Reviewed by: La norme du français et sa diffusion dans l’histoire ed. by Dorothée Aquino-Weber, Sara Cotelli Kureth and Carine Skupien Dekens Bryan Donaldson Aquino-Weber, Dorothée, Sara Cotelli Kureth, and Carine Skupien Dekens, eds. La norme du français et sa diffusion dans l’histoire. Honoré Champion, 2021. ISBN 978-2-7453-5626-0. Pp. 250. Linguistic norms, a perennial topic in French, receive a historical perspective in this edited volume. Aquino-Weber and Cotelli Kureth’s introduction reminds readers of Haugen’s seminal model and the distinction between linguistic norms (actual usage) and prescriptive norms (desired usage). Skupien Dekens traces the diffusion of prescriptive norms in the teaching of French as a foreign language. Kristol discusses François Bonivard, a 16th-century Swiss polyglot whose remarques prioritize objective norms over prescriptive norms, more reminiscent of a linguist than a grammarian. Amatuzzi examines how three 17th-century grammarians (Du Val, Chiflet, De Courtin) view variation and changing norms. All three have a globally negative view of variation, but Chiflet appears tolerant of stylistic variation that characterizes familiar speech. Grosse discusses the 18th-century educator (translator, historian, literary critic...) Eléazar de Mauvillon; this émigré from Provence gave French lessons in Dresden, where his pupils’ interlanguage (“vitement”, “il est vingt ans”) still resonates today. Cotelli Kureth and Nissille examine the teaching of (standard) French in Switzerland in the 18th and 19th centuries, when the home language was often a patois or regional French. Interestingly, some prescriptive manuals defended regional variants (gringe “grumpy”), either on account of their meritorious etymology or the génie of the local variety. Surcouf addresses the challenges of describing spoken language through writing and asks if (educated, professional) linguists can accurately and objectively describe the speech of less educated speakers. Surcouf notes the implicit comparison to the (conservative) written norm when we describe, for example, ne “deletion” in spoken French. He proposes, instead, that we speak of adding ne for negation in writing. Glikman and Bouard research the conjunctive phrase pour que, which, despite widespread normative reprobation (e.g., by Vaugelas), replaced afin que as the dominant expression of purpose. Capin examines historical metalinguistic commentary on subject pronoun expression. Caron focuses on the choice between passé simple ~ passé composé and social factors like the “crushing” of the linguistically conservative Parlement de Paris that may have favored the rise of the latter. Laferrière examines tensions between prescriptive norms and usage of incises de citation; after early condemnation of examples like reconnus-je, decried by grammarians as “horreurs” or “infamies,” Laferrière documents evolutions to the norm that encourage variety beyond the [End Page 257] “lassant” and formulaic dit-il. Sthioul examines treatments of the elusive passé surcomposé, identified as early as Meigret (1550) but often marginalized, stigmatized, or simply ignored; Sthioul’s hope is that the current openness to variation leads to more acceptance and understanding of this form. This volume contributes valuable scholarship on norms in French, despite its heterogeneity and occasional unevenness. Strengths include the inclusion of figures who observed and commented on French, beyond the usual suspects like Vaugelas or Bouhours and the emphasis on regional Frenches (especially in Switzerland), including local norms. The contributors consistently highlight the subjectivity of prescriptive norms and the shifting rationales for them (usage, raison, Dieu...) and, chemin faisant, unearth historical sociolinguistic morsels. Surcouf’s chapter, in particular, should be required reading for any linguist, en herbe or otherwise, working on spoken French. [End Page 258] Bryan Donaldson University of California, Santa Cruz Copyright © 2023 American Association of Teachers of French