{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.030790283954840916, 'fraction_numerical': 0.010263427984946972, 'mean_word_length': 5.768518518518518, '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': 1, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Landscape in Language: Transdisciplinary Perspectives, Culture and Language Use 4

The relevance of philosophical conceptions of landscape cross-culturally and the embeddedness of language in the human and natural world is the focus of the volume under review. The 21 chapters in this well composed and intelligently edited edition provide ample evidence of where certain modern priorities in anthropological linguistics lie and how contemporary authors attempt to tackle complex phenomena dealing with more intricate aspects of language in landscape and landscape in language research. Ethnophysiography, or the ‘‘linguistics of landscape’’ (p. 3), differs from studies of the ‘linguistic landscape’ (e.g. Shohamy & Gorter 2009) by considering landscape terms and categories, toponyms and the cultural and spiritual significance of places in relation to cross-cultural and cross-linguistic differences. It was initiated in 2002 by David Mark and Andrew Turk and is defined as ‘‘the study of differences in the way languages use generic terms and proper names (toponyms) for landscape features’’ (p. 25). This research perspective draws all the chapters together epistemologically. The contributions are theoretically broad ranging from the philosophical complexities of ethnophysiography and the relationship between European phenomenological approaches to landscape perception and indigenous cultural conceptions of place (e.g. Turk’s chapter on ‘Exploring philosophy of place: Potential for synergy between phenomenology and ethnophysiography’). They are also methodologically forward thinking by relating academic approaches to mapping, geographical information systems (GIS) and linguistic documentation of landscape to indigenous methods of obtaining place-knowledge (e.g. Turk and Mark’s ‘Perspectives on the ethical conduct of landscape in language research’ chapter). The perspectives put forward in this volume are not only relevant to toponymists and scholars interested in spatial relationships in landscape perception (e.g. Heyes’ ‘Between the trees and the tides: Inuit ways of discriminating space in a coastal and boreal landscape’ chapter) and the ontology of landscape in language (cf. Kuhn’s chapter), but also to those concerned more generally with multicultural readings and interpretations of environment, language and culture interaction (cf. Lynch’s ‘Navigating regional landscapes with Jicarilla personal narrative’ chapter). There has been recent interest in toponymy and language in landscape interaction in linguistics and anthropology, especially based in approaches which consider spatial orientation and its implications for measuring linguistic and cognitive behaviour cross linguistically (e.g. Burenhult 2008). This volume contributes to these studies by putting forward an impressive breadth and depth of analysis. The Journal of Multicultural Discourses Vol. 7, No. 2, July 2012, 197 200