Kay Richardson's Television dramatic dialogue: A sociolinguistic study is an attempt to fill in a lacuna in language-oriented research on televised discourse. The author addresses a number or problems pertinent to dialogue in TV genres, both fictional (soap operas or sitcoms) and nonfictional (talk shows or quiz shows). In her discussion, Richardson conflates different theoretical perspectives, combining media studies with linguistic scholarship. A chief attraction of the volume is a diversified selection of example data, including selections from “Life on Mars” and “House.”

The book opens with an overview of proposals and studies about media discourse. They represent several disciplines and display various goals and methodologies, their common denominator being televised dialogues as the central topic of investigation. The second chapter focuses on the nature of dramatic dialogue, teasing out its peculiarities consequent upon the fact that there are two communicative levels underpinning mediated interactions, which the author captures under the concept of their representational character. For example, conversations held by fictional characters must be available to TV audiences. This objective necessitates a number of discoursal tactics that need to be employed by scriptwriters.

The next two chapters try to account for screenwriters' and audience's vantage points. Richardson argues for the importance of scriptwriters' expertise and metalinguistic knowledge, which are crucial for their role as designers of oral interactions. By contrast, Ch. 5 gives some insight into audience's understanding and reception of, as well as response to, dramatic dialogue. Richardson shares her observations on how televised discourse can affect viewers' idiolects and motivate them to take action, and thereby (unwittingly) promote media products. Chs. 6 and 7 position televised dialogue in the context of sociolinguistic and pragmatic theories, as well as cognitive linguistics. Richardson rightly notes that dramatic dialogue can be discussed against the backdrop of linguistic scholarship. Researchers can probe televised conversations using many theories of communication, on the understanding that mediated dialogues should be reminiscent of everyday interactions. Richardson also endorses the well-acknowledged postulate that dialogue is geared towards characterization, capitalizing on sociocognitive schemata ingrained in viewers' minds.

The author's conclusions are preceded by two case studies, pointing to potential directions for further research. Richardson ventures into the area of the dialogue between dramatists and audiences, as well as touching upon impoliteness, a fast-developing field of study. The monograph brings into focus a number of vexing issues, such as the relationship between real and fictional dialogues, the portrayal of characters, and the roles of the viewer in film interpretation. Undoubtedly, this publication indicates a few strands of research to be pursued more systematically in the future and poses a number of questions, which call for more profound linguistic investigation, on the strength of ample background literature.