The 2000 Georgetown University Round Table focused on “the application of linguistics to … a full range of … professions” (p. 3). It offered tracks on education, journalism, law, medicine, technology, and other professions. The book reviewed here presents highlights from that conference: six plenary speeches, eight selected conference papers, and a closing discussion among plenary speakers, conference organizers, and audience members. The chapters are distributed fairly evenly across the range of professions identified for the conference. The plenary speakers were Shirley Brice Heath, John R. Rickford, Allan Bell, Roger W. Shuy, Richard M. Frankel, and Lee Lubbers. James E. Alatis and Heidi Hamilton were the conference chairs. In this review, I will not comment on each chapter of the book; rather, I will highlight some themes and focus on articles I found particularly relevant to them.

An overarching theme of this volume is the complex and historically shifting relationship between theory and application. As Shuy points out in the concluding section, the field of linguistics has moved between phases in which theoretical and applied work were closely integrated and phases in which the two were sharply differentiated. Currently the discipline seems to be moving toward integration again, with academics showing a renewed interest in how they might apply their expertise to various institutional settings. This book includes some chapters that focus on practical applications and others that investigate the professions more from a “knowledge for the sake of knowledge” point of view. It therefore has several target audiences. One potential readership, however, is students or established academics who wish to learn more about the opportunities they have to engage in practical work.

The conference's closing discussion is especially interesting in this regard. Participants raised a number of profound questions about what it means to be an academic who engages in applied work, going beyond the particularities of their areas to explore issues they all had in common. Several point out the importance and difficulty of learning to communicate effectively with their nonacademic audiences, the need to develop a “remarkable code-switching ability” (Rickford, 253). As someone who moves between academic and applied work myself, I have found that the cultural logics of these two realms are indeed more divergent than many academics realize. It is useful to remember Bourdieu's insights about how unusual the scholastic point of view is (Bourdieu 1990).

Shirley Brice Heath and John Rickford discuss the need for linguists to document the value of their contributions to the institutions where they apply their expertise. I agree that developing forms of assessment for our applications is a productive avenue for future work. Through the example of his own role in a school of medicine, Richard Frankel demonstrates that building close working relationships with professionals is also a means to gain influence. Roger Shuy further points out that linguists can advertise the value of their work and stimulate job opportunities by giving talks to audiences of potential clients.

Researchers who inhabit both academic and applied worlds not only need to become fluent in the codes of each context; they also need to develop the ability to translate each world's logic to the other one. When linguists present their insights to nonacademics, they face the task of making their specialized theoretical notions easily understandable to a lay audience. A volume like this offers the reverse challenge: The authors are faced with the task of explaining the needs and priorities of the professions they work with to an audience of linguists.

Shuy's chapter on “Breaking into language and law: The trials of the insider-linguist” is a model of how to explain differences between the practice of linguistics in a university setting and its use in an arena of application. The body of this paper is organized around a description of eight problems linguists encounter when they work with lawyers. For instance, linguists need to shift their sense of time and deadlines, since legal cases often require a quick turnaround and the deadlines, set by the court, are inflexible. Another problem Shuy explores is the way courtroom procedure restricts what linguists can say during a trial. He describes the rules concerning turn-taking and topic control that shape direct examination and cross-examination, and explains the implications of these rules for what linguists on the stand can or cannot say.

Rickford's chapter on “Linguistics, education, and the Ebonics firestorm” presents a thoughtful account of the linguistic issues surrounding the 1996 Oakland School Board resolution. In particular, he explores the problems that led the Oakland School Board to seek a series of remedies, and the “Contrastive Analysis” approach to teaching Standard English that teachers were to adopt. Rickford's detailed description of this approach is a welcome addition to the many commentaries linguists have offered on the Ebonics controversy. He presents three examples in which Contrastive Analysis has been used successfully in other schools, and he narrates its history of use in Oakland since 1981 as part of a “Standard English Proficiency” program. Rickford's chapter is a model for the way linguists can contribute to public debates on government policy.

A third chapter that illuminates the history and cultural logic of an institution in which linguists can make a difference is “The (socio)linguistic turn in physician-patient communication research,” by Richard M. Frankel. The author considers the three main tasks doctors accomplish during medical encounters: data gathering, relationship building, and educating patients. In each area, he identifies common mismatches between the assumptions and needs of physicians and of patients, and communication problems that result. I found Frankel's arguments compelling and would have liked to see an additional section on how he has applied these insights to medical training programs. Frankel also points out two further opportunities for applied research: changes in doctor-patient relationships over time, and the effects of computer technologies.

The chapter by Anne-Marie Currie, Jocelyn Cohan, & Larisa Zlatic, “Linguistic approaches in information retrieval of medical texts,” is interesting because it represents the extreme of an applied focus. This is the only chapter whose authors do not work for an educational organization. This paper provides a window into an arena of applied work – technology – that is an increasingly common career option for linguists.

The chapters described so far all draw clear connections between linguistic research and its practical application. However, not all of the contributions to the book follow this approach. Other chapters present fascinating insights about particular professions without seeking to identify practical uses for these discoveries. The two papers that examine the media both fall into this category. In “Dateline, deadline: journalism, language, and the reshaping of time and place in the millennial world,” Allan Bell offers an elegant analysis of changes in news reporting over the past hundred years, using New Zealand media accounts of three journeys to the South Pole as illustrations. He shows how the time between an event and its reporting became increasingly compressed as the medium for “scoops” shifted from newspapers to radio to television. Likewise, the distance between news consumers and the subjects of stories shrank to the point where an intimate conversation between the explorer just arrived at the South Pole and his wife was broadcast live on television. In “Involvement strategies in news analysis roundtable discussions,” Stacy Krainz shows how journalists use the involvement strategies of repetition, constructed dialogue, and figurative language to enhance their persuasiveness during unscripted discussions between reporters.

Finally, some chapters fall halfway between an academic and an applied focus. Shirley Brice Heath presents a rich analysis of parallel changes in philosophy that have occurred in the fields of business and community-based youth organizations, in her chapter “The talk of learning professional work.” She argues that both domains increasingly seek to develop creative and entrepreneurial qualities in their members. Her paper summarizes deep and extensive ethnographic work among youth-based organizations. She does not examine business organizations in the same way, so this suggests productive areas for future research. A study that tracked graduates of youth-based organizations as they developed careers in corporations would be fascinating. Would the subjects' earlier experiences give them an advantage in the workplace? If so, such a study could have powerful effects; for instance, large companies might be motivated to donate money to youth organizations.

Another chapter that occupies this midway point is Nkonko M. Kamwangamalu's “Language policy and mother-tongue education in South Africa: The case for a market-oriented approach.” Kamwangamalu shows how the history of language planning in South Africa has led to a devaluation of education in African languages. The present government formally treats nine African languages as equal to English and Afrikaans. In practice, however, English carries the greatest value because it is used in most workplace contexts. Kamwangamalu argues that the government must go further in raising the market value of African languages. This could be done, for instance, by making “certified knowledge of these languages … one of the criteria for access to employment” (132). The chapter thus suggests a powerful arena of application for linguists who could develop collaborative relationships with the South African government.

Given the varying perspectives offered by different chapters, this book holds interest for several audiences. On the one hand, it is a valuable resource for students as well as established faculty members who want to learn about opportunities to do applied work. On the other hand, it is of equal relevance for those who have a strictly academic interest in the linguistic aspects of the professions and institutions addressed. In addition, the articles are accessible to students, so teachers can use them in courses that include a consideration of language and the professions.