This book is unlike other sociolinguistics texts in its coverage and in its consistent critical focus. It is not so much a guide to doing sociolinguistic research as a guide to “some of the ways in which society shapes us through its language, in the belief that by knowing something about the constraints exerted on us by language we can avoid becoming its prisoners” (p. 8). It is an excellent text for students who may not be particularly interested in the details of variationist research, but who would benefit from rethinking often prejudicial opinions and from increasing awareness of the role of language in constructing and maintaining power. In particular, it is a valuable resource for future teachers. Although the text is generally accessible, its focus on the United Kingdom may be a minor drawback for readers from elsewhere.

Unusually for a sociolinguistics text, the first two chapters, comprising Part 1 of the book, deal with first-language acquisition. Montgomery justifies this inclusion by pointing out that children become full members of society only by learning its language, and in fact his discussion emphasizes the acquisition of social functions. Chapter 2 in particular explores the strategies small children use to enter into dialogue and how dialogue supports acquisition. Several examples of child–adult dialogue demonstrate the evolution of an utterance as its functions change over time. For example, What’s that? may first be used by a parent to increase the likelihood of a successful dialogue with a child who cannot yet handle more complicated questions such as Why did you do that? Later adoption of Wassat? by the child may serve both to learn new words and to keep an adult engaged in conversation.

Part 2, “Linguistic diversity and the speech community,” comprises chapters 3–9 and is the bulk of the book. Chapter 3, “Language and regional variation: Accent and dialect,” deals mostly with accent differences, providing a few examples of lexical and grammatical differences toward the end. The chapter emphasizes accent evaluation and how varieties come to be prestige forms, rather than quantitative analysis of language variation or methodology. Montgomery emphasizes the equality of varieties, and I think makes this point better than many authors by contrasting “nonstandard dialect” with “a standard dialect” rather than with “Standard English.” Chapter 4, like chapter 3, focuses on the UK, in this case on Jamaican Creole as a marker of African-Caribbean identity. A brief explanation of the origins of Jamaican Creole is followed by examples contrasting Creole forms to “Standard English.” Discussion of the creole continuum and the asymmetrical use of forms between parents and children is illustrated by an excerpt from a story written in Jamaican Creole. The chapter concludes with a brief discussion of crossing.

Chapter 5 discusses anti-language, including how the term does and does not apply to rapping in hip-hop music. Montgomery argues that rap has features of an anti-language, including its difficulty for outsiders to understand and its over-lexification of items such as money and drugs, for which he provides numerous examples (though some are not limited to use in rap). On the other hand, he also points out that rapping is not separated from the mainstream to the degree of an anti-society. His point that anti-language is not “an absolute category” but rather “an idea to which given instances approximate more or less closely” (118) is a good reminder for students who are sometimes frustrated by nebulous categorizations of varieties. Chapter 6 covers a wide range of issues under the umbrella of register, addressed in terms of field, tenor, and mode. The discussion of mode is particularly good, with a transcript and discussion illustrating features of spontaneous speech, and an interesting analysis of a BBC “message board” posting, a mixed mode with features of both speech and writing. In contrast, the discussion of field is limited to specialized vocabulary, while tenor includes forms of personal address and politeness, discussed quite briefly (e.g., no mention of positive and negative face). The chapter ends with a helpful in-depth example analysis of a bank’s letter to a customer.

A surprisingly detailed treatment – all of chapter 7 – is devoted to discussion and critique of Bernstein’s (Reference Bernstein1971, Reference Bernstein1990) “restricted” vs. “elaborated” codes. Bernstein argued that working-class children typically used a so-called restricted code, which is tied to a specific situation and makes use of implicit meaning, while schools required use of the elaborated code typically used by middle-class speakers. Montgomery suggests that “restrictedness” vs. “elaboratedness” can be found on a continuum, and speakers’ use of these is likely to depend on the situation, although speakers will tend to prefer one end or the other. While he puts “restrictedness” in quotation marks, to use these ideas seriously it would be more useful to suggest an alternate term (perhaps “implicit”) that would show how its meaning has changed and avoid connotations of inferiority. In chapter 8, “Language and gender,” Montgomery first illustrates the distinction between gender and sex, citing research that shows the influence of both on voice pitch, and acknowledges the androcentrism of much sociolinguistic research that has failed to challenge stereotypes. The following subsections start from folk-linguistic questions about whether women tend to speak more correctly or more politely than men, but the discussion progresses quickly to a more complex consideration of how gender interacts with factors such as social class, age, and social networks. Montgomery also points out the need for clear definitions of concepts like “polite,” with the caveat that even more linguistically based terms like “tag question” and “interruption” are not always straightforward to identify. I wish Montgomery’s discussion of explanations of differences drew on academic publications (e.g. Coates Reference Coates1996, Reference Coates2003; Tannen Reference Tannen1994) for the “subcultures” view rather than on Tannen’s popular work (Reference Tannen1991). Chapter 9 provides a conclusion to Part 2, drawing on the preceding chapters to reconsider the notion of “speech community,” a term used but not defined before this chapter. This ordering works well, as the discussion can draw on the concrete, in-depth examples given previously to illuminate the complexity of the concept. Montgomery stresses the relationship between language and identity, with linguistic variables showing solidarity with one’s own group and demarcation from other groups. He also points out parallels, for example between gender research and Bernstein’s research on social class. Ultimately he describes a speech community as an imagined community with an imagined standard.

Part 3, consisting of chapter 10, “Language and social interaction,” draws on conversation analysis, discourse analysis, and ethnography of communication to analyze functions of language beyond “informing.” Openings, closings, and various functions and types of questions are discussed with an eye to power and institutional roles. This chapter also includes discussion of cultural differences in how much speech is used, when it is used, and to what purposes. In Part 4, consisting of chapter 11, “Language and Representation,” Montgomery introduces relativist and universalist positions on how language represents reality. However, his main point is that “there is no absolutely neutral and disinterested way of apprehending and representing the world” (254–55). The majority of the chapter provides examples of this point. Of particular interest is his discussion of terms for nuclear weapons, which he points out are typically referred to by names emphasizing technical sophistication (e.g. devices) or delivery system (e.g. missiles), while bomb is now used almost exclusively in reference to terrorists (e.g. suicide bomber). He also provides a devastating list of post-9/11 euphemisms and definitions and a critical discourse analysis of newspaper accounts of civil unrest and of men’s violence against women. The schematic used to illustrate his analysis of active and passive constructions in these accounts is not particularly transparent, but fortunately the analysis is clear without it.

Each chapter includes a list of “background sources and further reading,” sometimes with commentary. This is where Montgomery explicitly names the research traditions he is drawing on, as critical discourse analysis (for example) is not identified or explained in the main text. He also provides references for key ideas not discussed in the main text, such as communities of practice. In some cases, such as in the language and gender chapter, there is little to no commentary, making it more difficult to find the source for a particular claim made in the main text. Follow-up activities for each chapter vary: Sometimes there are suggestions for research projects, while other times data with questions are provided.

Overall, this book is very engaging, with fascinating in-depth examples. Adding to its readability is the limited use of phonetic symbols, often illustrated with informal dialect spelling so readers can get them from context, and parenthetical glosses of terms as needed. However, a glossary of terms and a list of words to exemplify sounds would be helpful, especially since terms are occasionally used without glosses or prior definition (e.g. argot, tag, glottal stop). While its coverage is different from what readers of Language in Society might expect, this book would make an excellent main text for a course for graduate or advanced undergraduate students in communications, education, and related fields, or as a critical supplement in a course for sociolinguists.