Reviewed by: Corpus Stylistics as Contextual Prosodic Theory and Subtext by Bill Louw, Marija Milojkovic Feng (Robin) Wang (bio) and Philippe Humblé (bio) Bill Louw and Marija Milojkovic. Corpus Stylistics as Contextual Prosodic Theory and Subtext. John Benjamins Publishing Company, 2016. xix + 419 pp. $149. The term corpus stylistics, usually regarded as a near-synonym for stylometry, stylometrics, statistical stylistics, or stylogenetics, is closely related to statistics and corpus linguistics. Despite an increasing number of studies in the field, people still do not attain a clear line of demarcation between corpus linguistics and corpus stylistics. Corpus linguists are typically concerned with “repeated occurrences, generalizations and the description of typical patterns,” while corpus stylistic studies relate to “deviations from linguistic norms that account for the artistic effects of a particular text” (Mahlberg, “Corpus Stylistic Perspective” 19). However, more needs to be known about what new perspectives corpus linguistics can offer to the depiction of stylistic devices and the interpretation of stylistic values. Under these circumstances, Bill Louw and Marija Milojkovic’s Corpus Stylistics as Contextual Prosodic Theory and Subtext is instructive and worthy of reading, for it offers valuable perspectives for interdisciplinary investigations. This volume comprises two parts: the first part (Chapters 1–6) is devoted to the theoretical construction of Contextual Prosodic Theory (CPT), and the second part (Chapters 7–12) applies CPT to literary criticism, translation studies, and foreign language teaching. Chapter 1 revisits the proposal on “language and literature integration” in foreign language teaching. Louw dissolves the doubts from language teachers about “integration” by sufficiently discussing lexical syllabus design and progressive delexicalization. Having critically reviewed different theoretical perspectives on collocation, the authors argue in [End Page 550] Chapter 2 that one objective characteristic of literary devices is that they will demonstrate some evidence of relexicalization through collocation. Chapter 3 focuses on the theoretical interpretation of semantic prosody. Semantic prosody, according to Louw, is the “consistent aura of meaning with which a form is imbued by its collocations” (80). In Chapter 4, the author expounds that data-driven reading will produce a class of negotiator distinct from the intuitive counterparts. Chapter 5 affirms the role of collocation in terms of predicting and grading the potential success of all humorous contexts of situation as well as composition. Moreover, the interaction between collocation and events in the external world is capable of isolating humorous situations that are “waiting to happen” (132). Chapter 6 introduces subtext, a core concept of CPT, and proceeds to explore what these deviations from logical semantic prosody (subtext) can tell us about an author’s text. The second part (Chapters 7–12) is written by Milojkovic and adapts CPT to other disciplines. In this sense, the volume can be considered as a necessary reference for a consortium of scholars. In order to test the applicability and universality of CPT, Milojkovic applies CPT to Slavic languages, namely, Russian and Serbian. Based on a synthesis of the theoretical tools of CPT (i.e., collocation, semantic prosody, and subtext), Milojkovic analyzes the logical construction of literary worlds as well as a hitherto uncharted domain in corpus stylistics: authorial intention, that is, whether the author sincerely means what he or she writes. Chapter 8 reveals the subtext of “in the * of” in a translated poem of Pushkin as a picture of action verging on conflict, which inspires Milojkovic to probe into whether this is an incompatible grammatical pattern to express Pushkin’s call for resignation. Methodologically, the application of CPT in translation studies enriches the theoretical toolkit of corpus-based translation studies. Chapter 9 distinguishes inspired writing from banality by evaluating the deviation from the reference corpus. Chapter 10 puts forward the hypothesis that inspired writing will differ from uninspired in the density of its subtextual and prosodic clashes, and that the clashes themselves will be indicative of the presence of inspiration (274). In order to test this hypothesis, Milojkovic, in Chapter 10, contacts several poets to elicit clear-cut cases of inspired writing. The final two chapters, concerning applications for foreign language teaching, pertain to time-honored pedagogical stylistics. Chapter 11 is a piece [End Page 551] of classroom corpus stylistics research with a twofold purpose: empirically, to verify Louw...