to’, <italic>whenever</italic> for a single event in the past, and <italic>all the</italic> for <italic>the only</italic> (<italic>he's all the son she has</italic>). Verbal -<italic>s</italic> may have changed slightly in its constraints, in that the proximity constraint ‘did not survive into the twentieth century’ (p. 319). Other features like double modals probably also changed after their transportation. Montgomery argues that these grammatical features have survived not because their speakers were ‘isolated’, but because they may escape notice (and stigmatization) more easily.</p>
<p>The Midwest remains the under-researched dialect area that Timothy C. Frazer deplored in 1993 in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B50"><italic>Heartland English: Variation and Transition in the American Midwest</italic></xref>; the (unchanged) republication of this volume might be able to give some impetus to new research. All the more laudable is the inclusion of an overview of ‘The West and Midwest: Phonology’ (in Kortmann and Schneider, eds., 1, pp. 338–50), by Matthew J. Gordon, who shows that these dialect areas are in fact richly variable. For example, <sc>goat</sc> and <sc>face</sc> are monophthongized in the Upper Midwest, lax front vowels are lowered in California, /æ/ is tensed in Cincinnati and /a<sc>u</sc>/ is monothongized in Pittsburgh. Speaking of Pittsburgh, Barbara Johnstone and Dan Baumgardt investigate ‘ “Pittsburghese” Online: Vernacular Norming in Conversation’ (<italic>AS</italic> 79[2004] 115–45), tracking an internet discussion on whether ‘our local dialect is charming or embarrassing’. The authors show how interactants establish the right to participate (e.g. through ‘feature-dropping’), how vernacular norms emerge (linking language, place and identity) and they discuss the history of vernacular norms. Betty S. Phillips discusses ‘Vowel Merger in West Central Indiana: A Naughty, Knotty Project’ (in Curzan and Emmons, eds., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B35"><italic>Studies in the History of the English Language</italic>, vol. 2: <italic>Unfolding Conversations</italic></xref>, pp. 447–57), where the distinction /ɔ/vs./<inline-formula><inline-graphic xlink:href="mal001i1"></inline-graphic></inline-formula>/ seems intact for many older speakers only, while younger ones seem to have merged the two vowels.</p>
<p>Linking the north and the south, Betsy Evans investigates ‘The Role of Social Network in the Acquisition of Local Dialect Norms by Appalachian Migrants in Ypsilanti, Michigan’ (<italic>LVC</italic> 16[2004] 153–67), the local norm being the Northern Cities Shift, one feature of which (the raising and fronting of /æ/) Evans investigates here. Surprisingly, she finds that age and socio-economic factors are not significant predictors of the acquisition of this feature, but social network and sex are, such that women who are least integrated in the Appalachian network raise and front /æ/ the most. This article leads us nicely to the US South, and to a topic similar to that of Evans above discussed by Valerie Fridland, Kathryn Bartlett and Roger Kreuz, who ask: ‘Do You Hear What I Hear? Experimental Measurement of the Perceptual Salience of Acoustically Manipulated Vowel Variants by Southern Speakers in Memphis, TN’ (<italic>LVC</italic> 16[2004] 1–16), in fact comparing speakers’ reaction to the Southern Vowel Shift and the Northern Cities Shift—changes which are effectively moving in opposite directions. The experiments test whether speakers from Memphis, Tennessee, can identify the manipulated tokens as ‘southern’ or ‘northern’; the authors conclude that especially the mid-front vowels seemed to be most salient. Erik R. Thomas surveys ‘Rural Southern White Accents’ (in Kortmann and Schneider, eds., 1, pp. 300–24). While he claims that phonologically, southern speech is essentially the same as other varieties of AmE, distinctive prosodic features include the ‘southern drawl’ (probably a ‘prolongation of certain stressed vowels and diphthongs’ (p. 305) with exaggerated pitch rises), and Thomas tentatively suggests that this feature might be on the decline even in rural southern varieties, as it is impressionistically more noticeable in speakers born before 1960. Phonetically, the <italic>pen–pin</italic> merger and the Southern Shift are stereotypically southern, as is non-rhoticity. Thomas notes that this last feature also seems to decline, probably due to a shift in prestige. Jan Tillery and Guy Bailey report on ‘The Urban South: Phonology’ (in Kortmann and Schneider, eds., 1, pp. 325–37) (there are no direct grammar counterparts, but cf. contributions by Montgomery and Wolfram below), stressing that urbanization was ‘the single most important social fact about the American South since 1880’ (p. 325)—a fact that is extremely important in Bailey's theory (see also below), as he stresses the correlation of widespread phonological change and urbanization in the South, leading to such features as /ay/-monophthongization, the <italic>pen–pin</italic> merger, the Southern Shift and the southern drawl, but as many non-southerners have now moved into southern cities, many of these features have begun to disappear. On one of these stereotypical features, Michael Montgomery and Connie Eble present ‘Historical Perspectives on the <italic>Pen/Pin</italic> Merger in Southern American English’ (in Curzan and Emmons eds., pp. 415–34), a feature that Guy Bailey has argued may be more recent than generally thought (namely a post-Civil War development, cf. Bailey [1997] (<italic>YWES</italic> 78[1999] 104). Montgomery and Eble on the basis of a corpus of plantation overseers’ letters and African American Civil War soldiers come to the conclusion that, <italic>pace</italic> Bailey, ‘the merger before nasals began earlier’ (p. 415) and may have originated in AAE. Guy Bailey responds to this directly in the same volume (pp. 435–44) in ‘Digging Up the Roots of Southern American English: On Michael Montgomery and Connie Eble's “Historical Perspectives on the <italic>Pen/Pin</italic> Merger in Southern American English’, having discovered an ‘inconsistency in their method’ (p. 437) and restating his point that ‘present-day SAE is primarily a consequence of recent linguistic developments’ (p. 442).</p>
<p>Edgar W. Schneider joins the debate in his overview article, ‘The English Dialect Heritage of the Southern United States’ (in Hickey, ed., pp. 262–309). On the basis of comparisons with the SED from England, Schneider investigates twenty-four phonological, ten grammatical, and many lexical features. He finds some plausible antecedents of southern US forms in British dialects, especially in the south-west, but many variables seem to have been realigned and changed in the New World, e.g./ai/monophthongization, plural <italic>y’all</italic>, double modals, perfective <italic>done</italic>, and counterfactual <italic>liketa</italic>, which were all subject to considerable reorganization.</p>
<p>David Wilton addresses <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B116"><italic>Word Myths: Debunking Linguistic Urban Legends</italic></xref> in a very accessible (and entertaining) way, amongst many other ‘legends’ also the one that ‘They Speak Elizabethan English in the Appalachians’, carefully picking apart the argumentative structure of this myth, but at the same time pointing out its appeal: ‘those who speak a non-standard dialect are often stigmatized … It is no surprise that they are attracted to a tale that connects them to a great literary tradition’ (p. 50). In a more academic manner, ‘Appalachian English: Morphology and Syntax’ is also Michael B. Montgomery's topic (in Kortmann and Schneider, eds., 2, pp. 245–80). Reacting to the myth, Montgomery points out that Appalachian English ‘is far more accurately described as “colonial American” than “Elizabethan” ‘(p. 246) and is as innovative as it is conservative. Montgomery gives a comprehensive overview of the grammar of this dialect, including a host of examples, which should be a treasure-trove for researchers doing comparative work, but also a wonderful starting point for anyone wanting to explore Appalachian features in more detail. Walt Wolfram summarizes ‘Rural and Ethnic Varieties in the Southeast: Morphology and Syntax’ (in Kortmann and Schneider, eds., 2, pp. 281–302), another highly diverse area, not least because of the presence of several enclave dialect communities, discussed as <italic>remnant dialects</italic> in several other publications this year below. Particularly helpful are overview tables of grammatical features (forty-five if I counted correctly; pp. 297–300) in the various enclave communities, compared to their occurrence in rural southern dialects and non-southern dialects.</p>
<p>Walt Wolfram tries to define ‘The Sociolinguistic Construction of Remnant Dialects’ in more detail (in Fought, ed., pp. 84–106), discussing a range of features that several intuitively remnant communities studied so far have in common, such as geographical factors that led to isolation, potential economic autonomy, a considerable time depth, historical continuity of their speakers, social subordination and concomitant stigmatization by the mainstream community. Wolfram also looks at linguistic developments, and cautions researchers that, while remnant communities clearly feature at least some vestigial linguistic forms, ‘we cannot simply assume that so-called relic forms will remain static in their linguistic composition’ (p. 93), showing that there are ‘structural and functional parameters’ that might distinguish forms across various communities. Partly overlapping in content, Walt Wolfram and Natalie Schilling-Estes also introduce readers more specifically to ‘Remnant Dialects in the Coastal United States’ (in Hickey, ed., pp. 172–202). This paper stands out as a careful comparison of phonological and morpho-grammatical dialect traits, which are conveniently summarized in two tables.</p>
<p>The (US) South is also the subject of yet another book, Bender, ed., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B12"><italic>Linguistic Diversity in the South: Changing Codes, Practices, and Ideology</italic></xref>, which stands out in combining linguistic and anthropological contributions, dealing not just with English, but also with some Native American languages. In ‘Multilingualism in the South: A Carolinas Case Study’ (pp. 37–49) Blair A. Rudes stresses that the South was ‘one of the most linguistically diverse areas in North America’, and that it may well be on its way of becoming a very multilingual area again. (On a similar topic, see Wolfram, Carter and Moriello's contribution below.) Kirk Hazen and Ellen Fluharty in ‘Defining Appalachian English’ (pp. 50–65) discuss the ‘monstrous stereotype’ that ‘authentic Appalachians are poor, white, drunken, and gun-happy males’ (p. 53), which is so pervasive that it influences speakers’ self-perception. In addition, since the only in-depth scholarly study of Appalachian English (Wolfram and Christian [1976]) is by now quite dated as well as geographically very limited, they stress ‘the need for further descriptive accounts of language variation patterns in Appalachia’ (p. 58). In ‘Identity, Hybridity, and Linguistic Ideologies of Racial Language in the Upper South’ (pp. 120–37), Anita Puckett discusses from a more ethnological point of view the little-known group of ‘Melungeons’, a term originally used by others to refer to those ‘presumed to have been of mixed race ancestry’ (p. 123), i.e. Native American or African American and northern European, or, in another tradition, southern European and/or Mediterranean, and Puckett investigates especially their discourse about themselves. Walt Wolfram reports on implementations of his principle of linguistic gratuity (‘information about language variation should be shared with the community whose data has fuelled our research’) in ‘Dialect Awareness in Community Perspective’ (pp. 15–36). In comparing projects for the Ocracoke community with the Lumbee project, Wolfram discusses difficult issues such as the authority asymmetry between researchers and the community, rights and obligations, issues of representation, etc. Shana Walton writes ‘Not with a Southern Accent: Cajun English and Ethnic Identity’ (pp. 104–19). In her study of dialect performance in a small convenience store Walton finds that speakers create a consensus about their identity which is, however, multiply ambivalent.</p>
<p>Walt Wolfram, Philip Carter and Beckie Moriello report on ‘Emerging Hispanic English: New Dialect Formation in the American South’ (<italic>JSoc</italic> 8[2004] 339–58). Noting that North Carolina is the goal of much immigration from Central and South America—it has in fact the largest percentage of monolingual Spanish speakers at the moment—Wolfram, Carter and Moriello find—to their and to the reader's surprise—that the length of residence of their speakers does not correlate with mastery of English, probably due to the fact that they are quite segregated. These Hispanic speakers in general do not accommodate much to the local vowel system, as their analysis of /ay/-monophthongization shows. If anything, this dialect marker seems to progress by lexical diffusion. Also on/ay/-monophthongization as well as <italic>r</italic>-lessness, Natalie Schilling-Estes tries to integrate more traditional variationist analyses with a constructionist approach in ‘Constructing Ethnicity in Interaction’ (<italic>JSoc</italic> 8[2004] 163–95), where she investigates a sociolinguistic interview between a speaker of AAVE and a Lumbee Indian, and finds that, while both are aligned with their ethnic group overall, they diverge particularly markedly from each other when they discuss race relations, but become much more similar when talking about family and common friends.</p>
<p>The <italic>Handbook</italic> also has a chapter on ‘Cajun Vernacular English: Phonology’, by Sylvie Dubois and Barbara M. Horvath (in Kortmann and Schneider, eds., 1, pp. 407–16). The authors stress that Cajun Vernacular English is not Southern English. CajVE is characterized by final consonant deletion, glide reduction (or even monophthongization) and non-aspiration of voiceless plosives. Interestingly, CajVE has quite different social meanings for different generations. While the first generation ‘created’ CajVE in the switch from French to English, the second generation (now middle-aged) used English extensively at home, dropping many features of CajVE ‘to attenuate the stigma of being Cajun’ (p. 413), while the younger generation grew up with the ‘Cajun Renaissance’, taking pride in the vernacular and using it to index local identity. Another ethnic variety dealt with in the context of the <italic>Handbook</italic> is ‘Chicano English’, with the phonology chapter written by Otto Santa Ana and Robert Bayley (in Kortmann and Schneider, eds., 1, pp. 417–34), and morphology and syntax by the same authors in reverse order (2, pp. 374–90). Santa Ana and Bayley try to disprove the myth that Chicano English is mere ‘Spanish-accented English’, although many of its features can of course be traced to Spanish. Chicano English is not a fossilized L2 variety, but a native variety in its own right, and over 78 per cent of third-generation speakers consider themselves English-dominant. Like all other speakers of a non-standard variety, speakers use Chicano English to express social solidarity. Interestingly, the authors also try to do justice to the noticeably different intonation patterns of Chicano English, drawing intonation contours on four pages of their phonology contribution. Chicano English morphosyntax is characterized mainly by features that also occur in other dialects, although some features are in fact distinctive (<italic>tell</italic> as an introducer of questions, inversion only with <italic>wh</italic>-questions, the use of <italic>would</italic> in <italic>if</italic>-clauses) and others (like negative concord) may be quantitatively different.</p>
<p>Moving to studies on AAVE, Walter F. Edwards gives an overview of ‘African American Vernacular English: Phonology’ (in Kortmann and Schneider, eds., 1, pp. 383–406), also giving room to the different positions in the origins debate (but not—yet?—taking John Holm's contribution into account; see below). Edwards stresses that AAVE speakers do not take part in the Northern Cities Shift (see above) and gives useful overview tables of the phonetic differences between AAVE and standard AmE. Although Edwards does not comment on the ongoing research into suprasegmentals (cf. especially the study by Thomas and Reaser below) that make speakers of AAVE identifiable, he does mention unique intonation contours and a wider pitch range including falsetto, which are however ‘poorly studied’ (p. 390). African American English morphology and syntax merit two chapters in the <italic>Handbook</italic>, with Walt Wolfram presenting ‘Urban African American Vernacular English’ (2, pp. 319–40) and Alexander Kautzsch commenting on ‘Earlier African American English’ (2, pp. 341–55). ‘Urban’ in Wolfram's chapter refers to non-southern cities, and the interesting questions here are: Is urban (northern) AAVE different from rural (southern) AAVE? Can we observe dialect levelling, accommodation, and innovation? Again, forty-eight(!) grammatical features are summarized in extremely helpful overview tables, comparing their use in urban and rural AAVE, earlier AAVE, southern EAVE (European American Vernacular English), and northern EAVE (pp. 335–8). Wolfram concludes that, in general, ‘urban AAVE is more … aligned with Southern rural European American vernacular varieties than it is with surrounding European American Northern vernaculars’ (p. 338). Adding to this overview, the most important point of Kautzsch's chapter is that it is essential ‘to realize that AAVE used to be much more heterogeneous in its early days than it is today’ (p. 353).</p>
<p>John R. Rickford looks at how the Ebonics controversy has changed attitudes towards this variety for the worse in ‘Spoken Soul: The Beloved, Belittled Language of Black America’ (in Fought, ed., pp. 198–208), pleading that ‘it is not necessary to abandon Spoken Soul to master Standard English’ (p. 207). Becky Childs and Christine Mallinson investigate ‘African American English in Appalachia’ (<italic>EWW</italic> 25[2004] 27–50), where they find both accommodation to the local (white) dialect in earlier AAVE, and a persistent substrate. They investigate 3 pl -<italic>s</italic>, absence of 3 sg -<italic>s</italic>, copula absence and past tense <italic>be</italic>-levelling but also phonological features like rhoticity, consonant cluster reduction and /ay/-glide weakening (monophthongization). Interestingly, the young AAVE speakers in the Texana community do not accommodate to a supra-regional norm of AAVE. Christine Mallinson also investigates the language of non-whites in the isolated community of Beech Bottom in south-eastern Appalachia in ‘Constructing Ethnolinguistic Groups: A Sociolinguistic Case Study’ (in Bender, ed., pp. 66–79), and argues that there may not be such a strict dichotomy between whites and non-whites today; instead, ‘different linguistic options may be available to informants … depending on their ethnic self-identification’ (p. 67). In the light of recent criticism, Shana Poplack and Sali Tagliamonte go ‘Back to the Present: Verbal -<italic>s</italic> in the (African American) English Diaspora’ (in Hickey, ed., pp. 203–23), reanalysing their older data from Samaná English and Devon, largely coming to the same conclusions as before (i.e. the same constraint hierarchy), arguing that ‘verbal -<italic>s</italic> variability was already inherent in the language transported to the US by emigrants from Devon and elsewhere’, establishing ‘a direct relationship between the emergent Early AAE and an English dialect source’ (p. 220). Sarah H. Ross, Janna B. Oetting and Beth Stapleton discuss ‘Preterite <italic>had</italic> + V-<italic>ed</italic>: A Developmental Narrative Structure of African American English’ (<italic>AS</italic> 79[2004] 167–93). This structure (<italic>She had told my daddy</italic> …) does not indicate the pluperfect, but is used as a narrative past tense. It is used exclusively by African American children and occurs almost exclusively in narratives, in particular in the ‘complicating action’ (cf. Labov [1972]) to ‘foreground salient information in the story’ (p. 186). Unfortunately, the authors do not discuss whether this is an age-graded feature that only occurs in children's speech, or whether it can be observed in the speech community more widely.</p>
<p>John Holm discusses the status of AAVE in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B62"><italic>Languages in Contact: The Partial Restructuring of Vernaculars</italic></xref>. As a creolist, Holm is best qualified to judge the status of AAVE versus other creoles. Based on the social and demographic data, Holm claims that ‘the most likely scenario after 1715 in most parts of the American South is that English was not fully creolized but did undergo some degree of restructuring as it was acquired by speakers of African languages and of more fully restructured varieties of English brought in from the Caribbean’ (p. 33). He argues explicitly against Poplack and Tagliamonte's position, pointing out that features like the zero copula, remote time <italic>been</italic>, the use of <italic>ain't</italic> for <italic>didn't</italic> are not shared with Southern White Vernacular English, making the general position of Poplack and Tagliamonte ‘untenable’ (p. 40). In Holm's view, AAVE is just as much a partially restructured vernacular (this new term substitutes his earlier <italic>semi-creole</italic>)—in fact, a little bit more—as Afrikaans, Réunnionais (French), Brazilian Vernacular Portuguese or Nonstandard Caribbean Spanish, the other languages discussed in his book. Holm links the demographic development of these varieties with an analysis of their linguistic structure, discussing AAE verb phrases, noun phrases and clause structure in comparison with ‘proper’ creole structures, helpfully summarized in a table (including the respective substrate features), pointing out that the restructured features, in which function words are often lost, ‘tend to make the partially restructured varieties more like their substrate languages’ (p. 141). While the ‘demographic balance, during the first century of a new language's development, of native speakers versus non-native speakers of the European source language’ (p. 135) is not the only factor that determines the linguistic outcome, it seems to be the overriding one.</p>
<p>Alicia Beckford Wassink and Anne Curzan introduce the special issue of <italic>Journal of English Linguistics</italic> 32:iii[2004] which, fifty years after the end of racial segregation in education, looks at AAE and the educational system today. Lisa Green gives an overview of ‘Research on African American English since 1998’ (<italic>JEngL</italic> 32[2004] 210–29), i.e. since the Ebonics controversy, and argues that AAE should not be studied in isolation, or in the context of language variation, but as a complete system in its own right, data from which could be studied in all areas of linguistics. John R. Rickford, Julie Sweetland and Angela E. Rickford contribute ‘African American English and other Vernaculars in Education: A Topic-Coded Bibliography’ (<italic>JEngL</italic> 32[2004] 230–320), where publications are coded for eighteen topics which represent distinct strands of research, the two largest being ‘Reading’ and ‘Ideology’. Each subdivision is prefaced by a short overview of the field, which should make this bibliography eminently useful, and not only for newcomers. Geneva Smitherman in ‘Language and African Americans: Moving On up a Lil Higher’ (<italic>JEngL</italic> 32[2004] 186–96) compares and contrasts the Oakland ruling with the earlier Ann Arbor resolution from 1979 and calls passionately for (African American?) linguists ‘to go public with our knowledge, to take linguistics … out of ivory … towers, and to advocate on behalf of African American youth and their/our language’ (p. 194). Finally, Erik R. Thomas and Jeffrey Reaser embark on the difficult task of ‘Delimiting Perceptual Cues Used for the Ethnic Labeling of African American and European American Voices’ (<italic>JSoc</italic> 8[2004] 54–87), the first of a series of planned studies. Since a range of studies (as well as intuition) have confirmed that ‘prototypical’ African American speakers can be identified as such even in the absence of non-standard features, Thomas and Reaser design a number of perceptual experiments to narrow down the wide range of potential variables that might be responsible for this correct identification. Using African American speakers from Hyde County, they found that these (rather untypical) speakers, ‘exhibit[ing] phonetic variants typical of a European American vernacular[,] are difficult for listeners to identify’ (p. 79), and their experiments point to vowel quality and intonation as the important cues (although timing might also be involved).</p></sec>
<sec id="SEC10"><title>10. New Englishes and Creolistics</title>
