Besides affording a way of modeling deviations from canonical morphotactics, rule composition makes it possible to see apparently recalcitrant morphotactic patterns as conforming to canonical criteria if these are assumed to cover composite rules as well as simple rules. I examine an apparent deviation from the integral stem criterion in Sanskrit and apparent deviations from the rule opposition criterion in Latin, Limbu, and Sanskrit. Each of these phenomena can be reconciled with the canonical criterion from which it apparently deviates if this criterion is assumed to cover composite rules as well as simple rules. All of these are cases in which deviation from the minimal rule criterion facilitates conformity to other canonical morphotactic criteria.

Rule composition makes it possible to model an important kind of deviation from the rule independence criterion – cases in which the application of one rule is directly dependent on that of another, carrier rule. In such cases, the only use of the dependent rule is as part of a composite rule incorporating both the dependent and its carrier. Where the definition of a word form involves two carrier rules, it can further happen that the same dependent rule composes with both of them, engendering a pattern of multiple exponence that deviates from the unique sequence criterion. I discuss two cases of this sort of rule dependency: Limbu verb morphology exhibits a pattern in which dependent rules compose with their carrier rules; Sanskrit presents a pattern of the reverse sort, in which a carrier rule composes with its dependent.

This chapter surveys the corpus of early Buddhist texts that have survived the passage of time and can be consulted by scholars. These comprise the complete canon of the Theravāda school written in Pali, a significant amount of the canon in Sanskrit belonging to the Sarvāstivāda school, plus more in Chinese translation, and substantial portions of the canons of other schools, also preserved in Chinese. Determining whether particular texts were early or later, along with analysis of their mode of transmission, enables them to be evaluated as sources for comparative analysis. This rather technical chapter concludes with a discussion of difficulties encountered in drawing parallels between texts from different schools in different languages.

Chapter one introduces South Asia’s people, geography, and history until the late twelfth century, and examines indigenous religious traditions as well as ones introduced by forces from Central Asia and the Iranian world. For India, by which we mean historic South Asia, we discuss differences in the north and south by focusing on Chandella patronage in north India of temples at Khajuraho, and Chola rule in south India and the construction of the Rajarajeshvara temple in Thanjavur. Contemporary with the construction of the Rajarajeshvara temple is Mahmud of Ghazni’s rise to power in what is modern Afghanistan and his subsequent raids into India. While Ghaznavid sway over India was short-lived it paved the way for the introduction of Islam and Ghurid dominance.

Chapter five begins with the ousting of the Lodi dynasty by Babur, the first Mughal, and continues to his son Humayun’s reign. Sher Shah Sur, an Indo-Afghan warlord, briefly seized control from Humayun instituting several administrative practices that the Mughals adopted. After surveying Akbar’s military conquests and alliances, we consider how Akbar’s concept of state evolved and its impact on politics and policies regarding India’s multicultural, multiethnic population. We then analyze how these policies affected cultural production, arguing that the use of specific languages and the production of art and architecture were part of a carefully planned political campaign. The chapter ends with an exploration of the political careers and artistic patronage of two top nobles at Akbar’s court.

There are a few hundred known sign languages around the world, and in such language communities, multilingualism is the norm. This multilingualism traverses modalities: signed, written, and, in some cases, spoken forms of language. Such a linguistic landscape inevitably leads to various forms of language contact between languages, including contact between two or more signed languages (characterised by lexical borrowing), signed language and spoken language (characterised by mouthings), and signed language and written language (characterised by fingerspelling, initialized fingerspelling). This chapter also covers sign language interference, code switching and code mixing, and the concept of bimodal bilingualism. The chapter concludes with a discussion of pidginization and creolization of sign languages and sign language endangerment, as well as general comments on the characteristics of contact between signed languages.

Chapter 6 situates Charles Wilkins’ approach to his translation of the Bhagavad-Gītā in the long history of British interpretations of Hinduism charted throughout this book. It argues that his ‘philosophical’ interpretation of the Hindoo religion was orientated to the same Enlightenment culture of religious debate that shaped the earlier work of Holwell and Dow, while at the same time contributing to the politics of his patron, Governor General Warren Hastings.

In this chapter, the author describes language as a location and the site of belonging, as well as a political tool for the empowering of one linguistic over another within a particular province and nation. It also describes the struggle to link Muslims with Urdu, thereby isolating both and deepening existing fractures in society, alongside attempts to privilege Sanskrit over all other ancient and modern languages.