{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.025974025974025976, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003952569169960474, 'mean_word_length': 5.174216027874564, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
RESPONSIBILITY AND EVIDENCE IN ORAL DISCOURSE. Jane H. Hill and Judith T. Irvine (Eds.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993. Pp. viii + 316.

Hayhoe and Parker's volume is one of a series arising out of the biennial conference on English teaching, held at the University of East Anglia. The major value of the volume is its international scope: The book represents a wide variety of very specific political and educational issues concerning the teaching of English literacy in diverse countries. For instance, Cox, of the University of Manchester, argues that teachers must help the cause of racial tolerance by deliberately redrawing the "canon" of English teaching. Writing from a Canadian perspective, Bogdan considers some of the problems involved in widening the canon texts. The chapter by Janks, of South Africa, argues that students must be taught "critical language awareness" so that they learn about their own power to resist subjection and resist the state's ideological machinery. The concluding chapter, by Squire, of the United States, argues that a print-rich environment with no instruction will only help linguistically gifted children. Although this volume should be highly useful to language specialists who need information concerning the teaching of English across the world, it has one drawback: For the most part, the authors ignore an important aspect of diversity—linguistic. The authors rarely discuss the students' knowledge of languages other than English or the experiences that students of diverse proficiencies of English might have when participating in English literacy activities in school settings. Given the pluralistic societies from which the authors come, it is surprising that linguistic diversity is so often overlooked.