The edited volume of the Proceedings of the 1994 Child Language Seminar has a scopeboth broad and ambitious. Not all participants have contributed to the volume and only onefeatured guest speaker's paper, A. Radford's “The nature ofchildren's initial clauses” (co-presented with H. Clahsen) is included, so we onlyget a tantalizing glimpse of the conference.

This volume sets forth an excellent overview of cutting-edge research in reading andlanguage processing and illuminates many of the controversial issues related to humancognition. Readers will find, as an example, apt commentaries on the tension betweenconnectionist modeling and the antecedent symbolic processing, and the subsequent efforts ofresearchers to resolve paradigmatic conflicts. As a result, several hybrid models, incorporatingelements of a symbolic system and an activation-based connectionist mechanism, haveemerged. Similarly, the logic and value of relevant research procedures are debated.Methodological scrutiny, in fact, is a prominent theme throughout the volume. Among otherthings, a variety of online measures, such as technologically enhanced procedures foreye-movement tracking, pupillometry monitoring, and moving-window display techniques, arediscussed.

Marcia Moraes has made a contribution that will be of interest to many bilingualeducators in the United States. Her book is an attempt to examine and critique contemporarybilingual education as it is generally conceptualized in the United States within the frameworkof a critical Marxian, poststructuralist perspective grounded in the work of Mikhail Bakhtinand Valentin Voloshinov. Thus, Bilingual education: A dialogue with the Bakhtincircle seeks to bring together two fields that have been, until this time, relativelyunconnected.There is a great deal to be said for such undertakings, and both those interested in criticalpedagogy and those involved in bilingual education have much to learn from oneanother.

Lynch, drawing on his experience of evaluation, in particular the Reading English forScience and Technology (REST) Project, aims to provide a “thorough theoreticalbackground for the evaluation of language education programs” and “thenecessary range of theory and practical techniques” (p. xi), and he highlightscontributions for “program evaluation . . . in the development of applied linguistics asa field of research” (p. x).

This paper seeks to resolve certain questions pertaining to therelationship between gender and second language vocabulary knowledge. One question weexamine is whether female and male ESL students at the University of California at Irvinediffer significantly in their knowledge of academic vocabulary in English as measured byscores on the Test of Academic Lexicon (TAL). One hundred ninety-two freshman universityESL students participated in the study. A t test, used to investigate differences in theTAL scores of males and females, reveals that the males performed better on the TAL than thefemales (t = 3.32, p = .001). Analyses of covariance were used to examinequestions pertaining to the effect of gender on the TAL, controlling for the possible effects ofthe students' verbal Scholastic Aptitude Test (SAT) scores, length of residence in theUnited States, and age of arrival in the United States. In all cases, gender remainssignificantly related to the results of the TAL when controlling for the other variable: forverbal SAT scores, F(1,181) = 5.86, p < .05; for length of residence,F(1,187) = 9.64, p < .01; and for age of arrival in the United States,F(1,185) = 10.22, p < .005. Neither the present study nor the genderliterature reviewed suggests that gender itself causes differences in the TAL scores.In analyzing the results, we consider possible explanations for the males' better TALscores related to reading habits, interactional styles, educational backgrounds, andcultures.

It was only about a year ago, in a reckless moment of shelf-purging, that I reluctantly placedmy original offset copy (circa 1975) of The Good Language Learner into thepaper-recycling bin. Many of us fondly remember that big orange-covered prepublicationvolume, dog-eared, battered, and stuck together with tape. Now, almost two decades after thefirst publication of The Good Language Learner (Ontario Institute for Studies inEducation, 1978) this reissue appears as part of Multilingual Matters' “ModernLanguages in Practice” series. It is the first time this series has featured a reprint of“classic” (p. vii) volumes of interest to foreign language researchers andteachers.

Interlanguage and Learnability, the published version of Yip's doctoraldissertation, examines some salient aspects of Chinese speakers' English Interlanguage(CIL) with insights from the Principles and Parameters Theory and research in languagetypology. On the basis of the Subset Principle and the notion of preemption, the book addresseslearnability questions of how the second language learner progresses or fails to progress in theacquisition of English. The author has presented the book carefully and logically with the goal ofreadability in mind, which makes the book accessible to an audience interested in secondlanguage research but with little theoretical background or knowledge of Chinese linguistics.Another commendable quality of the book is the author's ability to interrelate CIL featuresthat can easily be wrongly treated as separate and independent and analyze them in a holisticway.