<p>The most important publication with regard to English as a world language is without doubt the massive <italic>Handbook of Varieties of English</italic>, with as main editors, Bernd Kortmann and Edgar W. Schneider, already discussed in <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC9">Section 9</xref> above. An accompanying CD-ROM provides more detailed bibliographical references, interactive maps and speech samples of many (but not all) varieties treated in the <italic>Handbook</italic>. It is impossible to do justice to the two massive tomes in the short space available here, so I will limit myself to a number of general remarks concerning the coverage of the New Englishes and creolistics. The attempt to survey all varieties of English, from the British Isles (Bernd Kortmann and Clive Upton, eds.), to the Americas and the Caribbean (Edgar W. Schneider, ed), the Pacific and Australasia (Kate Burridge and Bernd Kortmann, eds.), to Africa, South and South-East Asia (Rajend Meshtrie, ed.) by means of contributions written by experts in the field and following similar guidelines in the coverage of all varieties presented, is a very laudable undertaking, and the result is the most comprehensive reference work on varieties of English available to date. Some lesser-known varieties such as St Helena English (Sheila Wilson and Rajend Meshtrie, 1, pp. 985–91; 2, pp. 1006–15) or Pitkern-Norfolk (John Ingram and Peter Mühlhäusler, 1, pp. 780–802; 2, pp. 789–801) are contained in the collection, but, unfortunately for the interested creolist, not all English-based pidgins and creoles have been covered. Notable gaps are e.g. Guyanese Creole and Bajan morphosyntax or Krio, but also lesser-known varieties such as those spoken on St Helena and Tristan da Cunha or in Brunei Darussalam. With regard to the African continent, South Africa and West Africa are quite well represented, but there is no morphosyntactic description of Nigerian English, Krio or recent urban varieties, e.g. Sheng in Kenya. And while the educated West African varieties of English are represented alongside the West African pidgins (e.g. Ghanaian English and Ghanaian Pidgin English by Magnus Huber and Kari Deko, 1, pp. 842–65 and 866–73; 2, pp. 854–65 and 866–78), there are no accounts of the educated varieties of English spoken in the Caribbean. In other cases, the authors have only covered a part of the required content: for example Rakesh M. Bhatt (2, pp. 1016–44) discusses Indian English syntax, but devotes a mere paragraph to the morphological features of this variety. The same is true for the coverage of recent research on each variety, which has not been realized to the same extent in all contributions. The editors’ synopses at the end of the each volume, evaluating and discussing common features of all regions and global non-standard English, are an innovative feature of the <italic>Handbook</italic>. Especially interesting is the ‘Global Synopsis: Morphological and Syntactic Variation in English’ (by Bernd Kortmann and Benedikt Szmrecsanyi; 2, pp. 1142–1201), which seeks to identify typical features of pidgins and creoles, L2 and L1 varieties, and global non-standard English. Unfortunately, the results are based on one single questionnaire per variety, and the features themselves are rather general in nature (e.g. ‘irregular use of articles’), but the least frequent and most frequent non-standard features of English around the world listed here give a very good impression of which features are regional and which are due to the status of a variety. Despite its shortcomings, the <italic>Handbook</italic> is definitely the first source of reference for anyone working on varieties of English, whether in a teaching or research context.</p>
<p>Two volumes are concerned with the spread of English in colonial settings and the ensuing linguistic change. First, Peter Trudgill's <italic>New-Dialect Formation: The Inevitability of Colonial Englishes</italic>, which developed out of his earlier work on <italic>Dialects in Contact</italic> [1986]. A number of components have been added, namely three stages of New Dialect formation—(1) rudimentary levelling; (2) extreme variability as children growing up without a peer group variety adopt parental variety in unusual ways, possibly further levelling; (3) focusing and koinéization—and the concepts of determinism and drift (a built-in potential for change). The latter, Trudgill claims, have led, for example, to large-scale similarities between the southern hemisphere varieties, which all originated in the nineteenth century and where input was very similar. Trudgill also discusses examples from New World Spanish and French, as well as Fiji Hindi, to support his claims, but the main line of argument stems from the Origins of New Zealand English (ONZE) project, which is discussed in detail below. Interestingly, the assessment of the ONZE data in terms of Trudgill's new model in Gordon et al., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B52"><italic>New Zealand English</italic></xref> (pp. 235–9, see review below) is rather tentative. Nevertheless, Trudgill's model is presented in an eminently readable and very convincing way and should definitely provoke further research in this area. The other volume, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B59"><italic>Legacies of Colonial English: Studies in Transported Dialects</italic></xref>, has been edited—and largely written—by Raymond Hickey. This collection traces the spread of English in the EME period and thereafter to Scotland and Ireland, further to America and the Caribbean, the southern hemisphere and Asia. As most contributions were written by experts on the individual varieties, it comes as a surprise that Raymond Hickey authored the whole section on English in Asia himself. Unfortunately, the Caribbean is strangely under-represented in the section on the New World, while ‘minor’ Englishes such as Falkland Islands English and Tristan da Cunha English receive extensive coverage. Hickey's introduction and chapter on ‘Dialects of English and their Transportation’ set the scene for the contributions to follow by outlining the social and historical conditions for the spread of English during colonialization, and describe the features of the EME English dialects which tended to be retained, lost in or merged with the emerging colonial varieties. The chapters on the individual varieties are dealt with in the relevant sections below. As a whole, the book is a welcome addition to the historical study of the origins of the New Englishes, as it provides a much more detailed account of the dialectal input and historical development of the New Englishes than most earlier work (a discussion of those chapters dealing with Irish English can be found in <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC9">Section 9</xref> above). An extensive appendix includes a checklist of non-standard features transported to the New World, a time-line for the spread of English, maps of Anglophone locations throughout the world, a glossary, and a large selection of references ordered by region.</p>
<p>A special issue of <italic>World Englishes</italic> (23:ii[2004]) is dedicated to comparative research on World Englishes based on the International Corpus of English (ICE). Helen Fallon provides readers with ‘Comparing World Englishes: A Research Guide’ (<italic>WEn</italic> 23[2004] 309–16), which includes a select bibliography, a list of scholarly journals regularly concerned with English as a world language, and electronic resources. Edgar W. Schneider explains ‘How to Trace Structural Nativization: Particle Verbs in World Englishes’ (<italic>WEn</italic> 23[2004] 227–49), examining ICE corpora from East Africa, Great Britain, India, the Philippines and Singapore. Analysing their frequency as well as structural behaviour and productivity range, Schneider is able to show variety-specific patterns in terms of multi-word verbs. While they tend to be more frequent in BrE than in the New Englishes, Singapore English is a notable exception to this rule, exceeding even the British data in terms of frequency and range of uses. Andrea Sand has found ‘Shared Morpho-Syntactic Features in Contact Varieties of English’ with respect to ‘Article Use’ (<italic>WEn</italic> 23[2004] 281–98) in the ICE corpora from Great Britain, New Zealand, Jamaica, Kenya, India, Singapore and a corpus of Irish English. While there are variety-specific differences with regard to article frequencies, a number of contexts are identified in which articles tend to be used in the New Englishes and Irish English as opposed to BrE or NZE. Gerald Nelson looks at ‘Negation of Lexical <italic>have</italic> in Conversational English’ (<italic>WEn</italic> 23[2004] 299–308) on the basis of ICE GB, NZ, India, Hong Kong and Singapore, concluding that the New Englishes form a group of their own with regard to this feature, patterning neither with AmE nor with BrE. Christiane Meierkord's analysis of ‘Syntactic Variation in Interactions across International Englishes’ (<italic>EWW</italic> 25[2004] 109–32) reveals, on the basis of conversations recorded in London student accommodation, common patterns of simplification and regularization in the English spoken by ESL and EFL speakers in a multicultural setting, which are similar to the processes at work in dialect contact.</p>
<p>Finally, there are two publications dealing with more general aspects of English as a world language. Tom McArthur discusses the terminology involved in his article ‘Is It <italic>World</italic> or <italic>International</italic> or <italic>Global</italic> English, and Does It Matter?’ (<italic>EnT</italic> 20:iii[2004] 3–15), concluding that the three terms are used synonymously. Roger Wright takes up the frequently drawn comparison between ‘Latin and English as World Languages’ (<italic>EnT</italic> 20:iv[2004] 3–13; cf. David Crystal [1997], Tom McArthur [1998, 2002]), correcting some misperceptions about the development of Late Latin and the Romance languages while at the same time making a strong point about the linguistic ownership of native speakers of English and the importance of a shared orthography for the speaker to perceive several varieties as one language.</p>
<p>We will begin the survey of the individual varieties with those from the southern hemisphere. Three book-length publications on AusE have appeared this year. The most comprehensive treatment of the subject is undoubtedly the two-volume publication by Gerhard Leitner, <italic>Australia's Many Voices</italic>. Volume 1 is concerned with <italic>Australian English: The National Language</italic>, giving a detailed account of the demography of AusE, its origins and development, the influence of BrE and other languages on the features of present-day mainstream AusE, the social, ethnic and regional stratification of mainstream AusE, the role of the media and other institutions in the codification of a standard AusE, as well as a thorough discussion of the changes in language attitudes towards AusE, from ‘cultural cringe’ to major variety in the Pacific region. Leitner's book is certainly the most thorough treatment of the development of AusE, but it is clearly not intended as an accessible textbook on its linguistic features but rather as a resource book for the study of their development. The second volume, <italic>Ethnic Englishes, Indigenous and Migrant Languages. Policy and Education</italic>, extends Leitner's approach to the other languages spoken in Australia (e.g. Greek, Italian, and German, but also Norfolk and Pitkern) and the results of their contact with English, such as language loss, language change and the development of contact languages, such as Kriol, and Aboriginal English. One chapter is devoted to Australian language policy up to 2003, evaluating the various programmes instituted and the gradual change to a multilingual Australia as well as the swinging back of the pendulum to the predominance of mainstream AusE. Compared to volume 1, volume 2 is presented in a more accessible overview style, but is naturally less detailed with regard to the linguistic features and historical development of the various languages discussed. The two volumes taken together are an impressive account of AusE from the angle of contact linguistics. The third book is the paperback edition of Romaine, ed., <italic>Language in Australia</italic>, which first appeared as a hardback in 1991 and unfortunately has not been updated for this edition. The individual contributions are grouped into five sections, ‘Aboriginal and Islander Languages’, ‘Pidgins and Creoles’, ‘Transplanted Languages Other than English’, ‘Varieties of Australian English’ and ‘Public Policy and Social Issues’, thus covering more or less the same ground as Leitner's two volumes. The approach of the individual contributions, however, is descriptive and gives a concise overview of the features of the variety discussed. Although the bibliographical references are dated, Romaine's volume provides quick reference on the linguistic features rather than on the complex social and historical development of Australia's linguistic repertoire.</p>
<p>A number of articles also deal with the history of AusE. Scott F. Kiesling investigates ‘English Input to Australia’ (in Hickey, ed., pp. 418–39), discussing London and Irish English as possible sources for present-day AusE. Clemens Fritz proposes moving ‘From Plato to Aristotle: Investigating Early Australian English’ (<italic>AuJL</italic> 24[2004] 57–97) by introducing a corpus of early written sources he has compiled and presenting first results from a lexical analysis. Gerhard Leitner goes ‘Beyond Mitchell's Views on the History of Australian English’ (<italic>AuJL</italic> 24[2004] 99–125), proposing numerous processes of transplantation to explain the genesis of AusE, rather than just one. Roland Sussex looks at ‘<italic>Abstand, Ausbau</italic>: Creativity and Lucidity in Australian English’ (<italic>AuJL</italic> 24[2004] 3–19), arguing that linguistic playfulness resulting in innovative word-formation processes (such as the diminutives in -<italic>o</italic> or -<italic>ie</italic> as in <italic>reffo</italic> ‘refugee’ or <italic>brekky ‘</italic>breakfast’) is a major factor in the identification of the emergent variety. Finally, Bert Peeters reports on ‘Tall Poppies and Egalitarianism in Australian Discourse: From Key Word to Cultural Value’ (<italic>EWW</italic> 25[2004] 1–25), showing how the idiomatic expression <italic>tall poppy</italic> meaning ‘individual criticized for unwarranted self-adulation due to fame or fortune’ in AusE relates to the ideology of egalitarianism in Australian society.</p>
<p>The most important publication on NZE this year is <italic>New Zealand English: Its Origins and Evolutions</italic> by Elizabeth Gordon, Lyle Campbell, Jennifer Hay, Margaret Maclagan, Andrea Sudbury, and Peter Trudgill. It provides a detailed summary of the results of the ONZE project, which is based on a corpus of historical recordings of the earliest generation of English-speaking settlers. Written in an immensely readable style, the volume first covers a survey of previous accounts and research on NZE, a brief outline of modern NZE pronunciation, a detailed account of the historical background of NZE and a very thorough summary of previous attempts to explain the origins of NZE, from lay theories to modern dialectology, before presenting the methodology and the results of the analysis. Each variable (mainly short vowels and diphthongs, but also/r/,/l/,/h/and/hw/) is discussed in comparison to its antecedents from the British Isles and early written sources on its NZE pronunciation. In the remaining chapters, the results of the analysis are related to possible explanations, and general implications for linguistic change are mapped out, especially with regard to the role of gender and families and the possibilities of lexically conditioned sound change. A short summary of these findings is presented in Margaret A. Maclagan and Elizabeth Gordon's article, ‘The Story of New Zealand English: What the ONZE Project Tells Us’ (<italic>AuJL</italic> [2004] 41–56), as well as in Elizabeth Gordon and Peter Trudgill's discussion of ‘English Input to New Zealand’ (in Hickey, ed., pp. 440–55). Jennifer Hay and Daniel Schreier's study on ‘Reversing the Trajectory of Language Change: Subject–Verb Agreement with <italic>be</italic> in New Zealand English’ (<italic>LVC</italic> 16[2004] 209–35) is also based on ONZE data. Looking at singular concord with plural NPs over a period of 150 years, they find that there is a distinct difference between existential constructions with a high rate of singular concord today and non-existentials, a context in which it is virtually absent in current NZE, while it had been present in both environments in nineteenth-century NZE.</p>
<p>Shaun F.D. Hughes asks ‘Was There Ever a “Māori English”?’ (<italic>WEn</italic> 23[2004] 565–84), and proceeds to analyse a large number of early sources, both fictional and non-fictional. He concludes that, while there is evidence for an early contact pidgin similar to other Pacific pidgins, Maori English is a more of a myth or a stereotype than a linguistic reality. Janet Holmes and Maria Stubbe look at ‘Strategic Code-Switching in New Zealand Workplaces: Scaffolding, Solidarity and Identity Construction’ (in House and Rehbein, eds., <italic>Multilingual Communication</italic>, pp. 33–54) in Maori, Samoan and English and, contrary to Shaun Hughes, they come to the conclusion that a distinct Maori English can be identified on the basis of feature frequency rather than the presence or absence of certain features.</p>
<p>Daniel Schreier has published yet another summary of his book on Tristan da Cunha English (cf. <italic>YWES</italic> 84[2005]), detailing the dialectal input and independent development of some features (in Hickey, ed., pp. 387–401). Andrea Sudbury provides a brief survey of ‘English on the Falklands’ (in Hickey, ed., pp. 402–17), attributing the unique features of this variety to its specific settlement patterns.</p>
<p>Singapore English received most attention among the Asian Englishes. Lim, ed., <italic>Singapore English: A Grammatical Description</italic>, contains recent research on the basis of a corpus of spoken Singapore English (GSSEC), which is presented in detail in the introduction by Lisa Lim and Joseph A. Foley. Lim's chapter on ‘Sounding Singaporean’ discusses the phonological features of Colloquial Singapore English (CSE) as well as the standard variety and possible substrate influence from the other languages spoken in Singapore, such as Mandarin, Hokkien, Malay and Tamil. Lionel Wee and Umberto Ansaldo look at ‘Nouns and Noun Phrases’ in CSE, discussing article use, number agreement and the various uses of <italic>one</italic>. Vivienne Fong is concerned with ‘The Verbal Cluster’ in CSE; based on corpus material and elicitation tests, the paper discusses specific Singaporean features, such as the optionality of inflections, use and possible omission of the copula, auxiliary usage, verb reduplication and passive constructions. Lionel Wee further investigates ‘Reduplication and Discourse Particles’ in CSE, covering particles such as <italic>lah, ma, leh</italic> and <italic>lor</italic>, which very frequently occur in all varieties of Singaporean English to express speaker attitudes. The final chapter, by Umberto Ansaldo, ‘The Evolution of Singapore English: Finding the Matrix’, is mainly concerned with a number of hybrid constructions resulting from language contact, such as passives, reduplication, polyfunctional constructions and aspectual markers. Unfortunately, Low Ee Ling and Adam Brown's collection <italic>English in Singapore: An Introduction</italic> was unavailable for review. According to the publisher's home page, the volume is intended as a textbook and contains chapters on the history of the variety, its present-day status and roles, multilingualism, and the major linguistic features of Singapore English, including suprasegmental features such as rhythm, stress and intonation, as well as implications for the teaching of English in Singapore. Jock Onn Wong has published extensively on the cultural background of Singapore English within the framework of natural semantic metalanguage developed by Anna Wierzbicka and her associates. In his article on ‘Reduplication of Nominal Modifiers in Singapore English: A Semantic and Cultural Interpretation’ (<italic>WEn</italic> 23[2004] 339–54), he claims that the main reason for the frequent use of reduplicative modifiers, as in <italic>dark dark place</italic>, is related to the general Singaporean discourse strategy of stating everything directly and without downtoning. Applying the framework to some of ‘The Particles of Singapore English: A Semantic and Cultural Interpretation’ (<italic>JPrag</italic> 36[2004] 739–93), namely <italic>la, wut</italic> (more commonly <<italic>what</italic>>) and <italic>meh</italic>, Wong points out that <italic>la</italic> represents several particles since the meaning changes with different lexical tones. <italic>Wut</italic>, always used with low-falling tone, is used to contradict assumptions made by others and to express disagreement, while <italic>meh</italic>, with high tone, signals surprise and the need for affirmation. The frequent use of particles in Singapore English is attributed to different cultural and politeness norms, which allow speakers to try and make others change their minds. A third article by Wong deals with ‘Cultural Scripts, Ways of Speaking and Perceptions of Personal Autonomy: Anglo English vs. Singapore English’ (<italic>IPrag</italic> 1–2[2004] 231–48), focusing on politeness conventions concerning requests and interrogatives. The author concludes that Singaporeans do not couch requests in indirect speech acts and tend to be more direct, even using bare imperatives, because, unlike Western culture, their culture does not value individual autonomy, i.e. the right to say no to a request. Peter K.W. Tan has examined ‘Evolving Naming Patterns: Anthroponymics within a Theory of the Dynamics of Non-Anglo Englishes’ (<italic>WEn</italic> 23[2004] 367–84), analysing graduation lists from Singaporean universities over a span of forty years. Of the two processes at work, Englishization (i.e. adding an English given name, e.g. <italic>Harry Lee Kuan Yew</italic>) and Sinicization (i.e. adopting Mandarin names in the <italic>pinyin</italic> transliteration, e.g. <italic>Li Xiuqi</italic>), the first is clearly the dominant pattern in recent decades.</p>
<p>Remaining in the same geographical area, there are two publications on English in Malaysia. Bernadette Foo and Cynthia Richards trace the historical development and present status and functions of ‘English in Malaysia’ (<italic>RELC</italic> 35[2004] 229–40), while Joanne Rajadurai looks at ‘The Faces and Facts of English in Malaysia’ (<italic>EnT</italic> 20:iv[2004] 54–8), examining the various sub-varieties used in different contexts, such as the classroom or advertising. Gloria Poedjosoedarmo gives an account of ‘English in Brunei Darussalam: Portrait of a Vital Language with an Elusive Role’ (<italic>RELC</italic> 35[2004] 359–70), outlining the history of English in the sultanate and examining its current status in relation to Malay, as well as pointing out some distinctive features of this variety.</p>
<p>English in Hong Kong and mainland China continues to attract much scholarly attention. Unfortunately, the volume on <italic>English and Globalization: Perspectives from Hong Kong and Mainland China</italic>, edited by Tam Kwok-kan and Timothy Weiss, was not available for review. The publisher's home page tells us that it contains fifteen contributions ranging from theoretical issues on the globalization of English to aspects of English language use in Hong Kong and China, including education and language policy. John E. Joseph's study on <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B67"><italic>Language and Identity</italic></xref> devotes a whole chapter to the discussion of Hong Kong English (HKE). Joseph presents its historical background, some linguistic features of HKE, including a small number of sample texts, its current status and functions, and its role in the construction of a new Hong Kong identity, which mainly relies on identification with south China as opposed to Beijing and northern China (a more general review of Joseph's book can be found in <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC9">Section 9</xref> above). A number of articles analyse specific features of HKE: Long Peng and Jean Ann look at ‘Obstruent Voicing and Devoicing in the English of Cantonese Speakers from Hong Kong’ (<italic>WEn</italic> 23[2004] 535–64) on the basis of a word-list task in which the obstruents were read in a number of phonetic environments by two speakers. They conclude that the L2 patterns of devoicing are consistent with L1 devoicing but more variable, and that the ranking of the operative constraints is more similar to that in Cantonese than that in L1 English. Jackie F. K. Lee and Peter Collins report on ‘The Usage of <italic>have, dare, need, ought</italic> and <italic>used to</italic> in Australian English and Hong Kong English’ (<italic>WEn</italic> 23[2004] 501–13) based on elicitation data from teachers and their students. They found that AusE favours the lexical variant of these verbs in negatives and interrogatives (e.g. <italic>didn't need to</italic>), while HKE favours the auxiliary variant (e.g. <italic>needn't to</italic>). The students tended to prefer the lexical variants in both groups of informants. Nancy Lee and Yue Yuan Huang examine ‘To Be or Not to Be: The Variable Use of the Verb <italic>be</italic> in the Interlanguage of Hong Kong Chinese Children’ (<italic>RELC</italic> 35[2004] 211–28) among 270 Hong Kong primary school children, finding that the children largely use copular <italic>be</italic> in the required contexts but tend to omit it when used as an auxiliary. They also attested instances of over-generalization, omission and substitution of other auxiliaries, which they attribute to both L1 transfer and general L2 acquisition processes. Finally, Winnie Cheng presents ‘//-> FRIENDS//↓↑LAdies and GENtlemen//: Some Preliminary Findings from a Corpus of Spoken Public Discourses in Hong Kong’ (in Connor and Upton, eds., pp. 35–52), demonstrating how speakers convey particular meanings and ideological positions by means of lexico-grammatical and intonational choices. Hu Xiao Qiong puts forward arguments ‘Why China English Should Stand Alongside British, American, and Other “World Englishes”’ (<italic>EnT</italic> 20:ii[2004] 26–33), while Peter Hu comments on ‘Adapting English into Chinese’ (<italic>EnT</italic> 20:ii[2004] 34–9), discussing ways in which English words are borrowed, namely through transliteration and phonological adaptation or translation.</p>
