Danesi proposes an understanding of second language (L2) teaching based on the characteristic differences between right hemisphere and left hemisphere processing. He argues that certain language teaching techniques are more compatible with one hemisphere or the other and suggests that successful L2 teaching involves techniques that engage initially the right hemisphere, then the left hemisphere, and finally both together. Based on the neurobiological literature, he argues that left hemisphere (L-Mode) functions are such things as pronunciation, grammar, literal meaning, sequential relations, verbal memory, and logical thinking. Right hemisphere (R-Mode) functions include prosodic systems, metaphorical and emotional meaning, spatial relations, nonverbal memory, intuitive reasoning, and associations and synthesis (see Table 1, p. 35).

The author begins with a rather comprehensive discussion of the history of language teaching methodology with a focus on what he calls “The SLT [second-language teaching] Dilemma”: the lack of success in language teaching. He then provides a concise introduction to brain anatomy and function. Chapters 3, 4, and 5 are the core of the book. Here, he argues that novel material should be introduced using techniques that support the R-Mode through experiential learning; then techniques exercising the L-Mode are employed to provide formalization and practice with the new material. Finally, the author calls for an intermodal stage of instruction during which the new language material is used in creative ways.

Several additional principles are introduced in connection with the three-stage progression described earlier. Most interesting and perhaps most innovative are the conceptualization principle and the notion of conceptual competence. Danesi points out that concepts in any language are frequently embedded in metaphors often specific to the culture in which the language is used. It has long been recognized that metaphorical processing is a right hemisphere activity and, hence, potentially a domain of R-Mode-focused teaching. Understanding target language metaphors, therefore, helps the brain to deal with target language conceptual structure. To prepare appropriate pedagogical materials for instruction in conceptual structure, the author advocates extending contrastive analysis research to the comparison of conceptual metaphors in the source and target languages.

Knowledge in the neurosciences has increased enormously in the last decade and a half. The time has come for researchers in the language sciences to make use of that knowledge to understand language acquisition and use. There is, of course, a danger in overstating our current understanding of the connections between neuroanatomy and physiology and language processes. The author avoids this danger and warns the reader that no method is adequate for all learners because of the enormous interindividual variability among learners. He recognizes that his proposals for pedagogy based on brain function have some indirect empirical support but that they, nevertheless, remain speculations. However, teaching cannot be postponed until we thoroughly understand learning. Therefore, individual teachers might profitably inform themselves about how the brain works and, with that knowledge, be inspired to think in different ways about the learning enterprise and to experiment with different teaching techniques that this knowledge might suggest. Danesi's book might lead some teachers in precisely this direction.

The book could potentially serve an additional purpose. The author deals holistically with each hemisphere. SLA researchers or teachers interested in the neural underpinnings of their work might consider approaching the problem at a slightly more microlevel. Structures such as the hippocampus, the amygdala, the orbitofrontal cortex, the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, the parietal cortex, and so on are represented on both sides of the brain (in other words, in the left hemisphere and the right hemisphere). It might be fruitful to search the literature to determine what is known about the difference in the functions of these regions in each cortex. This knowledge could suggest additional teaching techniques that would be directed at subsystems within the hemispheres.