The semantic potential referred to in the title of this book is the ability of humans to learn the(closed-class) terms for basic spatial relations, such as (for English) onto, above, andthrough. Regier presents a modified connectionist model of this ability designed toaddress three questions: (a) What kind of system can learn spatial terms? (b) How can thissystem function without negative evidence? and (c) What are the universal constraints onlearnable spatial terms? The answers suggested to these questions are: (a) a modifiedconnectionist network—one which incorporates structural constraints motivated by humanphysiology; (b) the assumption of mutual exclusion, that is, that different terms have mutuallyexclusive denotations; and (c) the structural constraints that are incorporated into thenetwork.

A landscape of popular perceptions increasingly indifferent to French has sentteachers around the United States scurrying for new books that will draw students to thelanguage they love. In many cases, the profession has fixed on Francophonie as asolution, offering, it seems, the practical, down-to-earth usefulness that the profession thinksstudents want and providing, at the same time, a neat link to popular and sometimessimple-minded notions of multiculturalism. Ager's new book, 6 years after his excellentSociolinguistics and Contemporary French, demonstrates thatFrancophonie is far more problematic than many have thought. Less technical than theearlier book, this emphatically interdisciplinary work ought to be required reading for allprospective teachers ofFrench.

An invaluable contribution of scholarly papers on the bilingual–bicultural nature ofdeaf people is the volume edited by Ila Parasnis. This collection of 18 insightful papers is awelcome contribution in the context of recent national debates about whether deaf people areconsidered a minority group with their own unique linguistic and cultural identity, or consideredas audiologically disabled individuals. Collectively, the authors of the papers provide strongarguments in favor of recognizing the bilingual and bicultural nature of deaf people'sexperience. The contents of this well-edited book provides both theoretical and practicalknowledge leading to the empowerment of deaf people and to expanded views of bilingualismand second language acquisition. Reflective presentations by deaf people and applied linguisticdiscussions by researchers are combined to provide researchers and practitioners innovativeperspectives on the development of psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic competence of thisunique population. The authors also contribute to research on linguistic, cognitive, and socialaspects of language and literacy development.

This volume is dedicated to Bill Rutherford, a long-time friend and colleague, whosecommitment and dedication to the study of interlanguage has inspired many of us. The variouspapers deal with relevant issues in the study of interlanguage with the aim of addressing the widerange of theoretical and pedagogical questions that Rutherford has tried to answer throughout hiscareer. This multifaceted character of the book is very appealing, and so is the inquisitive andprovocative tone of several of the papers. I have chosen to group the contributions under fivedifferent headings, depending on the cognitive and behavioral sciences that constitute their mainfocus of attention.

This paper reports on two studies that addressed the issue of ultimate attainment by latesecond language learners. The aim of the studies, which included a carefully screened group ofhighly successful Dutch learners of English in their designs, was to determine whether or not latesecond language learners who had achieved a nativelike performance in the pronunciation of asecond language could be identified. Speech samples provided by two groups of learners, one ofwhich consisted of highly successful learners only, and a native speaker control group were ratedfor accent by native speakers of English. The ratings obtained by some learners were within therange of the ratings assigned to the native speaker controls. Such results suggest that it is notimpossible to achieve an authentic, nativelike pronunciation of a second language after aspecified biological period of time. Examination of the learning histories of the highly successfullearners lead the authors to argue that certain learner characteristics and learning contexts maywork together to override the disadvantages of a late start.

This paper reviews current research on language and gender and discusses theimplications of such work for gender-based research in second language acquisition. Recentwork in sociolinguistics, generally, and language and gender research, more specifically, hasrejected categorical and fixed notions of social identities in favor of more constructivist anddynamic ones. Thus, in this paper I elaborate a conception of gender that has not generallyinformed research in the field of second language acquisition, and point to more recent work inthe field that theorizes and investigates gender as a construct shaped by historical, cultural,social, and interactional factors.

This volume contains 34 papers presented at the Groningen Assembly on LanguageAcquisition in September 1995. According to the editors, the conference was designed topromote “a lively discussion about the merits and constraints of different approaches tolanguage acquisition.” Not surprisingly, in a conference that explicitly mentions it iscontinuing in the tradition of GALA 1993, Generative Approaches to Language Acquisition, 23of the papers in one way or the other deal with the innate properties of language and their statusin language acquisition, whereas 7 papers have a connectionist perspective. Only 2 of theconnectionist papers provide data from language learners. Two papers describe aspects of firstlanguage acquisition without an obvious theoretical allegiance. Only 1 paper considers howchildren make use of negative input provided in an experimental setting for learning aboutirregular verb forms. There is not a single paper on how interaction with caregivers influenceslanguage acquisition or how language is socially constructed.