<p>A special issue of <italic>World Englishes</italic> (23:i[2004]) presents papers from a colloquium at De La Salle University in Manila in 2001, covering literary, linguistic and pedagogical aspects of Philippine English. The foreword, ‘Philippine English: Tensions and Transitions’ (<italic>WEn</italic> 23[2004] 1–5), by Kingsley Bolton and Ma. Lourdes S. Bautista, and the information on ‘Researching English in the Philippines: Bibliographical Resources’ (<italic>WEn</italic> 23[2004] 199–210), by Ma. Lourdes S. Bautista, are useful for a first orientation on the subject. Contributions dealing with topics of interest to sociolinguists working on the New Englishes are Curtis D. McFarland's survey of ‘The Philippine Language Situation’ (<italic>WEn</italic> 23[2004] 59–75), detailing the intricate multilingual profile of the island state; Andrew Gonzalez's detailed account of ‘The Social Dimensions of Philippine English’ (<italic>WEn</italic> 23[2004] 7–16), covering past developments as well as the present sociolinguistic status of the variety; and Danilo T. Dayag's analysis of ‘The English-Language Media in the Philippines’ (<italic>WEn</italic> 23[2004] 33–45), which shows that the print media are still predominantly English, while the broadcast media have experienced a rapid expansion of Filipino in recent years. On the systemic level, Ma. Lourdes G. Tayao presents first results from ‘The Evolving Study of Philippine English Phonology’ (<italic>WEn</italic> 23[2004] 77–90). After a thorough review of previous research in this area, Tayao proceeds to discuss the specific features of basilectal, mesolectal and acrolectal speakers in relation to General AmE on the segmental and suprasegmental level. Ma. Lourdes S. Bautista also takes a closer look at ‘The Verb in Philippine English: A Preliminary Analysis of Modal <italic>would</italic>’ (<italic>WEn</italic> 23[2004] 113–28) on the basis of a judgement/elicitation test administered to 205 university students, which revealed that the subjects had most difficulty in correctly using modal verbs. <italic>Would</italic> especially is used in contexts of uncertain future or politeness, a tendency in line with usage in other New Englishes. Finally, Kingsley Bolton and Susan Butler explore ‘Dictionaries and the Stratification of Vocabulary: Towards a New Lexicography for Philippine English’ (<italic>WEn</italic> 23[2004] 91–112). After pointing out the importance of dictionaries in the recognition and codification of World Englishes, they describe the development of the Philippine English lexicon and its representation in earlier dictionaries from GB and the US, as well as new efforts in recording actual Philippine English usage by means of a large Asian Corpus of Computerized English Newspaper Texts (ACCENT), which resulted in the <italic>Anvil–Macquarie Dictionary of Philippine English for High School.</italic> A concise review of previous literature on English in Malaysia, Singapore, Hong Kong and the Philippines is given in ‘South-East Asian Englishes’ by Raymond Hickey (in Hickey, ed., pp. 559–85), which includes a brief summary of the historical development of English in each country as well as some linguistic features.</p>
<p>To round off the discussion of English in Asia, we turn to the Indian subcontinent. A new and revised edition of <italic>Indian and British English: A Handbook of Usage and Pronunciation</italic>, by Paroo Nihalani, R.K. Tongue, Priya Hosali and Jonathan Crowther, has appeared. The target audience of this usage guide are Indians wishing to speak and write according to BrE norms, but the alphabetically ordered entries are also of interest to linguists working on Indian English, as they inadvertently reveal typical Indian usages by brandishing them as ‘incorrect’. Dennis Kurzon provides insights into the macro- and micro-sociolinguistics of English in India in his study <italic>Where East Looks West: Success in English in Goa and on the Konkan Coast.</italic> The first part of the book is devoted to a macro-linguistic profile of India as a whole and of the former Portuguese colony on the Konkan coast and on Goa, where Konkani and Marathi are the two rival major indigenous languages and English is the language of administration and other public domains. The second part presents results from a field study, which reveals a connection between the sociolinguistic background of college students and their TOEFL test scores. The fact that native speakers of minority languages such as Konkani tend to have higher test scores is explained by their greater motivation and need to acquire English in order to succeed in life. Raymond Hickey presents a survey of previous research on ‘South Asian Englishes’ (in Hickey, ed., pp. 536–58), focusing on English in India, Pakistan, and Sri Lanka, as the other varieties are much less well researched. Aysha Viswamohan looks at ‘Code-Mixing with a Difference’ (<italic>EnT</italic> 20:iii[2004] 34–6), presenting examples of Hindi–English code-mixing, or Hinglish, from popular journalism in India, which appears to be spreading into more serious publications, such as <italic>India Today</italic> or <italic>Business Today.</italic> Finally, a contribution by Raymond Hickey on ‘Englishes in Asia and Africa: Origins and Structure’ (in Hickey, ed., pp. 503–35) provides the perfect transition between the two sections, as he seeks to address common features of these New Englishes, as well as specific features associated with African and Asian Englishes. Needless to say, such a brief summary of previous research must oversimplify to a large extent.</p>
<p>With regard to African Englishes, an oversight from last year must be amended. Lucko, Peter and Wolf, eds., <italic>Studies in African Varieties of English</italic>, discusses various aspects of mainly West African varieties of English. Hans-Georg Wolf summarizes the results from his book-length study on Cameroon English (cf. <italic>YWES</italic> 84[2005]) in his contribution on ‘The Contextualization of Common Core Terms in West African English: Evidence from Computer Corpora’, adding further evidence from other West African countries, such as Nigeria. Francis O. Egbokhare tells ‘The Story of a Language: Nigerian Pidgin in Spatiotemporal, Social and Linguistic Context’, highlighting the development and current status and functions of Nigerian pidgin, as well as its current creolization in urban contexts. A similar paper on ‘Pidgin English in Cameroon in the New Millennium’ is presented by Augustin Simo Bobda and Hans-Georg Wolf, focusing on the history of the variety and current speaker attitudes. Three contributions deal with lexical and semantic aspects of West African Englishes: Efurosina Adegbija discusses ‘Idiomatic Variation in Nigerian English’, Herbert Igboanusi discusses ‘Semantic Dislocation in Nigerian English’ and Hans-Georg Wolf and Herbert Igboanusi undertake ‘A Preliminary Comparison of Some Lexical Items in Nigerian English and Cameroon English’. Anne Schröder looks at ‘Aspect in Cameroon Pidgin English’, with a strong focus on theoretical discussions of aspect. Two lesser-known varieties are treated in the contributions by Lothar Peter and Hans-Georg Wolf on ‘Aku in the Gambia: Terminological, Problems, Functional Distribution and Popular Attitude’, a new variety which developed out of Krio, and Lothar Peter on ‘English in the Sudan’. In the final paper, Peter Lucko asks ‘Is English a “Killer Language”?’, outlining how the spread of English indeed threatens indigenous African languages and cultures, but also arguing that this is not the fault of the language itself, since English has been a tool of both oppression and liberation on the African continent.</p>
<p>A number of publications deal with current issues of language use and language policy on the African subcontinent. Alamin M. Mazrui examines <italic>English in Africa: After the Cold War</italic> in the context of globalization and the post-colonial legacy. Part 1 of his book is concerned with the institutions and historical developments promoting the use of English in Africa; parts 2 and 3 examine its implications in the face of pan-Africanism, the quest for economic and political unity among African peoples, and Africentricity, the ideology which ‘seeks to restore the pride and confidence of Black people in their own African heritage’ (p. 95). Ultimately, Mazrui claims that either English has to be ‘domesticated’ to legitimately express African intellectual discourse, or the indigenous languages need to return to a central role in African politics and education in order for Africa to rid itself of its colonial past. Mazrui argues strongly in favour of the indigenous languages, citing the Swahilization of Tanzania as an example. What he does not mention, however, is the fact that Swahili was used as a lingua franca in Tanzania before the Swahilization campaign and the massive language-planning efforts involved. The role of English for the pan-African movement is also only briefly touched upon. Despite these shortcomings, Mazrui's book makes excellent reading for those interested in issues of globalization and decolonialization. Moradewun Adejunobi's account of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B2"><italic>Vernacular Palaver: Imaginations of the Local and Non-Native Languages in West Africa</italic></xref> is also concerned with the conflict between indigenous languages and languages of wider communication (i.e. European languages) in Africa in the domains of literature, film, popular romance writing and religion. Contrary to Mazrui's scepticism with regard to the suitability of European languages for the expression of African cultural values, Adejunmobi gives examples of successful cultural adaptation. While more geared toward literary studies, the discussion also provides good reading for linguists interested in African language issues. Four countries in the South of Africa are the focus of <italic>Africa</italic>, volume 1: <italic>Botswana, Malawi, Mozambique and South Africa</italic>, which appeared in the series on language-planning and policy world-wide edited by Richard B. Baldauf and Robert B. Kaplan. In their introduction, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B8">‘Language Policy and Planning in Botswana, Malawi, Mozambique and South Africa: Common Issues’</xref>, the editors state the common ground for grouping these countries together (e.g. use of English, geographical proximity, multilingualism, issues of religion and language), dispel some myths about language-planning and provide a large number of bibliographical sources. The authors generally adhere to the framework of the series, despite limitations in terms of data accessibility or other obstacles. Lydia Nyati-Ramahobo reports in great detail on ‘The Language Situation in Botswana’, a country in which no official language policy exist, but is ‘understood or inferred’ (p. 52). Edrinnie Kayambazinthu gives a very thorough account of the ‘Language Planning Situation in Malawi’, while Armando Jorge Lopes takes a briefer look at ‘The Language Situation in Mozambique’, where English is used as an additional language. Finally, Nkonko M. Kamwangamalu summarizes the development and current state of ‘The Language Planning Situation in South Africa’ in his usual thorough manner. A shorter publication with a pan-African focus is Roland Kiessling and Maarten Mous's study of ‘Urban Youth Languages in Africa’ (<italic>AnL</italic> 46[2004] 303–41), such as Sheng or Engsh in Kenya or Camfranglais in Cameroon, sketching the linguistic profiles of seven varieties with different substrates such as English, French, Lingala or Swahili and proceeding to discuss the recent expansion in the use of these codes, especially among boys and young men. While the base languages differ, all of these ‘anti-languages’ are formed artificially by similar linguistic processes. They signal identity and function as icons of urban youth culture, often also bridging interethnic gaps. While Kiessling and Mous rely on previous studies in terms of data, their analysis of the common feature of these youth languages is very convincing.</p>
<p>Individual publications on West African Englishes include Eronmonsele Pius Akhimien's discussion of ‘The Use of “How Are You?” in Nigerian Society’ (<italic>JP</italic> 36[2004] 2055–8), showing how the use of this greeting formula is constrained by such factors as age or status of the speaker, thus diverging from international English usage. In terms of linguistic human rights and problems of minority languages, Herbert Igboanusi and Lothar Peter report on ‘Oppressing the Oppressed: The Threats of Hausa and English to Nigeria's Minority Languages’ (<italic>IJSL</italic> 170[2004] 131–40), on the basis of a language use and language attitude survey which revealed a language shift to Hausa and English among speakers of minority languages even in oral communication. Finally, Daniel Nkemleke analyses a small corpus of ‘Job Applications and Students’ Complaint Letters in Cameroon’ (<italic>WEn</italic> 23[2004] 601–11) with regard to opening and closing formulas and general discourse strategies, concluding that this genre is developing a specifically Cameroonian form, partly due to the influence of the formal French writing style used in this predominantly Francophone country. Augustin Simo Bobda's survey of ‘Linguistic Apartheid: English Language Policy in Africa’ (<italic>EnT</italic> 20:i[2004] 19–26) is mainly concerned with the situation in Cameroon. He argues that from colonial times on there has been a conscious effort by Western institutions (the British administration, the school system, the BBC) to deny Africans access to international standard English, which has resulted in the emergence of distinctly African varieties. The speakers of these varieties are, however, discriminated against in the fields of academia, ELT, and publishing. Thus, Simo Bobda exhorts African policymakers to provide access to ‘native-like’ English in their education systems.</p>
<p>East Africa received comparatively little attention this year. Serah Mwangi examines ‘Prepositions Vanishing in Kenya’ (<italic>EnT</italic> 20:i[2004] 27–32) on the basis of ICE-GB and ICE-Kenya and elicitation data showing that, while Kenyan English has the same prepositions as BrE, their usage range is simplified and especially idiomatic uses do not occur. Josef Schmied reports on ‘Cultural Discourse in the Corpus of East African English and Beyond: Possibilities and Problems of Lexical and Collocational Research in a One Million-Word Corpus’ (<italic>WEn</italic> 23[2004] 251–60), tracing the frequency and use of East Africanisms, such as loanwords or culture-specific words (e.g. <italic>fuelwood</italic> ‘firewood’) in the Kenyan and Tanzanian subcorpus of ICE and on the internet. Christoph Haase's lexico-semantic analysis of ‘Conceptualization Specifics in East African English: Quantitative Arguments from the ICE-East Africa Corpus’ (<italic>WEn</italic> 23[2004] 261–8) is concerned with verbs of motion, and reveals a noticeable difference in usage between BrE and East African English. Angelina Nduku Kioko and Margaret Jepkirui Muthwii discuss an ‘English Variety for the Public Domain in Kenya: Speakers’ Attitudes and Views’ (in Muthwii and Kioko, eds., <italic>New Language Bearings in Africa: A Fresh Quest</italic>, pp. 34–49), revealing that most Kenyans prefer a non-ethnically marked variety of English in the public domain over ethnically marked and native speaker varieties, such as BrE or AmE. Kembo-Sure's contribution on ‘Establishing a National Standard and English Language Curriculum Change in Kenya’ (in Muthwii and Kioko, eds., pp.101–15) provides well-founded arguments for the institutionalization of a standard variety of Kenyan English.</p>
<p>Arua E. Arua presents ‘Botswana English: Some Syntactic and Lexical Features’ (<italic>EWW</italic> 25[2004] 255–72), such as tag questions, the use of reflexives instead of personal pronouns, the use of <italic>don't</italic> in contexts requiring <italic>do</italic>, and inversion in reported questions, as well as some characteristic lexical items. Mompoloki M. Bagwasi explains ‘The Functional Distribution of Setswana and English in Botswana’ (in Muthwii and Kioko, eds., pp. 116–21), advocating a more balanced language policy which enables speakers to function well on the national and international levels.</p>
<p>Roger Lass develops a scenario for the genesis of ‘South African English’ (in Hickey, ed., pp. 363–86), describing some of its features and discussing possible BrE dialect input responsible for its development. Chris Jeffery and Bertus van Rooy have studied the ‘Emphasizer <italic>now</italic> in Colloquial South African English’ (<italic>WEn</italic> 23[2004] 269–80) on the basis of ICE-GB and ICE-South Africa, coming to the conclusion that this usage is based on Afrikaans. The majority of publications on English in South Africa are concerned with issues of language policy, language choice or language shift. Felix Banda has conducted ‘A Survey of Literacy Practices in Black and Coloured Communities in South Africa: Towards a Pedagogy of Multiliteracies’ (in Muthwii and Kioko, eds., pp. 10–33) which revealed that, while both groups rated literacy in English highest, this did not result in negative language attitudes towards the indigenous languages. Elizabeth de Kadt investigates ‘Gender Aspects of the Use of English on a South African University Campus’ (<italic>WEn</italic> 23[2004] 515–34), in an attempt to explain why female students at the University of KwaZulu-Natal increasingly use English in interacting with Zulu peers. De Kadt comes to the conclusion that it is due to their attempts to establish new gender roles which depart from traditional Zulu patriarchy. The language shift to English is also illustrated by ‘First-Name Changes in South Africa: The Swing of the Pendulum’ (<italic>IJSL</italic> 170[2004] 59–80), presented by Vivian de Klerk and Irene Logonikos, who report that many South Africans are turning away from traditional naming patterns due to urbanization. South Africans have the right to officially change their name once they reach the age of 16. A study of such name changes from identifiably African names was undertaken, and revealed that the majority of changes were in favour of English names, which is all the more surprising as leading public figures have recently changed their English names back to African ones. Leketi Makalela tries to ‘Mak[e] Sense of BSAE for Linguistic Democracy in South Africa’ (<italic>WEn</italic> 23[2004] 355–66) by pointing out the relationship between the tense and aspect system of the Bantu languages and BSAE features such as progressives with stative verbs or tense backshift rules. She concludes that language-planning efforts should take the reality of this variety into account. Neville Alexander examines ‘The Politics of Language Planning in Post-Apartheid South Africa’ (<italic>LPLP</italic> 28[2004] 113–30) looking at the positions of the various social groups involved in the process. Stanley G.M. Ridge deals with ‘Language Planning in a Rapidly Changing Multilingual Society: The Case of English in South Africa’ (<italic>LPLP</italic> 28[2004] 199–215), providing a survey of present policy and stressing the need for policymakers to take the continuum from FL speakers, L2 speakers to L1 speakers of English in SA into account. P. Eric Louw is concerned about what he calls ‘Anglicizing Postapartheid South Africa’ (<italic>JMMD</italic> 25[2004] 318–32). This involves a language shift towards English at the expense of Afrikaans and the ten indigenous official languages, which, in his view, is a result of cultural imperialism. Liesel Hibbert is interested in the effects of ‘Globalization, the African Renaissance and the Role of English’ (<italic>IJSL</italic> 170[2004] 81–93), exploring the dichotomy of globalization and an African re-identification in South Africa with regard to language policy and use, pointing out that the pan-African movement would be unthinkable without the use of English. Nkonko M. Kamwangamalu discusses ‘Language, Social History, and Identity in Post-Apartheid South Africa: A Case Study of the “Colored” Community of Wentworth’ (<italic>IJSL</italic> 170[2004] 113–29) within the framework of Robert LePage and Andrée Tabouret-Keller's ‘Acts of Identity’ model. Most of the subjects in his study claimed English as their L1, which they regard as a distinctive variety that sets them off from other groups and is recognized by outsiders. However, the labels attached to this variety, which is perceived as a marker of identity, for example, ‘uneducated’ or ‘standard-lowering’, are generally very negative. Finally, John Baugh compares ‘Standard English and Academic English (Dialect) Learners in the African Diaspora’ (<italic>JEngL</italic> 32[2004] 197–209) by looking at the process of language acquisition of African Americans and black South Africans. He points out that the different attitudes towards standard English and the differing circumstances for the acquisition of English need to be taken into account in the education system.</p>
<p>Moving on to the Caribbean, we welcome the publication of Alison Irvine's excellent article ‘A Good Command of the English Language: Phonological Variation in the Jamaican Acrolect’ (<italic>JPCL</italic> 19[2004] 41–76), in which she studies the speech of white-collar employees at the government agency JAMPRO, based on informant interviews in a formal setting. By distinguishing between frontline staff and back-office staff, Irvine is able to present a very detailed picture of acrolectal Jamaican English, showing that the speech of her frontline staff informants also contained the variables found in more mesolectal Jamaican English, but in lower frequencies. Along similar lines, Valerie Youssef forcefully argues ‘ “Is English we speaking”: Trinbagonian in the Twenty-First Century’ (<italic>EnT</italic> 20:iv[2004] 42–9), pointing out that while many Trinidadians would deny it, there is an emergent standard variety of English spoken there which merits linguistic investigation. Jeanette Allsopp give a progress report on ‘The Caribbean Multilingual Lexicography Project’ (<italic>EnT</italic> 20:i[2004] 11–18), which will eventually cover Caribbean English, French, Spanish and Dutch as well as the various Caribbean creoles. Megan Jones and Sali Tagliamonte travel ‘From Somerset to Samaná: Preverbal <italic>did</italic> in the Voyage of English’ (<italic>LVC</italic> 16[2004] 93–126), trying to establish a close link between an English dialect and a New World black variety of English. After a thorough examination of earlier research on preverbal <italic>do</italic>/<italic>did</italic>, the authors compare data from two corpora of informal spoken language from Wincanton (Somerset) and Samaná (Dominican Republic), finding that the two varieties share a number of features now obsolete in most other varieties of English. The analysis of periphrastic <italic>did</italic> revealed a surprising number of similarities in terms of frequency and operative constraints, which runs counter to previous claims on the reordering of constraints when a variable becomes obsolete. Raymond Hickey discusses ‘English Dialect Input to the Caribbean’ (in Hickey, ed., pp. 326–53), focusing mainly on possible features (phonological, morphological, syntactic) from Irish English that might have been retained in the Caribbean. While it does not become clear whether he is looking at Caribbean Englishes or creoles, or both, it is not possible to assign British dialectal input as the sole origin of the features discussed. Finally, Ken Decker presents a variety of ‘Moribund English: The Case of Gustavia English, St. Barthélmy’ (<italic>EWW</italic> 25[2004] 217–54), presenting the history and the main linguistic features of this little-known Caribbean variety, which will most likely disappear in the near future as there are no longer children acquiring English as their L1 since the population of St Barthélmy has completed a language shift to French. The present situation is a continuum of lects ranging between more creole-like features and general non-standard English, with the speech of Afro-Caribbeans containing more creole features.</p>
<p>From the Caribbean to general creolistics. Claire Lefebvre has gathered together most of her work on Haitian Creole and general creolistics published in 2000–3 and a summary of her book <italic>Creole Genesis and the Acquisition of Grammar: The Case of Haitian Creole</italic> [1998] in the volume <italic>Issues in the Study of Pidgin and Creole Languages</italic>, which thus provides an updated account of her work on relexification and levelling in creole genesis. As before, her data are drawn from Haitian creole French, but she also cites research on other pidgins and creoles to support her arguments on the general nature of pidgins and creoles. This volume, together with her 1998 study, represents the results of approximately twenty-five years of research and provides the reader with everything he or she ever wanted to know about the relexification model. John Mcwhorter, on the other hand, sets out to prove Lefebvre wrong. In his article ‘Saramaccan and Haitian as Young Grammars: The Pitfalls of Syntactocentrism in Creole Genesis Research’ (<italic>JPCL</italic> 19[2004] 77–138), he compares these Atlantic creoles with their main substrate language, Fongbe, to support his hypothesis that creoles are ‘young languages’ with a less ‘ornamental grammar’ (p. 78) than older languages. McWhorter uses new Saramaccan data and discusses features like reduplication, verb serialization, tone sandhi, temporal subordination, change-of-location marking, copula distinctions and morphophonemics. In the second part of the paper he compares Fongbe and Haitian Creole French in order to falsify Lefebvre's relexification model and Michel de Graff's account of Haitian Creole. He argues forcefully that the sole focus on syntactic structures blurs the picture of creole genesis, and that creoles are indeed linguistically less overspecified than their substrates. John Holm presents the first book-length publication on his ongoing research on partially restructured languages (called semi-creoles in earlier publications). The varieties under analysis are AAVE (see a detailed review of the work with regard to this variety in the section on dialectology and sociolinguistics), Afrikaans, non-standard Caribbean Spanish, Brazilian Vernacular Portuguese and Vernacular Réunnionais French. The hallmark of Holm's approach is the comparative study of the socio-historical background, the VP, NP and clause structure of these varieties, which reveals a cline of restructuring, as well as similar demographic and linguistic processes, such as levelling. Holm's study provides further insights into language contact that falls between dialect contact and creolization. A short summary of his work, entitled ‘Social and Linguistic Factors in Partial Restructuring’, can be found in Fernandéz, Fernandéz-Ferreiro and Vázquez Veiga, eds., <italic>Los Criollos des Base Ibérica</italic> (pp. 283–95). Selected papers from three consecutive meetings of the Society for Pidgin and Creole Linguistics are presented in Escure and Schwegler, eds., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B43"><italic>Creoles, Contact, and Language Change: Linguistic and Social Implications</italic></xref>, broadly grouped into four sections focusing on language history, acquisition, structure and discourse or identity. The volume covers a large number of creoles with English, French, Spanish and Portuguese substrates, and has been carefully edited. Fred Field's contribution examines the possible role of ‘Second Language Acquisition in Creole Genesis’ (pp. 127–60), applying the notion of processability to data from Jamaican Creole, Tok Pisin, Hawaiian Creole English and Palenquero. Other contributions of interest to English studies will be discussed in the appropriate places below in this section.</p>
