MLR, 102.4, 2007 II23 or Latin American examples (and a mixture of combinations as far as source and target languages and cultures are concerned). Most contributors, on the other hand, share theoretical perspectives broadly aligned with descriptive and target-oriented Translation Studies, with theoccasional reference to functionalist approaches such as skopos theoryand to semiotics.Many revisitestablished strategies for the translation of vernacular language, including standardization, substitution of a source-language varietywith a target-language one, or the creation of an ad hoc variant to signal dis tance from the standard. The general consensus is that, from an equivalence point of view, no solution is entirely satisfactory and Berman's warnings about the risks involved in attempting the translation of vernacular language are repeatedly quoted (e.g. byAnita Weston and Kathryn Woodham). Even more in evidence areVenuti's notions of familiarization and foreignization, as opposing and antagonistic transla tion strategies-yet not all authors are satisfiedwith thisdichotomy. Anna Fochi, for instance, proposes the supplementary concepts of 'neutralization' and 'denationaliza tion' (p. 74), which she derives fromTorop, inorder to stress themobility inherent in translation processes and theway inwhich the resulting chains of translated/adapted textsdefyVenuti's binarymodel. A similarly dynamic picture of translation processes is traced by Edwin Gentzler, whose analysis of fiction,performance art, and film in American 'border cultures' describes translation and polyphony (both linguistic and cultural) as always already inscribed (at times hidden) within the process of artistic production performed by hybrid, hyphenated artists. Although no definitive solutions are offered to the trials of the translator engaged in the rendering of locally rooted,minor voices, the overall effectof the collection is to confirm the feasibility of such an enterprise. All successful strategies are them selves deeply local and located. In factwhat many of the case studies show is that the presence of a strong rationale for a translation and of an equally strong, creative commitment on thepart of the translator(s) ensures at least thepossibility of success. No translator can escape thequestions posed byAnne Marie Miraglia (p. 4I 3): 'Quoi traduire? Pour qui traduire? et Comment traduire?' Those who engage with minor languages andmarginal voices-whether thedesired result is renderingBelli's sonnets inEnglish (Riccardo Duranti), Tramblay'sjoual plays inScots or 'italiese' (Miraglia), or Shakespeare's Hamlet in Mauritian Creole (Roshni Mooneeram)-should pay even more attention to thenuances of theiranswers. UNIVERSITY OFWARWICK LOREDANAPOLEZZI Menippean Satire Reconsidered: From Antiquity to theEighteenth Century. By Ho WARDD. WEINBROT. Baltimore: JohnsHopkins University Press. 2005. xviii+ 375 pp. $6o. ISBN 978-o-80I8-82I0-4. This is, in itsprimary focus, a study of theMenippean characteristics of themas terpieces of eighteenth-century prose, or prosimetric, satire,most notably by Swift, Pope, and Richardson. The book thus revisits and complements the investigations of a flurryof criticism produced in the i90os: JoelRelihan's Ancient Menippean Satire (Baltimore: JohnsHopkins University Press, I993), Peter Dronke's Versewith Prose fromPetronius toDante (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, I994), Scott Blanchard's Scholars'Bedlam (Lewisburg: Bucknell University Press, 1995), andmy ownMenippean Satire and the Republic ofLetters, I58I-I655 (Geneva: Droz, I996). Like any student ofMenippean satire, however, Howard D. Weinbrot must startby 'clearing theground' (p. i) and consider a host of authors who have either themselves laid claim to the Menippean label or have been associated with it.He thus provides a corrective evaluation both ofBakhtin's 'Menippea' and of Frye's 'anatomy', notions 1124 Reviews which have their following still (pp. i i-i 6). Acknowledging that Menippean satire is eminently aware of itsown tradition, he then surveys itsancient roots fromBion of Borysthenes, over theCynic Menippus, theRoman scholar Varro, and theHellenic mockers Lucian and Julian, to the novelists Petronius and Apuleius, not forgetting Seneca's 'snapshot of depraved power' (pp. 46-50, here p. 50). From this review of 'essential' classical models Weinbrot 'empirically derive[s] [his] definition ofMenippean satire' as 'a form that uses at least two other genres, languages, cultures, or changes of voice tooppose a dangerous, false, or specious and threatening orthodoxy' (pp. 6 and 297). Its tone can be either 'severe' or 'muted' (as, apparently but disputably, inSeneca's Apocolocyntosis, p. 50), so that 'jolly'works such asApuleius's Golden Ass or Sterne's Tristram Shandy...