In this paper we address the need for replication studies in the field ofsecond language acquisition and discuss the problems surrounding standards of reportingresearch. A particular focus is on the level of detail necessary for replication to take place. Thelack of uniform standards is noted with specific examples of problematic reporting taken fromdescriptions of second language learners' proficiency levels and measures of linguisticaccuracy in second language writing research. We propose ways that we believe will lead tomore thorough reporting of research and that will therefore allow others to engage inreplication.

Have you ever read a book and said to yourself, “Boy I wish I had that backthen?” In the area of data handling and manipulation, this is that book. Davidson hascompiled 30 principles by which one can effectively handle data. The audiences for this text are:“(a) graduate students and novice researchers who want to expand their knowledge of theuse of computers in the social sciences, including education, and (b) educators who want toimprove data gathering in their teaching institutions” (p. x). Davidson offers this book asa companion to statistical texts. If you are looking for the equation for a dependentt-test or want to review the assumptions for ANOVA, this is not the book you arelooking for. If you want to know how to efficiently handle information, for instance, researchdata, this is the text for you.

One of the differences between Chinese and English is that the former allows both nullsubjects in finite sentences and null objects, but the latter allows neither. This cross-linguisticvariation is believed to be related to the underspecification of I and topic drop in Chinese but notin English. This paper reports on an empirical study investigating the unlearning of null subjectsand null objects by 159 Chinese learners in their L2 acquisition of English. In L1 acquisition, ithas been found that English-speaking children display an asymmetry by frequently allowing nullsubjects but rarely null objects. The results of this study indicate that there is an asymmetry inChinese learners' L2 English, which, however, is opposite to that found in English L1acquisition: Chinese learners are able to reject the incorrect null subject in English, but unable todetect the ungrammaticality of the null object. It is proposed that the unlearning of null subjectsby Chinese learners of English is triggered by the evidence in their input indicating thespecification of AGR(eement) and T(ense) in English, and that the difficulty in the unlearning ofnull objects is related to the lack of informative evidence to unset the [+ topic-drop]setting in Chinese learners' L2 English.

The book under review follows other research by Biber in the field of register variation (cf.Biber, 1988; Biber & Finegan, 1994). It further develops the thesis that multidmensionalanalysis of many different linguistic variables can help posit theoretical and conceptualprimitives for the analysis of register. It also explores a corollary that the primitive for registervariation in different languages can be productively compared.

Ethnomethodology is a qualitative research methodology developed as an alternativepossibilityfor social scientists investigating the different ways in which reality is socially constructed. Fortheorists and researchers of language acquisition and language use in educational settings,ethnomethodology makes it possible to examine social discourse and participation structures inand out of school that are tied to success or failure in language learning. As Gumperz explains,with the help of ethnomethodology we study how knowledge is acquired, what role differencesinhome and ethnic background play in the acquisition process, and how the acquisition processinteracts with evaluational progress and the child's motivation to learn.

This collected volume on English language teaching (ELT) in India contains 22 articleswritten by Indian teachers and researchers. The book has been divided into six sections. The firstsection—“Problematizing ELT in India”—offers a critical, historicalperspective along with innovative ideas for making English language learning and teachingmeaningful and purposive in modern India. The second section—“Nature of ELTMaterials”—demonstrates how the ELT materials used in Indian classrooms arenot embedded in local needs and indigenous contexts. The section emphasizes the importance ofdeveloping instructional materials that not only make use of the rich linguistic and culturalresources available in India but also promote effective communication skills among the learners.The third section—“Learner Profiles”—provides interesting insightsinto the needs, wants, and lacks of Indian learners of English. This section shows how theinstruments of needs analysis developed in monocultural and monolingual settings areinadequate for assessing the needs and wants of learners in multilingual and multicultural India.The fourth section—“Classroom Issues”—focuses on certain centralissues affecting teaching and learning in the classroom context, particularly the role of nativelanguage knowledge and skills that Indian learners bring with them. The fifthsection—“Course Evaluation and Teacher Development”—suggestsideas for making teacher education responsive to the changing roles and responsibilities oflanguage teachers. The sixth and final section—“CurriculumChange”—deals with the principles and procedures for curricular changes that arein tune with the evolving knowledge about learning and teaching and the increasing desire forlearner control of the process of materials development and evaluation.