<p>Shorter publications dealing with general issues in creolistics include Andrei A. Avram's look at ‘Atlantic, Pacific or World-Wide? Issues in Assessing the Status of Creole Features’ (<italic>EWW</italic> 25[2004] 81–108), re-assessing some of the diagnostic features used by Philip Baker and Magnus Huber ([2001], cf. <italic>YWES</italic> 82[2003] 87) to distinguish Atlantic and Pacific creoles. In the light of the data used by Avram, twenty-three features previously classified as typical of Atlantic or Pacific creoles are actually in use world-wide. This new evidence also leads him to question some of the West African etymologies for the Atlantic creoles, since a presence of the lexeme in the Pacific creoles makes such an origin unlikely or suggests universal rather than language-specific mechanisms in word formation. Derek Bickerton and Michel de Graff cross swords again on the issue of creole exceptionalism. While Bickerton, ‘Reconsidering Creole Exceptionalism’ (<italic>Language</italic> 80[2004] 828–33), is much in favour of the idea that creole languages are typologically exceptional, de Graff, ‘Against Creole Exceptionalism (Redux)’ (<italic>Language</italic> 80[2004] 834–9), is strongly opposed to this notion. The issue remains unresolved. Jeff Siegel re-assesses the notions of simplicity and elaboration or expansion in his columns for the <italic>Journal of Pidgin and Creole Languages</italic>. He proposes using the cline of grammaticality to assess ‘The Morphological Simplicity in Pidgins and Creoles’ (<italic>JPCL</italic> 19[2004] 139–62), which needs to take into account both the lexifier and the substrate languages. Siegel stresses the importance of further research into the role of linguistic levelling and mixing in the role of creole genesis and into a comparison between early pidgins and foreigner talk. ‘Morphological Elaboration’ (<italic>JPCL</italic> 19[2004] 333–62) is considered a key issue in the transition from pidgin to creole. Siegel examines possible explanations for morphological elaboration, such as relexification, transfer, language-internal reanalysis and extension, concluding that the rapid elaboration of expanded pidgins and creoles is due to compensatory strategies of second language use.</p>
<p>Moving to work on individual Atlantic creoles, we welcome the publication of Stephanie Hackert's carefully researched and documented study of <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B54"><italic>Urban Bahamian Creole: System and Variation</italic></xref>, which combines a socio-historical and sociolinguistic account of English in the Bahamas and especially in the urban centre of Nassau with a thorough and statistically backed data analysis of past time reference in a large number of informant interviews. Hackert painstakingly develops her methodology and offers a complete survey of all occurring constructions to mark past time reference in urban Bahamian creole, such as <italic>was</italic>/<italic>been</italic> V<italic>ing</italic>, V<italic>ed, used to</italic> V, <italic>done</italic> V, <italic>did</italic> V or unmarked V. The longest chapter of her study is devoted to the social, stylistic and linguistic constraints on past marking by inflection. In her conclusions, Hackert places her findings in the context of research on other Atlantic creoles, such as Peter Patrick's study of urban Jamaican creole ([1999]; cf. <italic>YWES</italic> 80[2001] 89). A shorter publication by Jeffrey Reaser provides ‘A Quantitative Sociolinguistic Analysis of Bahamian Copula Absence: Morphosyntactic Evidence from Abaco Island, the Bahamas’ (<italic>JPCL</italic> 19[2004] 1–14), based on fieldwork in two mono-ethnic enclaves on the island: Cherokee Sound, with a predominantly white population, and Sandy Point, with a predominantly black population. Comparing the speech of his two informant groups with a number of possible source varieties, he comes to the conclusion that the varieties are ethnically distinct but fail to align with any possible input variety of BrE, AmE or Caribbean creole. Due to the presence of more standard features in Sandy Point, Reaser argues that the variety originally imported was most likely more standard than in other parts of the Bahamas, where Gullah is supposed to have been the primary input. Sheri Pargman reports on ‘Gullah <italic>duh</italic> and Periphrastic <italic>do</italic> in English Dialects: Another Look at the Evidence’ (<italic>AS</italic> 79[2004] 3–32), linking the Gullah preverbal imperfective marker <italic>duh</italic> to earlier influence from speakers of south-western English dialects which came to South Carolina via Barbados, discarding the previous notion that it might originate from Hiberno-English or substrate influence from West African languages, although she concedes that similar structures in Kwa languages, such as Ewe <italic>de</italic> or Igbo <italic>de</italic>, may have had an influence on the actual choice of the marker in Gullah.</p>
<p>Lars Hinrichs has discovered ‘Emerging Orthographic Conventions in Written Creole: Computer-Mediated Communication in Jamaica’ (<italic>AAA</italic> 29[2004] 81–109), discussing various strategies employed by Jamaicans writing emails and/or chat-group contributions in Jamaican Creole (JC). He concludes that writers tend to resort to etymological spellings based on Standard English and that alternate spellings relying on phoneme–grapheme correspondences in Standard English are employed for disambiguation or signalling non-standardness. Rocky R. Meade looks at ‘OT and the Acquisition of Jamaican Syllable Structure’ (in Escure and Schwegler, eds., pp. 161–88) based on a longitudinal study of twenty-four children from a basilectal and a mesolectal/acrolectal group. His study reveals that the sequence of acquisition of various syllable types is the same for both groups and also analogous to children acquiring Standard English or Dutch. Alicia Bedford Wassink and Judy Dyer's article (already mentioned in <xref ref-type="sec" rid="SEC9">Section 9</xref> above) on ‘Language Ideology and the Transmission of Phonological Change’ is concerned with ‘Changing Indexicality in Two Situations of Language Contact’ (<italic>JEngL</italic> 32[2004] 3–30), namely in Corby (UK) and Kingston (Jamaica). In both communities, features from historically stigmatized varieties (Scottish English, rural basilectal Jamaican Creole) have been adopted by younger speakers to mark local identity and pride. This leads the authors to conclude that sociolinguistic investigation needs to take issues of language ideology and metalinguistic commentary by the subjects into account. Silvia Kouwenberg and Darlene LaCharité look for ‘Echoes of Africa: Reduplication in Caribbean Creole and Niger–Congo Languages’ (<italic>JPCL</italic> 19[2004] 285–331), carefully trying to match the various reduplicative processes in JC and the Suriname creoles with parallel structures in potential substrate languages from the Niger–Congo family. Interestingly, some processes have parallels in languages that are not usually considered possible substrates, e.g. the bisyllabicity requirement of X-like reduplication in JC is paralleled in some Bantu languages, but usually Kwa is considered the main substrate for JC. The authors have not been able to find a complete match for this reduplication pattern in the Niger–Congo languages and argue that it might be an innovation in the Caribbean creoles, building only partially on reduplication patterns found in the substrates. They argue that evidence for the transfer of marked, i.e. non-iconic, reduplication is a stronger argument for substrate transfer than unmarked iconic reduplication.</p>
<p>Further research on the Suriname creoles includes Hugo Cardoso's account of ‘“KABA TEH A BI SUNTA DEM”: The Path of Two Portuguese Elements in Saramaccan’ (in Fernández, Fernández-Ferreiro and Vázquez, eds., pp. 267–82), outlining the grammaticalization process of <italic>kaba</italic> or <italic>kaa</italic> (from Port. <italic>acabar</italic>) and <italic>teh</italic> (also <italic>tee</italic> or <italic>te</italic>, from Port. <italic>até</italic>) from early nineteenth-century to present-day Saramaccan. Jeff Good analyses ‘Tone and Accent in Saramaccan: Charting a Deep Split in the Phonology of a Language’ (<italic>Lingua</italic> 114[2004] 575–619), showing that while one part of the Saramaccan lexicon exhibits a stable high-tone/low–tone opposition, the majority of words are marked by a pitch accent which leads to a mix between a tonal phrasal system and an accentual system in terms of phrasal phonology. Margot van den Berg and Jacques Arends examine ‘Court Records as a Source of Authentic Early Sranan’ (in Escure and Schwegler, eds., pp. 21–34), looking at about fifty-four short passages taken from seventeenth- and eighteenth-century court records, the oldest of which represent the earliest attestations of Sranan, pre-dating all other known sources by a decade. The findings presented in the paper are concerned with syntactic structures, such as TMA markers, and are generally in line with other research on early Sranan, which validates the court records as reliable data. Finally, Bettina Migge reports on ‘The Speech Event <italic>kuutu</italic> in the Eastern Maroon Community’ (in Escure and Schwegler, eds., pp. 285–306). Migge analyses the highly ritualized and structured <italic>kuutu</italic> ‘council meeting’ among the Pamaka Maroons according to the guidelines of the ethnography of speaking. She outlines the social background and overall structure of a <italic>kuutu</italic> meeting, and the rules of conduct and linguistic practices in terms of turn-taking, word choices, address forms and figures of speech that are used to highlight the dignity and importance of the event. James Essegy reports on ‘Auxiliaries in Serializing Languages: On <italic>come</italic> and <italic>go</italic> Verbs in Sranan and Ewe’ (<italic>Lingua</italic> 114[2004] 473–94), arguing that the reduction of form is a very important factor in distinguishing lexical and auxiliary verbs in serializing languages.</p>
<p>There are two publications on the English-based creoles spoken in Central America. Peter Snow examines ‘Small Languages and Small Language Communities 44: Tourism and Small-Language Persistence in a Panamanian Creole Village’ (<italic>IJSL</italic> 166[2004] 113–28), discussing the influence of English-speaking tourists in the village of Old Bank on the island of Bastimentos, Panama, for the maintenance of the English-based creole spoken there, while other English-based creoles in Central America are under threat from the dominant language, Spanish. It remains to be seen whether the increased contact with speakers of standard English will lead to linguistic change in the local creole. Anita Herzfeld and David Moskowitz discuss ‘The Limonese Calypso as an Identity Marker’ (in Escure and Schwegler, eds. pp. 259–84), showing how Carnival and the genre of calypso have become important factors in the maintenance of Limonese Creole in Spanish-dominant Costa Rica.</p>
<p>To round off the section on the Atlantic creoles, let us look at three publications concerned with Krio, the English-based creole spoken in Sierra Leone. Magnus Huber has done research on the possible origins of Krio, examining ‘The Nova Scotia–Sierra Leone Connection: New Evidence on an Early Variety of African American Vernacular English in the Diaspora’ (in Escure and Schwegler, eds., pp. 67–95). Huber traced the point of origin of over half of the 1,196 ex-slaves who came to Sierra Leone in 1792, and next analysed a corpus of letters from this group—a majority came originally from the coastal belt of Virginia and South Carolina—for possible connections to AAVE and Gullah, which proved to be successful. Malcolm Awadajin Finney looks at ‘Tone Assignment on Lexical Items of English and African Origin in Krio’ (in Escure and Schwegler, eds., pp. 221–36) proving prior claims that Krio is a pitch-accent language wrong. The stress patterns of English may have influenced the correspondence between high tone and primary or secondary stress in the English lexeme, but tone assignment is generally unpredictable in di- or polysyllabic words. Finney also reports on ‘Substratal Influence on the Morphosyntactic Properties of Krio’ (<italic>LingD</italic> 2:ii[2004] 58–83) analysing clefting, verb serialization and complementation on the basis of native speaker intuition. He comes to the conclusion that these features indeed are due to substrate influence primarily from Yoruba but that this should not be interpreted as an argument for an origin of Krio entirely determined by the substrate languages.</p>
<p>We will bring this survey to a close with a discussion of this year's work on Pacific pidgins and creoles. The most important news is that a comprehensive account of this linguistic area, namely Darrel T. Tryon and Jean-Michel Charpentier's <italic>Pacific Pidgins and Creoles: Origins, Growth and Development</italic>, has finally seen the light. Both authors have done research on Pacific pidgins for over thirty years, and their book is crammed with language samples and analyses, and demographic and historical information. They begin by giving an overview of present-day Pacific pidgins (unfortunately, they consider Hawaiian Pidgin and Creole English (HCE), as well as Bonin Islands and Palmerston Islands English, to be outside the scope of their book), discuss previous theories of pidgin development in great detail, and then present a historical account of the Melanesian varieties from the eighteenth century until the present day. Most interesting to linguists, chapter 9 is concerned with the linguistic development (differentiation, elaboration) of the major varieties in the twentieth century. Despite the unfortunate gap with regard to HCE, this book is an excellent source of information on the historical development of the Melanesian pidgins, especially Bislama. Charpentier also compares ‘Les pidgins/créoles du Pacifique-Sud et les langues Austranésiennes’ (<italic>FdeL</italic> 23–24[2004] 379–95), pointing out structural parallels between Bislama and other pacific pidgins and creoles and the Austronesian languages to the point of morpheme-for-morpheme relexification. Suzanne Romaine has written an overview of ‘English Input to the English-Lexicon Pidgins and Creoles of the Pacific’ (in Hickey, ed., pp. 456–99), covering both Melanesian and Polynesian varieties. The English sources for a large number of lexical and some grammatical items are given after a brief summary of the historical background of language contact with English in the Pacific. Unfortunately, the <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B32"><italic>Bislama Reference Grammar</italic></xref> by Terry Crowley was unavailable for review. According to the publisher's homepage, it seeks to describe the spoken and written usage of ordinary speakers in Vanuatu. Sarah J. Roberts investigates ‘The Role of Style and Identity in the Development of Hawaiian Creole’ (in Escure and Schwegler, eds., pp. 331–50), especially with regard to the development of a continuum between HCE and standard AmE and the language shift from the ‘ancestral languages’ Hawaiian, Portuguese, and Chinese to HCE. Roberts stresses the importance of language ideologies and the construction of identity in the development of HCE out of Hawaiian Pidgin. Finally, Daniel Long and Peter Trudgill have discovered ‘The Last Yankee in the Pacific: Eastern New England Phonology in the Bonin Islands’ (<italic>AS</italic> 79[2004] 356–67), showing that one of the last speakers of Bonin Islands English recorded in the 1970s has indeed retained vowel distinctions from Eastern New England English.</p></sec>
<sec id="SEC11"><title>11. Pragmatics and Discourse Analysis</title>
<p>Two textbooks on discourse analysis were published in 2004: Hillary Hillier's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B60"><italic>Analysing Real Texts</italic></xref>, and Jan Renkema's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B95"><italic>Introduction to Discourse Studies</italic></xref>. In her introduction, Hillier presents the organization of the subsequent eight chapters. These are focused on various spoken and written registers (e.g. newspaper reports, political speeches), or membership categories of language users (e.g. women's talk, children's talk). Each chapter follows the consistent organizational structure that is presented in chapter 1: it begins with a brief introduction of the type of discourse that is the focus of that chapter, and is followed by an identification of relevant variables, a description of the data, a discussion of relevant frameworks, a presentation of method and analysis, the findings/results, a concluding summary, and suggestions for future work. As a result, Hillier's text not only provides a ‘reader-friendly’ overview of the types of questions and issues that often concern discourse analysts, but also presents some necessary and practical tools for anyone interested in actually undertaking discourse analytic work.</p>
<p>Though Renkema claims that his <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B95"><italic>Introduction to Discourse Studies</italic></xref> is intended ‘to serve as a first introduction to discourse studies at university level’ (p. 5), his text assumes considerable background knowledge in linguistics and communication theory. Each chapter begins immediately with a discussion of relevant subtopics with no general, orientating introduction: for example, the chapter on conversation analysis covers transcription, turn-taking, sequential organization, and discourse markers, without any contextualization of the background of CA. In a true introductory textbook one would expect much more guidance for the reader (perhaps in the form of chapter introductions and summaries), as well as more elaboration on how the individual topics presented in each chapter relate to one another. Renkema's chapter on ‘Contextual Phenomena’ (chapter 7), for instance, treats text-internal contextual phenomena (e.g., deixis, presupposition), and in doing so presents a very restricted notion of context which does not take into account the physical, situational, or relational variables of speakers and writers, their interlocutors and audience. Although some of these variables are discussed in the final section of the text (for example in sections that address ‘gender’ and ‘intercultural communication’), this discussion is not integrated with reference to preceding chapters. Nevertheless, Renkema's text offers some valuable information about the subject that is not often found in other textbooks on discourse analysis (e.g., multimodality, judging discourse quality) and would certainly be appropriate for a more advanced audience, with its detailed end-of-chapter bibliographies, exercises (answers to which are provided at the back of the book), and assignments.</p>
<p>Lerner, ed., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B81"><italic>Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation</italic></xref>, brings together some previously unpublished, though often cited, work by Harvey Sacks and many of his colleagues and students, including Emanuel Schegloff, Gail Jefferson, and Anita Pomerantz. Lerner's engaging ‘Introductory Remarks’ are helpful in situating this collection of papers in the early days of CA research (from the mid-1960s to the mid-1970s). Following Lerner's introduction, Jefferson's ‘Glossary of Transcript Symbols with an Introduction’ illustrates the advantages and analytic possibilities of working with the very detailed style of transcription that has become a hallmark of CA approaches to the analysis of spoken interaction. The eight papers that follow are organized into three main sections on turn-taking, action formation, and sequence organization. This volume, which brings together some of the original, pioneering work of major figures in CA, represents an important reference source for scholars of spoken discourse.</p>
<p>The continuing influence of CA can be seen in Couper-Kuhlen and Ford, eds., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B29"><italic>Sound Patterns in Interaction</italic></xref>, which includes a number of papers that ‘combine analysis of [conversational] action with analysis of sound in data from naturally occurring language use’ (p. 4). The editors’ clear introduction discusses functional approaches to the study of naturally occurring language, and presents previous CA work which has included a specific interest in sound patterns. Individual papers address a number of languages (Japanese, German, Finnish) and a variety of phenomena that represent the interface between conversational structure and phonetics and phonology. Of the twelve chapters, seven papers are dedicated to English. Beatrice Szczepek Reed's chapter, ‘Turn Final Intonation in English’, examines a variety of pitch movements that occur at the end of a turn at talk. Bill Wells and Juliette Corrin examine the development of intonation in English-speaking children in ‘Prosodic Resources, Turn-Taking and Overlap in Children's Talk-in-Interaction’. Gareth Walker's chapter ‘On Some Interactional and Phonetic Properties of Increments to Turns in Talk-in-Interaction’ reports on the interactional functions of ‘increments’ or ‘continuations to possibly complete turns at talk’ (p.150). Traci Curl's ‘Repetition Repairs: The Relationship of Phonetic Structure and Sequence Organization’ looks at phonological differences associated with two different types of other-initiated repair repetitions. Particularly noteworthy are the chapters by Cooper-Kuhlen, John Local, and Cecilia Ford, Barbara Fox and John Hellerman. Cooper-Kuhlen investigates the shifts in prosody that signal a shift in topic and illustrates how lexical, grammatical and prosodic cues work in tandem to signal to participants the sequential status of a turn. Local provides a discussion of the particular phonetic and phonological characteristics associated with <italic>and-uh</italic> used as a conversational resource by speakers to tie their talk back to their own prior talk. Finally, Ford, Fox and Hellerman consider the interplay between discourse function, sequence, and phonetics in accounting for the occurrence of stand-alone versus multi-unit <italic>no</italic> in conversation.</p>
<p>In <italic>Narrative Counselling: Social and Linguistic Process of Change</italic> Peter Muntigl combines CA with Hallidayan Systemic Functional Linguistics (SFL) to analyse the discursive practices and changes that occur over time in client–counsellor interactions; he focuses on six transcripts of one couple's counselling sessions. Muntigl's introduction serves as an excellent overview of the remainder of the book. The second and third chapters provide details about CA and SFL and the utility of these approaches in Muntigl's analysis. In the remainder of the text, Muntigl analyses problem identifications, reformulations, problem constructions and problem effacements in client–counsellor discourse. Because language is the primary resource drawn on in counselling sessions to bring about change in a client, Muntigl's descriptive account and clear analysis of what actually happens between clients and therapists represents an important contribution to understanding counselling discourse.</p>
<p>Cotterill, ed., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B28"><italic>Language in the Legal Process</italic></xref>, which includes contributions by Malcolm Coulthard, Roger Shuy, Diana Eades, and Susan Berk-Seligson among others, offers readers an excellent overview of the wide range of work being conducted in the domain of forensic linguistics. The book is divided into four sections: (1) ‘The Linguist in the Legal Process’; (2) ‘The Language of the Police and the Police Interview’; (3) ‘The Language of the Courtroom I: Lawyers and Witnesses’; and (4) ‘The Language of the Courtroom II: Judges and Juries’. Of particular interest are those chapters which deal with the communicative problems caused by legal texts. As both Peter Tiersma (‘The Language and Law of Product Warnings’) and Gail Stygall (‘Textual Barriers to U.S. Immigration’) demonstrate, the linguistic complexity of such texts (i.e. sentence length, complex syntax, and difficult vocabulary) is often exacerbated by the complexity or ambiguity of presentation of the text itself, reflected in other multimodal discourse features such as font size, ambiguous symbols, document organization, and print layout.</p>
<p>Bernadette Vine's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B113"><italic>Getting Things Done at Work</italic></xref> reflects a growing interest in power and politeness in institutional interactions. Vine examines the linguistic expression of power in the setting of four New Zealand government offices, focusing specifically on the linguistic expression of three speech acts: directives, requests, and advice. Following Vine's introduction, chapters 2–5 present a review of literature on speech acts, and a very lucid discussion of her operationalization of head acts as well as various types of internal and external modifying devices (e.g. modals, alerters). Chapter 6 then illustrates each of these features with representative excerpts from Vine's transcripts. In the subsequent chapters of analysis and conclusion, Vine's conclusions echo those of similar work carried out in other institutional contexts, that is, the tendency of speakers to mitigate these speech acts, even when they are issued by a more powerful speaker to an individual in a less powerful position. Vine includes comprehensive descriptions of her data in the book's appendices. This methodologically sound and clearly written work contributes to the field of pragmatics as well as to that of institutional discourse.</p>
