TONER, ANNE. Ellipsis in English Literature: Signs of Omission. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2015. x + 255 pp. $95.00 hardcover. Despite its brevity (170 pages of text, 85 pages of end matter), Ellipsis in English Literature is actually two books: first, history of as chronicled in grammar and rhetoric books from sixteenth through twentieth century; second, an application to literary works, exploring how writers have used available punctuations of hesitations, interruptions and omissions (1). The first book is perhaps most useful, because few readers know history she uncovers, whereas most will recognize that her study casts minimal new light on texts she writes about, usually just reinforcing what has long been thought. Still, some important observations on Richardson, Meredith, and Woolf make this book well worth author's effort and reader's attention. Toner early establishes several fundamental points around which her study will revolve: can be represented by dots (points), dashes, asterisks, hyphens; it can be used to imitate speech; because it is lack, it necessarily involves reader; and because it serves to indicate unfinished thoughts, may be thought of as a sign of linguistic failure...or artistry, of depth...or banality (6). In that novel evolves toward interiority, becomes more and more important as marker: the intrinsic difficulty of conveying non-verbalized internal state is expressed typographically by ellipsis... (13). The relationship to speech necessitates opening chapter's focus on printed drama: is here as important as drama because print engages problem that early authors often paid little attention to punctuation, task left to compositors. To this complication, Toner adds slow acceptance of by grammarians, questions of how it would be marked (e.g., dots or dashes), and when it would be justified, grammatically and stylistically. Her discussion of early folio and quarto printings of King Lear exhibits strengths and weaknesses of her approach. The scholarship is impeccable, an intricate tracking of texts and their variations. On other hand, play on ellipse and eclipse, obvious enough, seems insufficient to suggest that the typographical sign can very subtly bring reader imaginatively closer to experiencing, suffering human beings (43-44). One suspects Shakespeare did not need dash to make that possible. At heart of Toner's project, then, is her effort to weigh as equal to word in conveying meaning (or its lack). Some authors lend themselves readily to her thesis: Sterne, Gothic novelists, George Meredith. Precisely their self-conscious usage means that critics have already covered much of ground. Hence her discussion of Richardson offers good deal more than her comments on Sterne. To be sure, as printer Richardson was well-positioned to control appearance of his printed pages, as Janine Barchas and others have richly discussed. The paradoxical connection of to novelistic ideal of total inclusiveness (omissions that signal desire for completeness) is perceptively discussed by Toner in one of best sections of her book; her conclusion, that ellipsis characterizes form of Clarissa (68), is excessive, but her explanation certainly tends to justify her enthusiasm: these marks of are part of narrative trajectory in which we see disabling of heroine's verbal agency. …