Locative Expressions in English and French: A Multimodal Approach by Mark Tutton (review)

publications, are at the heart of the entire volume. While pertinent, the contribution on relative pronouns in Old and Middle French (Dupuy et Limousin) in the corpus linguistics section breaks from the more pedagogy- and/or acquisition-focused nature of the other seven papers. The only other chapter in the corpus linguistics section (Cappeau) serves as a sound introduction to the rest of the volume, with its analysis contrasting two approaches to presenting relatives (as a subordinate clause or as a type of nominal elaboration) in French textbooks and grammars. The middle section on second language acquisition of subordination involves a multitude of L1s (English, French, Polish, German, etc.) with primarily a functionalist and/or information processing approach to acquisition. These studies offer insights on global textual organization comparing English to French (Lambert), the extent to which L1 continues to influence L2 syntactic choices in narration even among advanced speakers (Leclercq et Lenart), and discrepancies between how and when relatives are presented in textbooks and observed developmental stages in acquisition (Trévisiol-Okamura). The latter’s recommendations on methods to facilitate second language learning of relatives makes a nice bridge to the section on didactics focusing on the explicit approaches to teaching relative clauses to français langue maternelle students. This final section includes an analysis of 8- to 11-year-olds’use of relatives in writing (Roubaud), a case study involving lessons with 11- to 14-year-olds in French-speaking Switzerland (Canelas-Trevisi), and an analysis of didactic transposition of relatives elucidated by a lesson in a CM2 classroom (Kaheraoui, Coret, et Volteau). Potentially validating for teachers and students of French alike are the observations that transformation exercises (e.g., from simple to complex clauses or the reverse) prove to be difficult no matter the L1 and that the use of dont does not come readily to anyone. University of Missouri, Kansas City Lindsy L. Myers Tutton, Mark. Locative Expressions in English and French: A Multimodal Approach. Berlin: Gruyter, 2016. ISBN 978-3-11035-473-7. Pp. xiiii + 323. 100 a. However basic and common the linguistic task of expressing location may seem, the relationships between spatial cognitive representations and their linguistic expressions are still not fully understood. Using both a crosslinguistic and multimodal approach, Tutton’s revised doctoral dissertation provides an empirical contribution to understanding how location is linguistically expressed. His study not only compares the use of locative expressions in French and in English, but also analyses how speech and gesture express locative information. During the experimental tasks, French and English speakers were asked to describe two drawings—one representing a lounge scene and the other a street scene—to an addressee, and their exchanges were videotaped . Tutton’s analyses indicate that gestures and speech interact in a complementary fashion. Gestures are often used to specify the directionality of nondirectional lexical 226 FRENCH REVIEW 90.3 Reviews 227 items or to provide information about distance, topological configuration, or orientation. When describing the street scene, for instance, speakers tended to use speech to describe the frontal axis and gestures for the lateral axis. The analyses show that gestures are an integrant part of locative expressions and highlight the crossmodal dimension of locative expressions, especially as some objects can function both as gestural Figures and lexical Grounds. The way gestures and speech interact does not seem to be completely specific to a given language, as gestures can encode the same type of information for similar crosslinguistic items. French and English speakers were observed, for example, to clarify the directionality of nondirectional lexical items such as next to/à côté de with gestures. Tutton points out numerous differences in the way French and English speakers express locations. English speakers, for instance, tend to specify left and right lexically and to use posthold strokes more than the French. On the other hand, French speakers tend to use Grounds that are scene-internal and to not specify topological information that can be pragmatically inferred. They also appear to be more sensitive to the expression of distance, especially when using en face de and devant. Tutton notes that, when describing the lounge scene, speakers tended to use en face de to express...