<p>Another work on politeness and power published this year is Miriam Locher's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B83"><italic>Power and Politeness in Action: Disagreements in Oral Communication</italic></xref>, a text which is rich in both theory and data. This book is divided into three parts: the first provides the theoretical background necessary to understand power, communication, relational work, and politeness; the second part focuses on discourse strategies related to disagreement; and the third part presents detailed analyses from three contexts (a conversation among family and friends, a business meeting at a scientific research institution, and several political arenas). Locher includes comprehensive descriptions of her setting and participants as well as of her data (for example distributions of talk among participants), and conducts close analytical readings of several key excerpts. Locher proposes a framework (in the form of a ‘checklist’, or a set of related propositions) for understanding the nature and exercise of power in discourse. She argues convincingly that in order to understand the complex relationship between power, politeness, relational work, and disagreement, any content-level analysis of discourse must be integrated with consideration of the broader contexts in which those interactions take place.</p>
<p>In <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B46"><italic>Recontextualizing Context</italic></xref>, a work that focuses specifically on context and discourse, Anita Fetzer proposes a model for describing the complex and multiple connections between language and different types of context. Fetzer's book is organized into four chapters. Chapter 1 defines linguistic, social and sociocultural contexts as they relate to pragmatics and meaning, and considers the interface between context and grammaticality, well-formedness, acceptability and appropriateness. Chapter 2 explores grammaticality and context in greater depth. Chapter 3 focuses on appropriateness and context, and in chapter 4 Fetzer concludes the book with a discussion of the distinct goals and purposes of sentence grammars compared with dialogue grammars.</p>
<p>Contributing to the literature on pragmatics from a philosophy of language perspective, Brisard, Meeuwis, and Vandenabeele, eds., <italic>Seduction, Community, and Speech. A Festschrift for Herman Parret</italic>, brings together an eclectic collection of papers written by international scholars on topics as diverse as deixis, language games, and identity.</p>
<p>The primary aim of Judith Baxter's <italic>Positioning Gender in Discourse: A Feminist Methodology</italic> is to introduce the framework of feminist post-structuralist discourse analysis (FPDA). After reviewing the relevant concepts and major theoretical antecedents (the work of Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida, etc.) in her first three chapters, Baxter illustrates the application of this approach to understanding discourse in two distinct settings: a school classroom and several meetings of a management team. She demonstrates how, within these contexts, speakers’ gendered identities are constructed and negotiated in a complex web of different—and sometimes contradictory—discourses. Consistent with other critical approaches to the analysis of discourse, Baxter argues for the transformative potential of FPDA.</p>
<p>As his title clearly indicates, in <italic>(Mis)Representing Islam: The Racism and Rhetoric of British Broadsheet Newspapers</italic> John E. Richardson investigates the discursive construction of racism in British newspapers. In particular, he aims to demonstrate ‘how the reporting of elite (majority white) broadsheet journalists is implicated in the production and reproduction of (racist) attitudes, beliefs, sentiment and practices and the potential effects of this reporting on the lives of Muslims, both in Britain and in the rest of the world’ (p. xv). In using both quantitative and qualitative data in his analysis, Richardson addresses what he claims to be one of major limitations of prior work on the newspaper representation of Muslims, which has relied ‘largely on non-systematic anecdotal evidence’ (p. xvi). Although Richardson's work incorporates some quantitative analysis, some readers may be disappointed to find that, other than an introductory mention of an instrument used to quantify and code variables, he includes no discussion of methodological issues and decisions related to quantification.</p>
<p>Jonathan Charteris-Black's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B19"><italic>Corpus Approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis</italic></xref> and Veronika Koller's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B73"><italic>Metaphor and Gender in Business Media Discourse: A Critical Cognitive Study</italic></xref> both examine the predominance of certain metaphors in specific discourse contexts. These works suggest a shift away from analyses of semantic meaning of particular metaphors to an analysis of the pragmatic functions of metaphor in various domains of discourse. Charteris-Black examines metaphors and their distribution across various political and religious texts, and compares for example, the source domains of metaphors found in American presidential speeches with those found in British New Labour speeches, those found in the Bible with those found in the Koran. He argues that, in the discourse domains of religion and politics, metaphor plays an important role in realizing the persuasive function in texts, and because its persuasive function may not be immediately transparent, metaphor also plays an important role in developing ideologies. By contrast, Koller focuses exclusively on metaphors found in British and American business writing in magazines and newspapers, arguing that the major function of metaphor in written business texts is to capture and hold readers’ attention. She concentrates on how the prevailing metaphor of business as war masculinizes the discourse. Both authors use corpora of texts as a source of data for their analyses, and both combine quantitative techniques (for description) and qualitative techniques (for analysis). Koller, in particular, offers a useful discussion of some of the methodological issues related to corpus techniques and metaphor analysis: both advantages (concordance programs, which enable the researcher to view metaphors in their larger linguistic environment) as well as challenges (the subjective decision-making involved in classifying words or expressions in various semantic domains). Finally, both authors propose frameworks that blend cognitive semantic theory (associated with the work of George Lakoff and Mark Johnson), which accounts for how metaphors are interpreted, and critical discourse analysis, which offers potential in accounting for ‘why particular metaphors are chosen in specific discourse contexts’ (Charteris-Black, p. 243). Charteris-Black concludes his book with a succinct synthesis which interweaves his major findings with an argument for using this ‘new’ framework, which he calls ‘Critical Metaphor Analysis’.</p>
<p>In <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B9"><italic>Considering Counter-Narratives: Narrating, Resisting, Making Sense</italic></xref>, editors Michael Bamberg and Molly Andrews bring together six articles on counter-narratives, which they define broadly as ‘the stories which people tell and live which offer resistance, either implicitly or explicitly, to dominant cultural narratives’ (p. 1). The topics included in this volume range from the contestation of various master narratives of motherhood to those counter-narratives which call into question many ‘normal’ practices of production and consumption. The topics are presented dialogically, in that each of the six central contributions is followed by three to five individual commentaries from various scholars, as well as a response to those commentaries by the author of the original article.</p>
<p>Anja Janoschka's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B66"><italic>Web Advertising</italic></xref> presents ‘an interdisciplinary study of online advertising in three main areas: communication, language, and information structure’ (p. 3). Of particular interest is chapter 5, ‘The Language of Web Ads’, which addresses the linguistic strategies employed in web advertisements, or ‘hyperadvertising’. Because online advertising is a relatively new phenomenon, the author grounds her analysis in some of the more general literature on language in traditional advertising. She suggests that ‘Web ads try to create a conversational relationship with the user, imitating interpersonal communication’ (p. 132), and that this ‘conceptual orality’ renders the written forms more like speech. Indeed, the author provides examples of web ads which illustrate numerous linguistic features more typical of spoken registers, such as questions, imperatives, spatial/temporal/person deictics, ellipsis—typical of advertisements in general—as well as certain features which may be more specific to this particular genre (e.g. persuasive ‘trigger words’, such as <italic>free, save</italic>) or to the medium (e.g. the use of abbreviations, emoticons and acronyms). Elsewhere in the book (for example, chapter 6, ‘Hyperadvertising’) Janoschka illustrates how cohesion and coherence are achieved in these ads not only linguistically, but also visually: through repetition of text and image, typography and formatting.</p>
<p>Finally in this section we present relevant articles from journals. A number of articles examine pragmatics and discourse from a historical perspective. In ‘Historical Patterns for the Grammatical Marking of Stance: A Cross-Register Comparison. (<italic>JHPrag</italic> 5[2004] 107–36), Douglas Biber expands on prior diachronic studies of stance by not limiting the object of his analysis to modality but instead examining the three major grammatical systems used to express stance in English: modals and semi-modals, adverbials, and complement clause constructions. In his corpus-based analysis of the patterns of use of these features over three centuries, Biber finds a general increase in use of stance expressions in English over time, and identifies several register-specific preferences. In ‘Subjectivity, Intersubjectivity and the Historical Construction of Interlocutor Stance: From Stance Markers to Discourse Markers’, Susan Fitzmaurice provides a diachronic analysis of the expressive and interactive functions of a number of discourse markers (<italic>DisS</italic> 6[2004] 427–48). Thomas Kohnen examines the speech act of directives in ‘“Let mee bee so bold to request you to tell mee”: Constructions with “let me” and the History of English Directives’ (<italic>JHPrag</italic> 5[2004] 159–73). A special issue on ‘Letter Writing’, edited by Terttu Nevalainen and Sanna-Kaisa Tanskanen (<italic>JHPrag</italic> 5:ii[2004]) is dedicated to the examination of historical pragmatics in epistolary texts.</p>
<p><italic>Journal of Pragmatics</italic> this year included issues that focused on special topics such as ‘Metaphor” (issue 7), ‘Corpus Linguistics’ (issues 2 and 9), ‘Pragmatics of Discourse’ (issue 10), and ‘Polylogue’ or non-dyadic interactions (issue 1). Also noteworthy is Almut Josepha Koester's ‘Relational Sequences in Workplace Genres’, which examines the relationship between task-oriented talk and talk with a more relational orientation in workplace discourse (<italic>JPrag</italic> 8[2004] 1405–28).</p>
<p>Three of the four issues of the journal <italic>Discourse Studies</italic> were also dedicated to special topics this year. Issue 1, edited by Charles Antaki, Paul Ten Have, and Tom Koole, is dedicated to the memory of Hanneke Houtkoop-Steenstra, and includes papers whose broad topic is that of ‘scripted practices’. A number of these papers adopt a CA approach and include analyses of a range of phenomena, from medical diagnoses—for example Anita Pomerantz and E. Sean Rintel's ‘Practices for Reporting and Responding to Test Results during Medical Consultations: Enacting the Roles of Paternalism and Independent Expertise’ (<italic>DisS</italic> 1[2004] 9–26) and Douglas W. Maynard's ‘On Predicating a Diagnosis as an Attribute of a Person’ (<italic>DisS</italic> 1[2004] 53–76)—to turn-taking in standardized interviews—for example Hanne-Pernille Stax's ‘Paths to Precision: Probing Turn Format and Turn-Taking Problems in Standardized Interviews’ (<italic>DisS</italic> 1[2004] 77–94). Issue 2, edited by Elinor Ochs and Olga Solomon, centres around the theme ‘Discourse and Autism’. This issue brings together a number of fascinating studies which arose from a larger cross-disciplinary research project investigating the communicative skills of children diagnosed with either high-functioning autism or Asperger's syndrome. Issue 3, edited by Shoshana Blum-Kulka and Catherine Snow, focuses on ‘The Potential of Peer Talk’ and includes articles which approach child–child interaction from a number of different methodological and theoretical perspectives.</p>
<p>Finally, in 2004 <italic>Discourse & Society</italic> featured two special issues concerned with particularly timely topics: Issue 2–3, in which a number of authors address the discursive construction of the events related to 11 September, and issue 4, a special issue on genetic and genomic discourses.</p></sec>
<sec id="SEC12"><title>12. Stylistics</title>
<p>The year 2004 has seen the publication of numerous works in the field of stylistics, which shows that, far from waning in popularity among scholars, the discipline is not only extremely productive but is also making inroads into new and previously unexplored territory. As Paul Simpson points out in his excellent textbook <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B105"><italic>Stylistics: A Resource Book for Students</italic></xref>, the discipline has in recent years witnessed a flourishing of multiple sub-areas of study which show the tendency towards an interdisciplinary and multidisciplinary dimension of stylistic analysis. Thus, the influence of fields of study such as cognitive science and psychology, cultural studies and translation theory, as well as discourse studies, including critical discourse analysis and empirical studies, has led to the development of new lines of research such as cognitive stylistics, corpus stylistics, critical discourse stylistics, and, more recently, what Kirstin Malmkjaer (see below) has called translational stylistics.</p>
<p>Several publications, including Simpson's, also approach the pedagogical applications and implications of the methods of stylistic analysis, which is not surprising given the practical nature of its approach to texts. Indeed, Paul Simpson's <italic>Stylistics</italic> is perhaps the best example of the good health of the discipline. It is a much-needed introductory coursebook, which, like previous works by this author, strikes the balance between a rigorous presentation of theoretical topics and a reader-friendly and entertaining style. <italic>Stylistics</italic> is conceived as a resource book which will enable students to become familiar with the main areas of study and methods of stylistic analysis and will provide them with the necessary tools to analyse any kind of text on their own. The topics dealt with include classical themes, such as grammar and style, narrative stylistics, transitivity and point of view, together with more recent developments such as cognitive stylistics, metaphor and metonymy. Like the rest of the volumes in the series, this one is characterized by an innovative organization of the contents, which can be followed sequentially from beginning to end, or cross-referentially, by selecting a specific trend and following it through each of the main chapters or sections. By opting for the linear approach, the reader first obtains, in section A, a complete picture of the most relevant and up-to-date issues in stylistic analysis. In section B, the reader is offered the possibility of reading further on these issues by analysing research developments and further illustrations of those issues. The concepts discussed previously can then be put into practice for an exploration of a variety of texts by means of a guided hands-on approach in section C. Texts discussed include examples of a great variety of classical and contemporary authors. The last section, D, provides complementary readings from a selection of writings by reputed stylisticians covering the issues discussed in the volume.</p>
<p>A general overview of the publications of 2004 also shows an interesting and thought-provoking relationship between trends originating in the traditions of linguistics and literary studies, providing new insights into the points of overlap, convergence and also divergence of these two main sources of research in stylistics. One particularly attractive dimension of this parallel development in linguistic and literary studies is the approach to creativity in language and literature touched on by Ronald Carter in <italic>Language and Creativity</italic> and by Derek Attridge in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6"><italic>The Singularity of Literature</italic></xref>. The publication of these works has given rise to an extremely interesting debate on the nature of creativity and related concepts such as originality, inventiveness and art. The debate has continued in the pages of the last issue of <italic>Language and Literature</italic> for the year 2005, which includes a review article of both works by Rob Pope and replies by both Carter and Attridge.</p>
<p>Carter's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B18"><italic>Language and Creativity: The Art of Common Talk</italic></xref>—which is a pleasure to read—challenges the traditional view of creativity as an individual and exceptional property of literary texts and of gifted people, and presents a view of creativity as a property of everyday language use and of all speakers. Carter expands on the assumption put forward by cognitive linguists that certain uses of language which have traditionally been considered literary are recurrently found in everyday exchanges. In this way, he argues, textual features and figures of speech, including metaphor, metonymy, simile, irony and hyperbole, parallelism and verbal play among others, very often arise as a result of collaborative dialogue and with different social purposes, such as feeling pleasure, expressing affectivity or displaying identity. Two crucial observations are stressed in this approach: first, the presence of the linguistic features mentioned above is not an ornamental embellishment, but a motivated choice of speakers in specific contexts of interaction, and, secondly, this view of creativity is firmly grounded on a conception of language use as dependent on the psychological and socio-cultural factors of context which surround speech events. Creativity understood in these terms thus goes beyond the narrower conception of literariness as a deviation from a linguistic norm and stresses the importance of the affective and interpersonal dimensions of language use, rather than focusing on the merely ideational functions. One further major asset of this work is the corpus-based analysis of real data, which consist of spontaneous conversations from different contexts, ranging from casual conversation between friends to doctor–patient interactions and web chats, drawn from the CANCODE corpus of spoken language.</p>
<p>Attridge's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B6"><italic>The Singularity of Literature</italic></xref> explores the nature of verbal creation in the literary work understood as a high expression of linguistic creative potential. Unlike Carter, who focuses on the creativity of everyday normal language, Attridge is concerned with the singular nature of literary language as a creative act, thus providing a narrower focus on the phenomenon of creativity, which he approaches as artistic invention. Attridge thus emphasizes what he sees as a necessary relation between the concept of creation and concepts such as originality and inventiveness. A point of convergence with Carter is that the act of creation is seen as a process of dialogue with the other, the reader, who does not just passively reconstruct the text but is actively engaged in its re-creation. He also stresses the importance of understanding the act of creation as a process which does not take place in a void but is conditioned by cultural-historical factors, and which achieves particular significance in the dimension of the performance and staging of the literary work, a view which further situates the literary work as something that acquires meaning in specific contexts of production and reception. Attridge is concerned with exploring the capacity of works of art to provide a feeling of freshness and inventiveness in the audience even when they are no longer new, and on how literary experiences come to form part of our cultural background. Further issues touched on are the relation between literature and ethics and the definition of literature as an open-ended, ongoing process. At this point it is worth mentioning that Derek Attridge's now well-known <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B5"><italic>Peculiar Language: Literature as Difference from the Renaissance to James Joyce</italic></xref> has seen its second edition in the New Critical Idiom series.</p>
<p>The relation between literature and ethics is also the focus of a special issue of <italic>Poetics Today</italic> (25:iv[2004]), with Michael Eskin as guest editor. Eskin also contributes an article entitled ‘On Literature and Ethics’ (<italic>PoT</italic> 25[2004] 573–94), in which he discusses the reasons for the exemplary moral role ascribed to literary works. This issue will be of interest to researchers in stylistics because particular emphasis is placed on the crucial role of language, style and rhetoric as the points of convergence between ethics and aesthetics. Indeed, this is the main argument of Kathrin Stengel's article, ‘Ethics as Style: Wittgenstein's Aesthetic Ethics and Ethical Aesthetics’ (<italic>PoT</italic> 25[2004] 609–25). Robert Eaglestone, in ‘One and the Same? Ethics, Aesthetics, and Truth’ (<italic>PoT</italic> 2[2004] 595–608), also takes as point of departure Wittgenstein's remark that ‘ethics and aesthetics are all the same’, in order to defend the important role played by the recent movement called the ‘New Aestheticism’ in the understanding of the relationship between literature and ethics. The second and third sections of this issue include articles which deal with applications to the exploration of specific literary works. The relation between literary ethics and linguistic expression is explored by contributions such as those by James Phelan and Derek Attridge. In ‘Rhetorical Literary Ethics and Lyric Narrative: Robert Frost's “Home Burial”’ (<italic>PoT</italic> 25[2004] 627–51), Phelan defends a particular model of rhetorical ethics which expresses the dynamic interaction of the ethical dimensions of author and audience. He uses this approach to account for the rhetorical dynamics of lyric narrative in general and of Robert Frost's ‘Home Burial’ in particular. Attridge, in ‘Ethical Modernism: Servants and Others in J.M. Coetzee's Early Fiction’ (<italic>PoT</italic> 25[2004] 653–71), discusses the ethics of otherness in Coetzee's works, and argues that these fictions display powerful modernist techniques which undermine conventional representations of servants, and are used to involve the reader ethically. Martha Craven Nussbaum completes the issue with ‘ “Faint with Secret Knowledge”: Love and Vision in Murdoch's <italic>The Black Prince</italic>’ (<italic>PoT</italic> 25[2004] 689–711), in which she explores the relationship between Iris Murdoch's philosophical thoughts about love and the complexities of her fiction.</p>
<p>Continuing with publications which are framed in the literary tradition, the first issue of <italic>Poetics Today</italic> of 2004, with James A. Knapp and Jeffrey Pence as guest editors, reflects the tendency to approach new genres. This issue focuses on the relation between theory and text, ‘Between Thing and Theory: Or the Reflective Turn’, and particularly on the nature of theory. It includes three articles which propose new theoretical approaches to the analysis and interpretation of specific literary genres. Thus, Sonja Laden's ‘Recuperating the Archive: Anecdotal Evidence and Questions of “Historical Realism” ’ (<italic>PoT</italic> 25[2004] 1–28), discusses the crucial role played by anecdotal evidence in new historicist writing as a type of discourse with literary features. Jeffrey Pence, in ‘Cinema of the Sublime: Theorising the Ineffable’ (<italic>PoT</italic> 25[2004] 31–66), proposes an open critical approach to account for the genre of spiritual films which explore questions of being and the limits of the knowable, such as Lars von Trier's ‘Breaking the Waves’. In ‘Print Is Flat, Code Is Deep: The Importance of Media-Specific Analysis’ (<italic>PoT</italic> 25[2004] 67–90), N. Katherine Hayles defends the need and relevance of media-specific analysis and goes on to discuss the specificities of electronic hypertext as a new medium through which texts are instantiated.</p>
