Alberta, and Louisiana. The analysis of individual speakers focuses on the variable portions of the vocalic system (e.g., the mid vowels), liaison, and elision. In addition, with the support of the transcript of a brief free conversation sample, other aspects of conversational interactions are discussed, including prosody, syntax, lexicon, and discursive features. For example, these samples of informal features show vernacular interrogative structures (Comment on disait?, Ça a changé quoi?) and left detachment (ben Freddy le train euh, déjà Paris, il m’a dit qu’il n’y allait plus en train). What this extensive mass of data reveals is that spoken French differs significantly from Referential French, the variety described in dictionaries and grammatical descriptions that underlies the variety taught to foreign learners. Examples in the verbal system include the absence of the passé simple, past subjunctive, future perfect, and the free alternation between the simple and periphrastic future.An important methodological article bears on the notion of the norm in spoken French. With regard to the vowel system, in France, Paris still sets the standard. Contrasts such as patte versus pâte or brin versus brun are fading. Relatively new trends include a counterclockwise movement in the nasal vowels, in which /ε̃/ is moving toward /ɑ̃/, and the latter toward /ɔ̃/, and mute e tagging, in which that phoneme is added after final consonants (bonjour[ə], bac[ə]). American teachers will appreciate the focus on North American varieties, to which half of the descriptions of overseas varieties of French are devoted. These descriptions show wide divergences from the Parisian norm, including more complex vowel systems, major grammatical differences, and English loanwords and calques. This volume stands as a basic tool for the teaching of French pronunciation. It is accompanied by a website offering transcribed recorded materials that enable students to hear the diverse voices of Francophony:. Indiana University Albert Valdman Moline, Estelle, et Stosic Dejan. L’expression de la manière en français. Paris: Ophrys, 2016. ISBN 978-2-70801-461-9. Pp. 216. Even though the notion of manner seems intuitively understandable to all, its precise definition is nonetheless debated. Two positions can be adopted: either treating manner as a primitive ontological category, along the lines of what is proposed in Jackendoff (1983), or treating it as a semantic domain with features and mechanisms that must be specified. This book adopts the latter view, and sets as its goal to describe and evaluate the different ways in which manner is expressed in French, demonstrating that adverbs do not constitute the sole strategy speakers have at their disposal— contrary to what is commonly assumed. Structurally, the book is divided into five chapters, along with an introduction and a conclusion. Every chapter ends with a 274 FRENCH REVIEW 91.2 Reviews 275 useful summary about the issues discussed therein, and the book includes a general bibliography and an index. The first chapter provides a historical discussion of how the notion of manner came to be and presents the reader with a comprehensive analysis of compléments circonstanciels, grammatical constituents via which manner has been assumed to be primarily encoded. The next four chapters consider alternative ways in which manner is encoded. Chapter 2 analyzes two syntactic markers, comme and comment. Chapter 3 discusses lexical encodings, via verbs, adverbs and nouns, and chapter 4 looks at the interaction of syntax and lexicon, arguing that such a lexicosyntactic approach (as opposed to an ontological one) should be favored when trying to characterize the notion of manner. Chapter 5 ends the typology of strategies by examining morphological markers. It is only in the conclusion that the authors provide a working definition of manner—one that they argue can encompass the different mechanisms reviewed, and general enough to also allow interacting with related notions such as instrument and motion. One of the main assets of this book is the quantity of examples given and their rigorous categorization. However, two shortcomings can be noted. First, the analyses sometimes remain quite general and vague. There is, for instance, no argumentation about the choice of the position adopted with respect to the definition of manner, for example, why an ontological perspective on manner is not seen as a...