<p>Among the works which approach new genres in linguistic stylistics, it is worth mentioning Guy Cook's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B27"><italic>Genetically Modified Language</italic></xref>, as well as Almut Koester's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B72"><italic>The Language of Work</italic></xref> and Mark Boardman's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13"><italic>The Language of Websites</italic></xref>. Cook's work in recent years is a good example of the broadening of interests in stylistics from the analysis of literature to other kinds of discourse. In <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B27"><italic>Genetically Modified Language</italic></xref> he uses the methods of stylistic analysis and critical discourse analysis in order to explore how language is used by the participants in the GM debate. The volume is organized into three sections, each of which discuss three different aspects of the GM debate. It provides a critical view of the way in which GM products are defended by politicians, multinational companies and the media, among others, and of the way in which public opinion is led to believe in the beneficial aspects of GM food. The focus on the linguistic and more specifically stylistic analysis of the debate is manifested in the discussion of the language employed to shape it, with particular emphasis on the metaphors, collocations, key phrases and lexical choices made. Louise Mullany, in ‘ “Become the Man that Women Desire”: Gender Identities and Dominant Discourses in Email Advertising Language’ (<italic>L&L</italic> 13[2004] 291–305), also approaches a new genre from a critical perspective. She discusses how email advertisements reproduce and intensify dominant gender discourses of masculinity and femininity.</p>
<p>New genres have also been approached from a pedagogical perspective, as is seen by the publication of two new volumes in the productive Intertext series. In both works the instruments of stylistic analysis are applied to the analysis of two relatively new areas, with numerous activities; no doubt they will be useful as resource books for teaching and self-learning in discourse and stylistics classes. In the first, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B72"><italic>The Language of Work</italic></xref>, Almut Koester analyses the characteristics of the language used in the workplace and devotes chapters to the world of work, written and spoken workplace genres, relationships at work and the process of entering the job market. Emphasis is placed on the relationship between language use and contextual factors, which include interpersonal relationships and factors of politeness, power and face, as well as procedural processes involved in language use at the workplace, such as negotiation and problem-solving. Interesting observations and activities are carried out in order to develop students’ awareness of the idiosyncrasies of talk at work as an asymmetrical, goal-oriented exchange, and of the intricacies of specific written genres. In the other volume, <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B13"><italic>The Language of Websites</italic></xref>, Mark Boardman guides the student in a virtual tour of the semiotic and linguistic characteristics of website language, with chapters on the physical context of websites, institutional websites, personal websites, multimedia content of websites, searching the web, and raw materials and web writing. This textbook serves the double purpose of introducing the reader to the world and the language of the web, and developing the student's awareness of specific semiotic and linguistic choices in websites.</p>
<p>Pedagogical issues are also touched on in articles produced in 2004. In ‘Reconstructing the Deconstructed: Hypertext and Literary Education’ (<italic>L&L</italic> 13[2004] 307–33), Astrid Ensslin proposes that literary hypertext, as incarnation of postmodern literature, has considerable educational potential in subject-centred pedagogy. Robert Cockroft, in ‘Putting Aristotle to the Proof: Style, Substance and the EPL Group’ (<italic>L&L</italic> 13[2004] 195–215), revises classical rhetorical concepts such as ethos, logos and pathos under the more recent light of cognitive linguistics, in order to propose a pedagogical method for the learning and use of these concepts.</p>
<p>Cognitive stylistics is no longer an emerging field of study but a well established and extremely prolific area of research, which has seen the publication of numerous articles, including studies on iconicity, metaphor and metonymy, text world theory, reading processes, and communication theory. Volume 33 of the <italic>Journal of Literary Semantics</italic> is a good example of the kind of work carried out in this area. Ming-Yu Tseng's ‘Iconicity and Power: Examples from Wordsworth and Zen discourse’ (<italic>JLS</italic> 33[2004] 1–24), provides a refreshing view of Wordsworth's poetry by discussing it in the light of the <italic>koan</italic> and investigating how iconic uses of language embody verbal energy. Jean Witherow, in ‘Anger and Heat: A Study of Figurative Language’ (<italic>JLS</italic> 33[2004] 71–92), provides an interesting analysis of the way in which metaphors and metonymies of anger and heat are used in a conversation between friends. In ‘Cognitive Processes in Text Interpretation: Rereading Bakhtin’ (<italic>JLS</italic> 33[2004] 25–40), Tahir Wood argues that some of the central concepts developed by cognitive science in recent decades were anticipated by Bakhtin. Alan Bailin, in ‘Worlds in Worlds: Assigning Inferences to Subdomains’ (<italic>JLS</italic> 33[2004] 93–109), proposes a framework to account for the way in which we draw inferences in order to process reference to subdomains of text worlds and to understand more complex phenomena such as metaphor. Text world theory is also addressed by David L. Hoover in ‘Altered Texts, Altered Worlds, Altered Styles’ (<italic>L&L</italic> 13[2004] 99–118). In this article he explores text alteration in Henry James's <italic>The Ambassadors</italic> and William Golding's <italic>The Inheritors</italic> as a technique which helps explain how text worlds and mind style are created. In ‘Communication and Levels of Meaning’ (<italic>JLS</italic> 33[2004] 41–69), Oliver Simonin presents a framework based on Relevance Theory in order to account for certain hidden aspects of literary communication, such as, for example, the parable, and to explain how they are superimposed on narrative. David S. Miall, in ‘Episode Structures in Literary Narratives’ (<italic>JLS</italic> 33[2004] 111–29), explores the unfolding of the text as it is read by focusing on the episode as a relevant unit when reading literary texts. Miall presents the results of an empirical study of readers’ responses to a short story with evidence for episodes in readers’ responses.</p>
<p>The study of reading processes is the focus of the special issue of <italic>Poetics Today</italic> (25:ii[2004]), ‘How Literature Enters Life’, with Els Andringa and Margrit Schreier as guest editors. It addresses the influence and effect of fiction on aspects of real life, and complements a collection of articles on the relationship between fiction and historical reality (<italic>Critical Reconstructions: The Relationship of Fiction and Life</italic> [1994], edited by Robert M. Polhemus and Roger B. Henkle). Don Kuiken, David Miall and Shelley Sikora's contribution, ‘Forms of Self-Implication in Literary Reading’ (<italic>PoT</italic> 25[2004] 171–203), is an empirical study on what the authors call ‘expressive enactment’, a process in which the reader becomes identified with some aspect of the world of the text, usually the narrator or a character. This research suggests that expressive enactment is a form of reading that penetrates and alters a reader's understanding of everyday life, especially following a personal crisis. Els Andringa, in ‘The Interface between Fiction and Life: Patterns of Identification in Reading Autobiographies’ (<italic>PoT</italic> 25[2004] 205–40), shows how reading experiences create connections between fiction and life, more specifically on how these experiences vary from childhood and adolescence to young adulthood and on how gender determines differences in reading styles and the identification experiences of readers. Richard Gerrig and David Rapp's ‘Psychological Processes Underlying Literary Impact’ (<italic>PoT</italic> 25[2004] 265–81) explores the effects of narrative on people's everyday lives and supports the claim that readers may draw on their literary experiences for evidence they can apply in their own real-life experiences. Two contributions discuss the effects of films on viewers. Thus, Joanne Cantor, in ‘I’ll Never Have a Clown in My House: Why Movie Horror Lives On’ (<italic>PoT</italic> 25[2004] 283–304), explores the lingering effects of frightening media, including films, together with news and documentaries, on viewers, and discusses the possible reasons for these lingering effects in associated real-life situations. Margit Schreier's ‘ “Please help me; all I want to know is: is it real or not?”: How Recipients View the Reality Status of <italic>The Blair Witch Project</italic>’ (<italic>PoT</italic> 25[2004] 305–34) discusses how viewers evaluate the status of this film as fiction or non-fiction, and how a novel, unfamiliar hybrid genre such as the one discussed may confuse recipients and thus temporarily provide a way for ‘fiction’ to enter ‘life’. The issue is completed by two articles which explore broader cultural reading experiences. Thus, Elizabeth Long, in ‘Literature as a Spur to Collective Action: The Diverse Perspectives of Nineteenth-Century and Twentieth-Century Reading Groups’ (<italic>PoT</italic> 25[2004] 335–59), discusses the way in which white women's reading groups in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries in Houston, Texas, provided different social and cultural frames for the influence of literature in everyday individual and collective life. Ann Rigney, in ‘Portable Monuments: Literature, Cultural Memory, and the Case of Jeanie Deans’ (<italic>PoT</italic> 25[2004] 361–96), looks at how literary texts are an integral part of cultural memory by analysing the genesis, composition and long-term reception of Walter Scott's <italic>The Heart of Midlothian</italic>.</p>
<p>A further area of study which has seen the publication of challenging works is corpus stylistics, which has benefited enormously from the deep concern manifested in recent works to go beyond mere quantitative analysis and combine in artful and insightful ways qualitative and quantitative methods. The new Routledge series Advances in Corpus Linguistics, edited by Anthony McEnery and Michael Hoey, includes Elena Semino and Mick Short's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B102"><italic>Corpus Stylistics: Speech, Writing and Thought Presentation in a Corpus of English Writing</italic></xref>, which presents the results of research on discourse presentation starting in 1994 and still ongoing. It is a rigorous and systematic study of speech presentation types in four genres, narrative fiction, news reports, biographies and autobiographies, including quality and popular types of the genres selected—a welcome innovation with respect to previous studies on discourse presentation. One of the main objectives of the study was to apply and revise Leech and Short's discourse presentation model so as to test its adequacy in accounting for non-fictional discourse, a further innovation in studies of discourse presentation. The revision of Leech and Short's model has led the authors to add one new scale of writing presentation—in addition to speech and thought presentation—and to add one new category to each of the three scales and several new subcategories. But possibly the greatest contribution of their study, and the most innovative, has to do with the creation of a complex annotation system, used to tag the whole of a corpus of textual extracts. This annotation system allows the authors not only to discriminate carefully between a variety of discourse presentation subtypes, but also to account for phenomena which traditionally have not been within the scope of quantitative analysis, such as ambiguous categories and the tracking of characters in relation to the presence of discourse presentation categories.</p>
<p>Masahiro Hori, in <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B64"><italic>Investigating Dickens’ Style: A Collocational Analysis</italic></xref>, is a further successful endeavour to combine quantitative and qualitative analyses which provides insights into Dickens's works. Hori uses a 4.6 million-word corpus of Dickens's works in order to analyse idiosyncratic patterns of collocation and to explore what these collocations reveal about narrative, character, and narrators’ mindstyle. Special attention is paid to the analysis of two narratives from <italic>Bleak House</italic>. Hori distinguishes between familiar and creative collocations and focuses on the presence of creative collocations in Dickens as an indication of his predilections, idiosyncrasies and uniqueness. High and low frequencies of familiar collocations are also analysed as they provide information about Dickens's stylistic preferences and other features which acquire significance in the context of his work.</p>
<p>An attractive publication in 2004 was the first issue of <italic>Language and Literature</italic> 13, a special issue on ‘Style and Translation’. In the introduction (<italic>L&L</italic> 13[2004] 9–11), guest editor Jean Boase Beier states that the aim of the issue is to bring to the foreground the contributions that stylistics can provide to translation studies by focusing on the relation between style and translation. It addresses issues such as the style of the source text and how it can be conveyed by the translator, the notion of style as choice and how this affects translation, the style of a group as opposed to the style of an individual, the voice of the translator in the translated text, the need of a special stylistics of the translated text, and the role of cognitive notions such as inferred translator, implied author and state of mind. The articles contributed are an eclectic mix of approaches dealing with both literary and linguistic concepts. The first two articles consider translation into English, the rest translation from English. Kirsten Malmkjaer's ‘Translational Stylistics: Dulcken's Translations of Hans Christian Andersen’ (<italic>L&L</italic> 13[2004] 13–24) presents an approach she defines as translational stylistics, which combines an analysis of source and target texts in order to account adequately for stylistic choices in the translation into English of Andersen's fairy-tales. Jean Boase Beier, in ‘Knowing and Not Knowing: Style and Intention in a Holocaust Poem’ (<italic>L&L</italic> 13[2004] 25–35), explores the translation of a German poem into English by focusing on how the intended ambiguity of the original is rendered in the translation, and on how the intended effects can be accounted for in terms of relevance-theoretic notions. In ‘ “Slainte, I goes, and he says his word”: <italic>Morvern Callar</italic> Undergoes the Trial of the Foreign’ (<italic>L&L</italic> 13[2004] 55–71), Catherine Claire Thomson discusses ethics and ethnicity within translation studies and presents a framework of ethno-stylistics in order to discuss the Danish translation of <italic>Morvern Callar</italic>. Josep Marco's ‘Translating Style and Styles of Translating: Henry James and Edgar Allan Poe in Catalan’ (<italic>L&L</italic> 13[2004] 73–90) proposes a framework for the analysis of the relationship between style and translation based on systemic linguistics, combining an awareness for the context of culture and for the linguistic choices in the lexico-grammar. Finally, in ‘Hearing Voices: James Joyce, Narrative Voice and Minority Translation’ (<italic>L&L</italic> 13[2004] 37–54), Carmen Millán Varela explores the issue of voice in translated texts and focuses on the translation of James Joyce into Catalan.</p>
<p>A further area of study which continues giving rise to numerous high-quality publications is what Joanna Gavins, in her ‘Year's Work of Stylistics: 2004’ (<italic>L&L</italic> 14[2005] 397–408), refers to as ‘steam stylistics’, that is, publications which do not fall within the more recent sub-areas of research mentioned so far but which provide new insights into classical topics of stylistic analysis, such as narratology and point of view, or the analysis of lexico-grammatical features in literary texts. Narratology is definitely a popular field of research, with a collection of articles edited by John Pier, a special issue in <italic>Style</italic> and several articles in various journals. Pier, ed., <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B90"><italic>The Dynamics of Narrative Form: Studies in Anglo-American Narratology</italic></xref>, originates from the narratology panel at the ESSE conference held in Strasbourg in 2002. It provides a complete view of recent trends in narratology, with proposals ranging from the analysis of focalization, reliable and unreliable narrations, and sequential ordering of narrative texts, among others. Worth mentioning is Hilary P. Dannenberg's ‘Ontological Plotting: Narrative as a Multiplicity of Temporal Dimension’, in which the author approaches the development of plot from the perspective of possible world theory, and Michael Toolan's ‘Graded Expectations: On the Textual and Structural Shaping of Readers’, in which he discusses how narrative moves readers forward through the narration and how readers experience this. Also in this volume is a discussion of the seldom studied issue of how narrative is overheard by unaddressed readers, in Ángel García Landa's ‘Overhearing Narrative’.</p>
<p><italic>Style</italic> devotes a special issue (38:ii[2004]) to narratology, with a focus on articles produced by German linguists, as explained by guest editors Monika Fludernik and Uri Margolin in the introduction. The articles collected include several which focus on English texts, and in broad terms the issues are relevant to English studies both because of their general interest and their application to the analysis of specific texts. Indeed, most readers of stylistics will be familiar with the works of Monika Fludernik and other German narratologists. The role of the reader is specifically addressed in two contributions. Paul Goetsch argues, in ‘Reader Figures in Narrative’ (<italic>Style</italic> 38[2004] 188–202), that a distinction between fictive (extradiegetic) readers and fictional (intradiegetic) is necessary for the control and illustration of readers’ responses. Franz Stanzel, in ‘The “Complementary Story”: Outline of a Reader-Oriented Theory of the Novel’ (<italic>Style</italic> 38[2004] 203–20) brings to the foreground the view of the reader as an active participant by presenting a view of reading as one in which a ‘complementary story’ is created. The process of figuring forth, or creation of characters as embodied individuals in the collective and individual memory, is explored by Herbert Grabes in ‘Turning Words on the Page into “Real” People’ (<italic>Style</italic> 38[2004] 221–35), in which he uses analytical tools of reception theory. Vera Nünning, in ‘Unreliable Narrator and the Historical Variability of Values and Norms: <italic>The Vicar of Wakefield</italic> as a Test Case of a Cultural-Historical Narratology’ (<italic>Style</italic> 38[2004] 236–52), discusses the concept of narrator (un)reliability by analysing the history of the reception of Oliver Goldsmith's novel, in order to argue that the perception of reliability is culturally and historically variable. This issue is rounded off by Jan Alber's ‘Bibliography of German Narratology’ (<italic>Style</italic> 38[2004] 253–72), which will be of interest to scholars of English Studies because it includes an updated selection of works on narratology published not only in German but also in English and on English works.</p>
<p>Evidence of the influence of Hallidayan Systemic Linguistics as a productive framework for stylistic analysis is once more supplied by the publication of Nina Norgaard's <xref ref-type="bibr" rid="B89"><italic>Systemic Functional Linguistic and Literary Analysis: A Hallidayan Approach to Joyce, a Joycean Approach to Halliday</italic></xref>. The author offers an insightful analysis and interpretation of selected texts by Joyce by focusing on the relations between text and context, language, situation and culture. The analysis centres on the discussion of aspects of transitivity, mood and textual meaning in Joyce's ‘Two Gallants’ and on aspects of cohesion, genre and interpersonal relations in <italic>Ulysses</italic>. This volume no doubt illustrates that the Hallidayan model is a powerful tool enabling the reader and critic to provide insights regarding the relationship between language and literariness in complex texts such as those of Joyce.</p>
<p>The role of lexico-grammatical items in narrative is further dealt with by Violeta Sotirova, and Yinglin Ji and Dan Shen. In ‘Connectives in Free Indirect Style: Continuity or Shift?’ (<italic>L&L</italic> 13[2004] 216–34), Sotirova explores the role of utterance initial connectives as indicators of shifts in point of view in selected passages from D.H. Lawrence, while Ji and Shen show, in ‘Transitivity and Mental Transformation: Sheila Watson's <italic>The Double Hook</italic>’ (<italic>L&L</italic> 13[2004] 335–48), how an analysis of transitivity relations reflects the process of mental transformation of the protagonist of Sheila Watson's work. Other articles provide new insights into aspects of the narrative of prose writers. Hilary Dannenberg's ‘A Poetics of Coincidence in Narrative Fiction’ (<italic>PoT</italic> 25[2004] 399–436) provides a new perspective on the analysis of the coincidence plot by analysing the way in which this kind of plot is developed in modernist and postmodernist fictions. Terence Patrick Murphy explores unmarked and marked ordering of narrative time in ‘James Joyce and Narrative Territory: The Distinct Functions of <italic>Lost Time</italic> in “An Encounter” and “The Sisters” ’ (<italic>JLS</italic> 33[2004] 131–54), putting forward a theory of narrative territory which includes the lexico-grammatical signalling of narrative discourse in Joyce. Susann Cokal, in ‘Expression in a Diffuse Landscape: Contexts for Jeannette Winterson's Lyricism’ (<italic>Style</italic> 38[2004] 16–37), examines the relationship between content and form in the work of Jeannette Winterson focusing on her revision of Romantic tropes through lyricism and metaphor. A particularly interesting article is that by Juan Li, who in ‘Pidgin and Code-Switching: Linguistic Identity and Multicultural Consciousness in Maxine Hong Kingston's “Tripmaster Monkey” ’ (<italic>L&L</italic> 13[2004] 269–87) explores code-switching and the use of pidgin expressions by Chinese Americans in this story.</p>
<p>Poetry is discussed by Maria Casas in ‘A Rose Is a Rose Is a Hero Is a Horse: Naming and Referentiality in the Poetry of Robert Kroetsch and Gertrude Stein’ (<italic>L&L</italic> 13[2004] 119–37), in which she compares and contrasts the works of Kroetsch and Stein, focusing on how relations between signifier and signified are represented differently in their poetry. Ernesto Suárez Toste's ‘ “The Tension is in the Concept”: John Ashbery's Surrealism’ (<italic>Style</italic> 38[2004] 1–15), explores the recurrence of surrealist features in John Ashbery's poetry and analyses them by paying special attention to his adoption of metaphysical imagery from the surrealist Italian painter Giorgio de Chirico. Peter Cosgrove, in ‘Hopkins's “The Windhover”: Not Ideas about the Thing but the Thing Itself’ (<italic>PoT</italic> 25[2004] 437–64), analyses the problems of allegorical readings and proposes a method of reading poetry, using as an illustration Gerard Manley Hopkins's complex allegorical poem. Bo Pettersson, in ‘The Common Ground: <italic>Sensus Communis</italic>, Humor and the Interpretation of Comic Poetry’ (<italic>JLS</italic> 33[2004] 155–67), explores how the combination of satirical and literary techniques in Nash's poetry is crucial for the creation of a comic effect and of often unresolved incongruities.</p>
<p>Drama seems to attract fewer articles than other genres, but those produced are worth reading precisely because of the attempt to provide new approaches to the analysis of dramatic works. For example, Dan McIntyre argues, in ‘Point of View in Drama: A Socio-Pragmatic Analysis of Dennis Potter's <italic>Brimstone and Treacle</italic>’ (<italic>L&L</italic> 13[2004] 139–50), that linguistic indicators of point of view are found in dramatic texts. Ingo Berensmeyer, in ‘ “Twofold Vibration”: Samuel Beckett's Laws of Form’ (<italic>PoT</italic> 25[2004] 465–95), aims at explaining the dynamics of form generation in Beckett's writings by testing the adequacy of a new approach to text generation based on systems theory and second-order cybernetics. The discussion draws on a wide range of Beckett's writings, from plays to prose and critical writings.</p>
<p>Geoff Hall and Joanna Gavins are the authors of ‘The Year's Work in Stylistics: 2003’ (<italic>L&L</italic> 13[2004] 349–64), an invaluable reading for the most relevant publications written on stylistics in the year 2003.</p></sec>
</body>
<back>
<ref-list><title>Books Reviewed</title>
<ref id="B1"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Aarts</surname><given-names>Bas</given-names></name><name><surname>Denison</surname><given-names>David</given-names></name><name><surname>Keizer</surname><given-names>Evelien</given-names></name><name><surname>Popova</surname><given-names>Gergana</given-names></name></person-group><source>Fuzzy Grammar</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>OUP</publisher-name><comment>pp. x + 536. hb £75 ISBN 0 1992 6256 X, pb £26 ISBN 0 1992 6257 8</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B2"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Adejunmobi</surname><given-names>Moradewun</given-names></name></person-group><source>Vernacular Palaver: Imaginations of the Local and Non-Local Languages in West Africa</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>MlM</publisher-name><comment>pp. xi + 224. hb £59.95 ISBN 1 8535 9773 2, pb £24.95 ISBN 1 8535 9772 4</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B3"><nlm-citation citation-type="confproc"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Aijmer</surname><given-names>Karin</given-names></name><name><surname>Altenberg</surname><given-names>Bengt</given-names></name></person-group><year>2004</year><conf-name>Advances in Corpus Linguistics: Papers from the 23rd International Conference on English Language Research on Computerized Corpora (ICAME 23)</conf-name><conf-date>22–26 May 2002</conf-date><conf-loc>Göteborg</conf-loc><publisher-name>Rodopi</publisher-name><comment>pp. vii + 419. €86 ISBN 9 0420 1741 4</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B4"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Aitchison</surname><given-names>Jean</given-names></name><name><surname>Lewis</surname><given-names>Diana M</given-names></name></person-group><source>New Media Language</source><year>2003</year><publisher-name>Routledge</publisher-name><comment>pp. xiii + 209. hb £55 ISBN 0 4152 8303 5, pb £16.99 ISBN 0 4152 8304 3</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B5"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Attridge</surname><given-names>Derek</given-names></name></person-group><source>Peculiar Language: Literature as Difference from the Renaissance to James Joyce</source><year>2004</year><edition>2nd edn</edition><publisher-name>Routledge</publisher-name><comment>New Critical Idiom. pp. xv + 262. £65 ISBN 0 4153 4057 8</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B6"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Attridge</surname><given-names>Derek</given-names></name></person-group><source>The Singularity of Literature</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Routledge</publisher-name><comment>pp. 192. £50 ISBN 0 4153 3592 2</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B7"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Austin</surname><given-names>Jennifer R</given-names></name><name><surname>Engelberg</surname><given-names>Stefan</given-names></name><name><surname>Rauh</surname><given-names>Gisa</given-names></name></person-group><source>Adverbials: The Interplay between Meaning, Context, and Syntactic Structure</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Benjamins</publisher-name><comment>pp. viii + 343. €135 ISBN 9 0272 2794 2, $162 ISBN 1 5881 1546 1</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B8"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Baldauf</surname><given-names>Richard B</given-names><suffix>Jr</suffix></name><name><surname>Kaplan</surname><given-names>Robert B</given-names></name></person-group><source>Language Planning and Policy in Africa, vol. 1: Botswana, Malawi, Mozambique and South Africa</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>MlM</publisher-name><comment>pp. 280. £29.95 ($59.95) ISBN 1 8535 9725 2</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B9"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Bamberg</surname><given-names>Michael</given-names></name><name><surname>Andrews</surname><given-names>Molly</given-names></name></person-group><source>Considering Counter-Narratives: Narrating, Resisting, Making Sense</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Benjamins</publisher-name><comment>pp. x + 381. $126 (€105) ISBN 1 5881 1542 9</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B10"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Barker</surname><given-names>J Stephen</given-names></name></person-group><source>Renewing Meaning: A Speech-Act Theoretic Approach</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>OUP</publisher-name><comment>pp. xi + 325. £45 ISBN 0 1992 6366 3</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B11"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Beal</surname><given-names>Joan C</given-names></name></person-group><source>English in Modern Times 1700–1945</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Arnold</publisher-name><comment>pp. xvi + 264. pb £16.99 ISBN 0 3407 6117 2</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B12"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Bender</surname><given-names>Margaret</given-names></name></person-group><source>Linguistic Diversity in the South: Changing Codes, Practices, and Ideology</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>UGeoP</publisher-name><comment>pp. vii + 141. £31.50 ISBN 0 8203 2585 6</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B13"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Boardman</surname><given-names>Mark</given-names></name></person-group><source>The Language of Websites</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Routledge</publisher-name><comment>pp. xiii + 136. £45 ISBN 0 4153 2853 5</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B14"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Breul</surname><given-names>Carsten</given-names></name></person-group><source>Focus Structure in Generative Grammar: An Integrated Syntactic, Semantic and Intonational Approach</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Benjamins</publisher-name><comment>pp. x + 430. €130 ISBN 9 0272 2792 6, $156 ISBN 1 5881 1503 8</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B15"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Bright</surname><given-names>William</given-names></name></person-group><source>Native American Placenames of the United States</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>UOklaP</publisher-name><comment>pp. xviii + 600. $59.95 ISBN 0 8061 3576 X</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B16"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Butler</surname><given-names>Alastair</given-names></name><name><surname>Mathieu</surname><given-names>Eric</given-names></name></person-group><source>The Syntax and Semantics of Split Constructions: A Comparative Study</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Macmillan</publisher-name><comment>pp. xii + 223. £52.50 ISBN 1 4039 2112 1</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B17"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Carr</surname><given-names>Philip</given-names></name><name><surname>Durand</surname><given-names>Jacques</given-names></name><name><surname>Ewen</surname><given-names>Colin J</given-names></name></person-group><source>Headhood, Elements, Specification and Contrastivity</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Benjamins</publisher-name><series>CILT 259</series><comment>pp. xxviii + 430. €110 ISBN 9 0272 4773 0</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B18"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Carter</surname><given-names>Ronald</given-names></name></person-group><source>Language and Creativity: The Art of Common Talk</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Routledge</publisher-name><comment>pp. xiii + 255. hb £55 ISBN 0 4152 3448 4, pb £15.90 ISBN 0 4152 3449 2</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B19"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Charteris-Black</surname><given-names>Jonathan</given-names></name></person-group><source>Corpus Approaches to Critical Metaphor Analysis</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Palgrave Macmillan</publisher-name><comment>pp. xv + 263. £60 ISBN 1 4039 3292 1</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B20"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Coates</surname><given-names>Jennifer</given-names></name></person-group><source>Women, Men and Language: A Sociolinguistic Account of Gender Differences in Language.</source><year>2004</year><edition>3rd edn</edition><publisher-name>Pearson</publisher-name><comment>pp. xi + 245. pb £26.95 ISBN 0 5827 7186 2</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B21"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Coene</surname><given-names>Martine</given-names></name><name><surname>Yves</surname><given-names>D'Hulst</given-names></name></person-group><source>From NP to DP, vol. 1: The Syntax and Semantics of Noun Phrases; vol. 2: The Expression of Possession in Noun Phrases</source><year>2003</year><publisher-name>Benjamins</publisher-name><comment>pp. vi + 359;. pp viii + 291. €223 ($268) vol. 1 ISBN 9 0272 2776 4 (Europe), ISBN 1 5881 1301 9 (US); vol. 2 ISBN 9 0272 2777 2 (Europe), ISBN 1 5881 1305 1 (US); set ISBN 9 0272 2782 9 (Europe), ISBN 1 5881 1319 1 (US)</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B22"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Coleman</surname><given-names>Julie</given-names></name></person-group><source>A History of Cant and Slang Dictionaries, vol. 1: 1567–1784</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>OUP</publisher-name><comment>pp. xii + 259. £47 ISBN 0 1992 5471 0</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B23"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Coleman</surname><given-names>Julie</given-names></name></person-group><source>A History of Cant and Slang Dictionaries, vol. 2: 1785–1858</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>OUP</publisher-name><comment>pp. xiv + 338. £45 ISBN 0 1992 5470 2</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B24"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Coleman</surname><given-names>Julie</given-names></name><name><surname>McDermott</surname><given-names>Anne</given-names></name></person-group><source>Historical Dictionaries and Historical Dictionary Research</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Niemeyer</publisher-name><comment>pp. viii + 224. pb €68 ISBN 3 4843 9123 5</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B25"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Connor</surname><given-names>Ulla</given-names></name><name><surname>Upton</surname><given-names>Thomas A</given-names></name></person-group><source>Applied Corpus Linguistics: A Multidimensional Perspective</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Rodopi</publisher-name><comment>pp. ix + 279. €65, $78 ISBN 9 0420 1922 0</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B26"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Contini-Morava</surname><given-names>Ellen</given-names></name><name><surname>Kirsner</surname><given-names>Robert S</given-names></name><name><surname>Rodríguez-Bachiller</surname><given-names>Betsy</given-names></name></person-group><source>Cognitive and Communicative Approaches to Linguistic Analysis</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Benjamins</publisher-name><comment>pp. viii + 380. €125 ($150) ISBN 9 0272 1560 X</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B27"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Cook</surname><given-names>Guy</given-names></name></person-group><source>Genetically Modified Language</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Routledge</publisher-name><comment>pp. x + 176. £45 ISBN 0 4153 1467 4</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B28"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Cotterill</surname><given-names>Janet</given-names></name></person-group><source>Language in the Legal Process</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Palgrave</publisher-name><comment>pp. xvii + 276. pb $24.95 ISBN 1 4039 3388 X</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B29"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Couper-Kuhlen</surname><given-names>Elizabeth</given-names></name><name><surname>Ford</surname><given-names>Cecilia</given-names></name></person-group><source>Sound Patterns in Interaction</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Benjamins</publisher-name><comment>pp. viii + 406. $156 (€130) ISBN 1 5881 1570 4</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B30"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Croft</surname><given-names>William</given-names></name><name><surname>Alan Cruse</surname><given-names>D</given-names></name></person-group><source>Cognitive Linguistics</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>CUP</publisher-name><comment>pp. xvi + 372. hb £50 ISBN 0 5216 6114 5, pb £18.99 ISBN 0 5216 6770 4</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B31"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Croft</surname><given-names>William</given-names></name></person-group><source>Typology and Universals</source><year>2003</year><edition>2nd edn</edition><publisher-name>CUP</publisher-name><comment>pp. 320. hb £50 ISBN 0 5218 0884 7, pb £18.99 ISBN 0 5210 0499 3</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B32"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Crowley</surname><given-names>Terry</given-names></name></person-group><source>Bislama Reference Grammar</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>UHawaiiP</publisher-name><comment>pp. 224. $27 ISBN 0 8248 2880 1</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B33"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Crystal</surname><given-names>David</given-names></name></person-group><source>Cognitive Linguistics</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Polity</publisher-name><comment>pp. x + 152. hb £45 ($54.95) ISBN 0 7456 3312 9, pb £12.99 ($19.95) ISBN 0 7456 3313 7</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B34"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Curzan</surname><given-names>Anne</given-names></name></person-group><source>Gender Shifts in the History of English</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>CUP</publisher-name><comment>pp. xii + 223. hb £40 ISBN 0 5218 2007 3</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B35"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Curzan</surname><given-names>Anne</given-names></name><name><surname>Emmons</surname><given-names>Kimberley</given-names></name></person-group><source>Studies in the History of the English Language, vol. 2: Unfolding Conversations</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>MGruyter</publisher-name><comment>pp. xii + 500. €94 ISBN 3 1101 8097 9</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B36"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Dąbrowska</surname><given-names>Ewa</given-names></name></person-group><source>Language, Mind and Brain</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>UGeoP</publisher-name><comment>pp. x + 272. hb $54.95 ISBN 1 5890 1046 9, pb $29.95 ISBN 1 5890 1047 7</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B37"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Dahl</surname><given-names>Östen</given-names></name></person-group><source>The Growth and Maintenance of Linguistic Complexity</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Benjamins</publisher-name><comment>pp. x + 327. €115 ($138) ISBN 9 0272 3081 1</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B38"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Davies</surname><given-names>Maria González</given-names></name></person-group><source>Multiple Voices in the Classroom</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Benjamins</publisher-name><comment>pp. x + 262. hb €125 ($150) ISBN 9 0272 1660 6, pb €36 ($42.95) ISBN 9 0272 1661 4</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B39"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Dent</surname><given-names>Susie</given-names></name></person-group><source>Larpers and Shroomers: The Language Report</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>OUP</publisher-name><comment>pp. viii + 165. £9.99 ISBN 0 1986 1012 2</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B40"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="compiler"><name><surname>Detro</surname><given-names>RA</given-names></name><name><surname>Walker</surname><given-names>HJ</given-names></name></person-group><source>The Wonderful World of Geographic Names</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>LSUP</publisher-name><comment>pp. xiii + 435. pb $25 ISBN 0 9389 0912 6</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B41"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Dossena</surname><given-names>Marina</given-names></name><name><surname>Jones</surname><given-names>Charles</given-names></name></person-group><source>Insights into Late Modern English</source><year>2003</year><publisher-name>Lang.</publisher-name><comment>pp. 378. €40.91 ISBN 3 9067 7097 4</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B42"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Dossena</surname><given-names>Marina</given-names></name><name><surname>Lass</surname><given-names>Roger</given-names></name></person-group><source>Methods and Data in English Historical Dialectology</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Lang.</publisher-name><comment>pp. 405. pb €63 (£45) ISBN 3 0391 0362 8, $75.95 ISBN 0 8204 7018 X</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B43"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Escure</surname><given-names>Geneviève</given-names></name><name><surname>Schwegler</surname><given-names>Armin</given-names></name></person-group><source>Creoles, Contact, and Language Change: Linguistic and Social Implications</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Benjamins</publisher-name><comment>pp. x + 354. €140 ISBN 9 0272 5249 1, $168 ISBN 1 5881 1551 8</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B44"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Evans</surname><given-names>Vyvyan</given-names></name></person-group><source>The Structure of Time</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Benjamins</publisher-name><comment>pp. x + 287. €95 ($114) ISBN 9 0272 2364 5</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B45"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Fernández</surname><given-names>Mauro</given-names></name><name><surname>Fernández-Ferreiro</surname><given-names>Manuel</given-names></name><name><surname>Vázquez Veiga</surname><given-names>Nancy</given-names></name></person-group><source>Los Criollos de Base Ibérica: Actas des III Encuentro de ACBLPE 2003</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Iberoamericana-Vervuert</publisher-name><comment>pp. 308. €36 ISBN 8 4848 9162 3</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B46"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Fetzer</surname><given-names>Anita</given-names></name></person-group><source>Recontextualizing Context</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Benjamins</publisher-name><comment>pp. vii + 267. $118. €98 ISBN 1 5881 1510 0</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B47"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Field</surname><given-names>John</given-names></name></person-group><source>Psycholinguistics: The Key Concepts</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Routledge</publisher-name><comment>pp. xx + 392. hb £55 ISBN 0 4152 5890 1, pb £14.99 ISBN 0 4152 5891 X</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B48"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Fisiak</surname><given-names>Jacek</given-names></name></person-group><source>Studies in English Historical Linguistics and Philology: A Festschrift for Akio Oizumi</source><year>2002</year><publisher-name>Lang.</publisher-name><comment>pp. xxviii + 497. pb €66 ISBN 3 6313 8617 6</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B49"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Fought</surname><given-names>Carmen</given-names></name></person-group><source>Sociolinguistic Variation: Critical Reflections</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>OUP</publisher-name><comment>pp. xvi + 214. hb £70.65 ISBN 0 1951 7381 3, pb £39.99 ISBN 0 1951 7039 3</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B50"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Frazer</surname><given-names>Timothy C</given-names></name></person-group><source>Heartland English: Variation and Transition in the American Midwest</source><year>1993</year><publisher-name>UAlabamaP</publisher-name><comment>[reissued 2004]. pp. x + 310. pb £26.50 ISBN 0 8173 5244 9</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B51"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Fromkin</surname><given-names>Victoria</given-names></name><name><surname>Rodman</surname><given-names>Robert</given-names></name><name><surname>Hyams</surname><given-names>Nina</given-names></name></person-group><source>An Introduction to Language</source><year>2003</year><edition>7th edn</edition><publisher-name>Thomson Heinle</publisher-name><comment>pp. xx + 621. pb £23.99 ISBN 0 1550 8481 X</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B52"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Gordon</surname><given-names>Elizabeth</given-names></name><name><surname>Campbell</surname><given-names>Lyle</given-names></name><name><surname>Hay</surname><given-names>Jennifer</given-names></name><name><surname>Maclagan</surname><given-names>Margaret</given-names></name><name><surname>Sudbury</surname><given-names>Andrea</given-names></name><name><surname>Trudgill</surname><given-names>Peter</given-names></name></person-group><source>New Zealand English: Its Origins and Evolution</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>CUP</publisher-name><comment>pp. 390. £55 ISBN 0 5216 4292 2</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B53"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Greenbaum</surname><given-names>Sidney</given-names></name><name><surname>Nelson</surname><given-names>Gerald</given-names></name></person-group><source>An Introduction to English Grammar</source><year>2002</year><edition>2nd edn</edition><publisher-name>Longman</publisher-name><comment>pp. xiii + 309. pb £20.99 ISBN 0 5824 3741 5</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B54"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hackert</surname><given-names>Stephanie</given-names></name></person-group><source>Urban Bahamian Creole: System and Variation</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Benjamins</publisher-name><comment>pp. xiv + 254. €105 ISBN 9 0272 4892 3, $126 ISBN 1 5881 1575 5</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B55"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hanna</surname><given-names>Patricia</given-names></name><name><surname>Harrison</surname><given-names>Bernard</given-names></name></person-group><source>Word & World</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>CUP</publisher-name><comment>pp. xii + 432. hb £55 ISBN 0 5218 2287 4, pb £19.99 ISBN 0 5215 3744 4</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B56"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hatim</surname><given-names>Basil</given-names></name><name><surname>Munday</surname><given-names>Jeremy</given-names></name></person-group><source>Translation: An Advanced Resource Book</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Routledge</publisher-name><comment>pp. xiv + 320. hb £60 ISBN 0 4152 8305 1, pb £18.99 ISBN 0 4152 8306 X</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B57"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hawkins</surname><given-names>John A</given-names></name></person-group><source>Efficiency and Complexity in Grammars</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>OUP</publisher-name><comment>pp. xvii + 303. pb £19.99 ISBN 0 1992 5269 6</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B58"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Hendrick</surname><given-names>Randall</given-names></name></person-group><source>Minimalist Syntax</source><year>2003</year><publisher-name>Blackwell</publisher-name><comment>pp. vii + 233. hb £55 ISBN 0 6312 1940 4, pb £19.99 ISBN 0 6312 1941 2</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B59"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Hickey</surname><given-names>Raymond</given-names></name></person-group><source>Legacies of Colonial English: Studies in Transported Dialects</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>CUP</publisher-name><comment>pp. xx + 713. £90 ISBN 0 5218 3020 6</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B60"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hillier</surname><given-names>Hilary</given-names></name></person-group><source>Analysing Real Texts: Research Studies in Modern English Language</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Palgrave</publisher-name><comment>pp. xxii + 274. pb £17.99 ISBN 0 3335 8471 6</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B61"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Holder</surname><given-names>RW</given-names></name></person-group><source>The Dictionary Men: Their Lives and Times</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>BathUP</publisher-name><comment>pp. ix + 294. £30 ISBN 0 8619 7129 9</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B62"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Holm</surname><given-names>John</given-names></name></person-group><source>Languages in Contact: The Partial Restructuring of Vernaculars</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>CUP</publisher-name><comment>pp. xx + 175. £45 ISBN 0 5214 3051 8</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B63"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hopper</surname><given-names>Paul J</given-names></name><name><surname>Closs Traugott</surname><given-names>Elizabeth</given-names></name></person-group><source>Grammaticalization</source><year>2003</year><edition>2nd edn</edition><publisher-name>CUP</publisher-name><comment>pp. xx + 276. hb £50 ISBN 0 5210 0948 0, pb £18.95 ISBN 0 5218 0421 3</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B64"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hori</surname><given-names>Masahiro</given-names></name></person-group><source>Investigating Dickens' Style: A Collocational Analysis</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Palgrave</publisher-name><comment>pp. xviii + 272. £52 ISBN 1 4039 2051 6</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B65"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Hüllen</surname><given-names>Werner</given-names></name></person-group><source>A History of Roget's Thesaurus: Origins, Development, and Design</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>OUP</publisher-name><comment>pp. ix + 410. £75 ISBN 0 1992 5472 9</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B66"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Janoschka</surname><given-names>Anja</given-names></name></person-group><source>Web Advertising</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Benjamins</publisher-name><comment>pp. xiv + 227. $126. €105 ISBN 9 0272 5374 9, $126 ISBN 1 5881 1603 4</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B67"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Joseph</surname><given-names>John E</given-names></name></person-group><source>Language and Identity: National, Ethnic, Religious</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Palgrave</publisher-name><comment>pp. xii + 268. hb £55 ISBN 0 3339 9752 2, pb £18.99 ISBN 0 3339 9753 0</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B68"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Kamp</surname><given-names>Hans</given-names></name><name><surname>Partee</surname><given-names>Barbara H</given-names></name></person-group><source>Context-Dependence in the Analysis of Linguistic Meaning</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Elsevier</publisher-name><comment>pp. xii + 554. €166 (£110.50; $183) ISBN 0 0804 3694 3</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B69"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Kay</surname><given-names>Christian</given-names></name><name><surname>Horobin</surname><given-names>Simon</given-names></name><name><surname>Smith</surname><given-names>Jeremy</given-names></name></person-group><source>New Perspectives on English Historical Linguistics, vol. 1: Syntax and Morphology</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Benjamins</publisher-name><comment>pp. x + 264. €120 ISBN 9 0272 4763 3, $144 ISBN 1 5881 1514 3</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B70"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Kay</surname><given-names>Christian</given-names></name><name><surname>Hough</surname><given-names>Carole</given-names></name><name><surname>Wotherspoon</surname><given-names>Irené</given-names></name></person-group><source>New Perspectives on English Historical Linguistics, vol. 2: Lexis and Transmission</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Benjamins</publisher-name><comment>pp. xii + 271. €144 ISBN 9 0272 4764 1</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B71"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Kay</surname><given-names>Christian</given-names></name><name><surname>Smith</surname><given-names>Jeremy</given-names></name></person-group><source>Categorization in the History of English</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Benjamins</publisher-name><comment>pp.viii + 268. €105 ISBN 9 0272 4775 7</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B72"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Koester</surname><given-names>Almut</given-names></name></person-group><source>The Language of Work</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Routledge</publisher-name><comment>pp. xi + 136. £40 ISBN 0 4153 0729 5</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B73"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Koller</surname><given-names>Veronika</given-names></name></person-group><source>Metaphor and Gender in Business Media Discourse: A Critical Cognitive Study</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Palgrave</publisher-name><comment>pp. xi + 244. £52.50 ISBN 1 4039 3291 3</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B74"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Kortmann</surname><given-names>Bernd</given-names></name><name><surname>Schneider</surname><given-names>Edgar W</given-names></name></person-group><source>A Handbook of Varieties of English: A Multimedia Reference Tool. 2 vols. + CD-ROM</source><year>2004</year><comment>Vol. 1: Edgar W. Schneider, Kate Burridge, Bernd Kortmann, Rajend Mesthrie and Clive Upton, eds., <italic>Phonology</italic>; vol. 2: Bernd Kortmann, Kate Burridge, Rajend Mesthrie, Edgar W. Schneider and Clive Upton. Mouton, eds., <italic>Morphology and Syntax</italic>. pp. xvii + 1,168, xvii + 1,226. €598 ($720) ISBN 3 1101 7532 0</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B75"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Kuiper</surname><given-names>Koenraad</given-names></name><name><surname>Scott Allan</surname><given-names>W</given-names></name></person-group><source>An Introduction to English Language</source><year>2004</year><edition>2nd edn</edition><publisher-name>Palgrave</publisher-name><comment>pp. xxii + 400. £17.99 ISBN 0 3339 8464 1</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B76"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lamb</surname><given-names>Sydney</given-names></name></person-group><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Webster</surname><given-names>Jonathan J</given-names></name></person-group><source>Language and Reality</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Continuum</publisher-name><comment>pp. xx + 432. £75 ISBN 0 8264 6820 9</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B77"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Landman</surname><given-names>Fred</given-names></name></person-group><source>Indefinites and the Type of Sets</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Blackwell</publisher-name><series>Explorations in Semantics</series><comment>pp. xxvii + 269. hb £60 ISBN 1 4051 1630 7, pb £24.99 ISBN 1 4051 1631 5</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B78"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Lasnik</surname><given-names>Howard</given-names></name></person-group><source>Minimalist Investigations in Linguistic Theory</source><year>2003</year><publisher-name>Routledge</publisher-name><comment>pp. xi + 192. £60 ISBN 0 4151 8194 1</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B79"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Leistyna</surname><given-names>Pepi</given-names></name><name><surname>Meyer</surname><given-names>Charles F</given-names></name></person-group><source>Corpus Analysis: Language Structure and Language Use</source><year>2003</year><publisher-name>Rodopi</publisher-name><comment>pp. v + 288. €75 ISBN 9 0420 1036 3</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B80"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Lenz</surname><given-names>Alexandra N</given-names></name><name><surname>Radtke</surname><given-names>Edgar</given-names></name><name><surname>Zwickl</surname><given-names>Simone</given-names></name></person-group><source>Variation im Raum: Variation and Space</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Lang.</publisher-name><comment>pp. 244. €28 ISBN 3 6315 2243 6</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B81"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Lerner</surname><given-names>Gene</given-names></name></person-group><source>Conversation Analysis: Studies from the First Generation</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Benjamins</publisher-name><comment>pp. x + 302. pb $65.95 (€55) ISBN 1 5881 1539 9</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B82"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Lindquist</surname><given-names>Hans</given-names></name><name><surname>Mair</surname><given-names>Christian</given-names></name></person-group><source>Corpus Approaches to Grammaticalization in English</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Benjamins</publisher-name><comment>pp. xiv + 264. €95 ISBN 9 0272 2284 3, $114 ISBN 1 5881 1523 2</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B83"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Locher</surname><given-names>Miriam</given-names></name></person-group><source>Power and Politeness in Action</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>MGruyter</publisher-name><comment>pp. xvi + 365. $94 ISBN 3 1101 8006 5</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B84"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Malmkjær</surname><given-names>Kirsten</given-names></name></person-group><source>The Linguistics Encyclopedia</source><year>2004</year><edition>2nd edn</edition><publisher-name>Routledge</publisher-name><comment>pp. xlii + 688. pb £25.99 ($45.95) ISBN 0 4152 2210 9</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B85"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Marshall</surname><given-names>Jonathan</given-names></name></person-group><source>Language Change and Sociolinguistics: Rethinking Social Networks</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Palgrave</publisher-name><comment>pp. xii + 246. £52.50 ISBN 1 4039 1487 7</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B86"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Mazzon</surname><given-names>Gabriella</given-names></name></person-group><source>A History of English Negation</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Pearson</publisher-name><comment>pp. xv + 176. €48.95 ISBN 0 5823 8185</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B87"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Mondorf</surname><given-names>Britta</given-names></name></person-group><source>Gender Differences in English Syntax</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Niemeyer</publisher-name><comment>pp. viii + 212. pb €68 ISBN 3 4843 0491 X</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B88"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Mukherjee</surname><given-names>Joybrato</given-names></name></person-group><source>Form and Function of Parasyntactic Presentation Structures: A Corpus-Based Study of Talk Units in Spoken English</source><year>2001</year><publisher-name>Rodopi</publisher-name><comment>pp. vii + 163. €41 ISBN 9 0420 1295 1</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B89"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Norgaard</surname><given-names>Nina</given-names></name></person-group><source>Systemic Functional Linguistic and Literary Analysis: A Hallidayan Approach to Joyce, a Joycean Approach to Halliday</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>University Press of Southern Denmark</publisher-name><comment>pp. 250. pb. €33.60 (£22.60) ISBN 8 7783 8863 5</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B90"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Pier</surname><given-names>John</given-names></name></person-group><source>The Dynamics of Narrative Form: Studies in Anglo-American Narratology</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Gruyter</publisher-name><comment>pp. 272. €88 ISBN 3 1101 8314 5</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B91"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Prandi</surname><given-names>Michele</given-names></name></person-group><source>The Building Blocks of Meaning: Ideas for a Philosophical Grammar</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Benjamins</publisher-name><comment>pp. xviii + 520. €135 ISBN 9 0272 2365 3, $162 ISBN 1 5881 1526 7</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B92"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Preston</surname><given-names>Dennis R</given-names></name></person-group><source>Needed Research in American Dialects</source><year>2003</year><publisher-name>DukeUP</publisher-name><comment>pp. xii + 261. £20 ISBN 0 8223 6594 4</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B93"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Rathert</surname><given-names>Monika</given-names></name></person-group><source>Textures of Time</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Akademie Verlag</publisher-name><series>Studia Grammatica 59</series><comment>pp. 250. pb €64.80 ISBN 3 0500 4074 2</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B94"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Recanati</surname><given-names>François</given-names></name></person-group><source>Literal Meaning</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>CUP</publisher-name><comment>pp. viii + 179. hb £40 ($55) ISBN 0 5217 9246 0, pb £14.99 ($19.99) ISBN 0 5215 3736 3</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B95"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Renkema</surname><given-names>Jan</given-names></name></person-group><source>Introduction to Discourse Studies</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Benjamins</publisher-name><comment>pp. x + 363. pb $42.99 (€36) ISBN 1 5881 1530 5</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B96"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Rivkin</surname><given-names>Steve</given-names></name><name><surname>Sutherland</surname><given-names>Fraser</given-names></name></person-group><source>The Making of a Name: The Inside Story of the Brands We Buy</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>OUP</publisher-name><comment>pp. x + 275. $28 ISBN 0 1951 6872 0</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B97"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Rizzi</surname><given-names>Luigi</given-names></name></person-group><source>The Cartography of Syntactic Structures, vol. 2: The Structure of CP and IP</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>OUP</publisher-name><comment>pp. vii + 367. hb £55 ISBN 0 1951 5948 9, pb £40 ISBN 0 1951 5949 7</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B98"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Robertson</surname><given-names>Judith</given-names></name></person-group><source>Plagiarism in Australian Lexicography</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>King's College, London Menzies Centre for Australian Studies</publisher-name><comment>pp. 28. pb £3.50 ISBN 1 8550 7128 2</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B99"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Room</surname><given-names>Adrian</given-names></name></person-group><source>Placenames of France</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>McFarland</publisher-name><comment>pp. 328. $49.95 ISBN 0 7864 2052 9</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B100"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Rothstein</surname><given-names>Susan</given-names></name></person-group><article-title>Structuring Events</article-title><source>Explorations in Semantics</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Blackwell</publisher-name><comment>pp. x + 206. hb £60 ($74.95) ISBN 1 4051 0667 0, pb £24.99 ($39.95) ISBN 1 4051 0668 9</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B101"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Santos</surname><given-names>Diana</given-names></name></person-group><source>Translation-Based Corpus Studies: Contrasting English and Portuguese Tense and Aspect Systems</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Rodopi</publisher-name><comment>pp. xii + 173. €44 ISBN 9 0420 1751 1</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B102"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Semino</surname><given-names>Elena</given-names></name><name><surname>Short</surname><given-names>Mick</given-names></name></person-group><source>Corpus Stylistics: Speech, Writing and Thought Presentation in a Corpus of English Writing</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Routledge</publisher-name><comment>pp. xii + 272. £65 ISBN 0 4152 8669 7</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B103"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Siewierska</surname><given-names>Anna</given-names></name></person-group><source>Person</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>CUP</publisher-name><comment>pp. xx + 327. hb £55 ISBN 0 5217 7214 1, pb £19.99 ISBN 0 5217 7669 4</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B104"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Simon-Vandenbergen</surname><given-names></given-names></name><name><surname>Anne-Marie</surname><given-names></given-names></name><name><surname>Taverniers</surname><given-names>Miriam</given-names></name><name><surname>Ravelli</surname><given-names>Louise</given-names></name></person-group><source>Grammatical Metaphor: Views from Systemic Functional Linguistics</source><year>2003</year><publisher-name>Benjamins</publisher-name><comment>pp. vi + 453. €110 ISBN 9 0272 4748 X</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B105"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Simpson</surname><given-names>Paul</given-names></name></person-group><source>Stylistics: A Resource Book for Students</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Routledge</publisher-name><comment>pp. xiii + 264. £50 ISBN 0 4152 8104 0</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B106"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Swann</surname><given-names>Joan</given-names></name><name><surname>Deumert</surname><given-names>Ana</given-names></name><name><surname>Lillis</surname><given-names>Theresa</given-names></name><name><surname>Mesthrie</surname><given-names>Rajend</given-names></name></person-group><source>A Dictionary of Sociolinguistics</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>EdinUP</publisher-name><comment>pp. x + 368. hb £54.98 ISBN 0 7486 1690 X, pb £16.99 ISBN 0 7496 1691 8</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B107"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Ter Meulen</surname><given-names>Alice</given-names></name><name><surname>Abraham</surname><given-names>Werner</given-names></name></person-group><source>The Composition of Meaning: From Lexeme to Discourse</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Benjamins</publisher-name><comment>pp. vi + 230. €99 ISBN 9 0272 4769 2, $119 ISBN 1 5881 1568 2</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B108"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Thumb</surname><given-names>Jenny</given-names></name></person-group><source>Dictionary Look-Up Strategies and the Bilingualised Learner's Dictionary</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Niemeyer</publisher-name><comment>pp. xii + 127. pb €48 ISBN 3 4843 9117 0</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B109"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Tristram</surname><given-names>Hildegard LC</given-names></name></person-group><source>The Celtic Englishes III</source><year>2003</year><publisher-name>Winter</publisher-name><comment>pp. xiv + 478. €78 ISBN 3 8253 1241 0</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B110"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Trudgill</surname><given-names>Peter</given-names></name></person-group><source>Dialects</source><year>2004</year><edition>2nd edn</edition><publisher-name>Routledge Language Workbooks. Routledge</publisher-name><comment>pp. ix + 78. hb £45 ISBN 0 4153 4262 7, pb £13.99 ISBN 0 4153 4263 5</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B111"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Tulloch</surname><given-names>Alexander</given-names></name></person-group><source>Word Routes: Journeys through Etymology</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Owen</publisher-name><comment>pp. 208. €7.50 ISBN 0 7206 1243 8</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B112"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>van Gelderen</surname><given-names>Elly</given-names></name></person-group><source>Grammaticalization as Economy</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Benjamins</publisher-name><comment>pp. xv + 320. €115, ISBN 9 0272 2795 0, $138 ISBN 1 5881 1552 6</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B113"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Vine</surname><given-names>Bernadette</given-names></name></person-group><source>Getting Things Done at Work</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Benjamins</publisher-name><comment>pp. viii + 276. $114. €95 ISBN 1 5881 1521 6</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B114"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Watts</surname><given-names>Victor</given-names></name></person-group><source>The Cambridge Dictionary of English Place-Names</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>CUP</publisher-name><comment>pp. vii + 713. £200 ($250) ISBN 0 5213 6209 1</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B115"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="editor"><name><surname>Webster</surname><given-names>Jonathan J</given-names></name></person-group><source>The Collected Works of M.A.K. Halliday, vol. 4: The Language of Early Childhood</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>Continuum</publisher-name><comment>pp. xiii + 415. £75 ISBN 0 8264 5870 X</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
<ref id="B116"><nlm-citation citation-type="book"><person-group person-group-type="author"><name><surname>Wilton</surname><given-names>David</given-names></name></person-group><source>Word Myths: Debunking Linguistic Urban Legends</source><year>2004</year><publisher-name>OUP</publisher-name><comment>pp. x + 221. £12.99 ISBN 0 1851 7284 1</comment></nlm-citation></ref>
</ref-list>
</back>
</article></istex:document></istex:metadataXml><mods version="3.6"><titleInfo><title>IEnglish Language</title></titleInfo><titleInfo type="alternative" contentType="CDATA"><title>IEnglish Language</title></titleInfo><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Evelien</namePart><namePart type="family">Keizer</namePart><affiliation>University of Amsterdam</affiliation></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Mohammed</namePart><namePart type="family">Albakry</namePart><affiliation>Middle Tennessee State University</affiliation></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Jeroen</namePart><namePart type="family">van de Weijer</namePart><affiliation>University of Leiden</affiliation></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Bettelou</namePart><namePart type="family">Los</namePart><affiliation>Radboud University Nijmegen</affiliation></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Wim</namePart><namePart type="family">van der Wurff</namePart><affiliation>University of Newcastle-upon-Tyne</affiliation></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Beáta</namePart><namePart type="family">Gyuris</namePart><affiliation>Hungarian Academy of Science</affiliation></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Julie</namePart><namePart type="family">Coleman</namePart><affiliation>University of Leicester</affiliation></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Edward</namePart><namePart type="family">Callary</namePart><affiliation>Northern Illinois University</affiliation></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Lieselotte</namePart><namePart type="family">Anderwald</namePart><affiliation>Albert-Ludwigs University, Frieburg</affiliation></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Andrea</namePart><namePart type="family">Sand</namePart><affiliation>Albert-Ludwigs University, Freiburg</affiliation></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Camilla</namePart><namePart type="family">Vasquez</namePart><affiliation>University of South Florida</affiliation></name><name type="personal"><namePart type="given">Laura</namePart><namePart type="family">Hidalgo</namePart><affiliation>Downing University Autonoma, Madrid</affiliation></name><typeOfResource>text</typeOfResource><genre type="research-article" displayLabel="research-article" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://content-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XTP-1JC4F85T-7">research-article</genre><originInfo><publisher>Oxford University Press</publisher><dateIssued encoding="w3cdtf">2006</dateIssued><copyrightDate encoding="w3cdtf">2006</copyrightDate></originInfo><abstract>This chapter has twelve sections: 1. General; 2. History of English Linguistics; 3. Phonetics and Phonology; 4. Morphology; 5. Syntax; 6. Semantics; 7. Lexicography, Lexicology and Lexical Semantics; 8. Onomastics; 9. Dialectology and Sociolinguistics; 10. New Englishes and Creolistics; 11. Pragmatics and Discourse Analysis; 12. Stylistics. Section 1 is by Evelien Keizer; section 2 is by Mohammed Albakry; section 3 is by Jeroen van de Weijer; sections 4 and 5 are by Bettelou Los and Wim van der Wurff; section 6 is by Beàta Gyuris; section 7 is by Julie Coleman; section 8 is by Edward Callary; section 9 is by Lieselotte Anderwald; section 10 is by Andrea Sand; section 11 is by Camilla Vasquez; section 12 is by Laura Hidalgo.</abstract><relatedItem type="host"><titleInfo><title>The Year's Work in English Studies</title></titleInfo><genre type="journal" authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://publication-type.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/JMC-0GLKJH51-B">journal</genre><subject><topic>Articles</topic></subject><identifier type="ISSN">0084-4144</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID">ywes</identifier><identifier type="PublisherID-hwp">ywes</identifier><part><date>2006</date><detail type="volume"><caption>vol.</caption><number>85</number></detail><detail type="issue"><caption>no.</caption><number>1</number></detail><extent unit="pages"><start>1</start><end>128</end></extent></part></relatedItem><identifier type="istex">A670BB1E867BF142D05FDC325B2FAF3F13136C0D</identifier><identifier type="DOI">10.1093/ywes/mal001</identifier><accessCondition type="use and reproduction" contentType="copyright">© The English Association; all rights reserved</accessCondition><recordInfo><recordContentSource authority="ISTEX" authorityURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr" valueURI="https://loaded-corpus.data.istex.fr/ark:/67375/XBH-GTWS0RDP-M">oup</recordContentSource><recordOrigin>© The English Association; all rights reserved</recordOrigin></recordInfo></mods><json:item><extension>json</extension><original>false</original><mimetype>application/json</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/A670BB1E867BF142D05FDC325B2FAF3F13136C0D/metadata/json</uri></json:item></metadata><covers><json:item><extension>tiff</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>image/tiff</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/A670BB1E867BF142D05FDC325B2FAF3F13136C0D/covers/tiff</uri></json:item></covers><annexes><json:item><extension>jpeg</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>image/jpeg</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/A670BB1E867BF142D05FDC325B2FAF3F13136C0D/annexes/jpeg</uri></json:item><json:item><extension>gif</extension><original>true</original><mimetype>image/gif</mimetype><uri>https://api.istex.fr/document/A670BB1E867BF142D05FDC325B2FAF3F13136C0D/annexes/gif</uri></json:item></annexes><serie></serie></istex></record>Pour manipuler ce document sous Unix (Dilib)
EXPLOR_STEP=$WICRI_ROOT/Wicri/Musique/explor/MusiqueCeltiqueV1/Data/Istex/Corpus
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_STEP/biblio.hfd -nk 001676 | SxmlIndent | more
Ou
HfdSelect -h $EXPLOR_AREA/Data/Istex/Corpus/biblio.hfd -nk 001676 | SxmlIndent | more
Pour mettre un lien sur cette page dans le réseau Wicri
{{Explor lien
|wiki= Wicri/Musique
|area= MusiqueCeltiqueV1
|flux= Istex
|étape= Corpus
|type= RBID
|clé= ISTEX:A670BB1E867BF142D05FDC325B2FAF3F13136C0D
|texte= IEnglish Language
}}
| This area was generated with Dilib version V0.6.38. |  |