This chapter presents an up-to-date overview of what we know about contemporary grammatical variation in England, drawing on a range of sources such as traditional and variationist dialectological investigations, as well as those using new technologies such as smartphone apps and Twitter feeds. It begins with an assessment of how common the use of non-standard morphosyntax is vis à vis Standard English, before presenting a well-cited list of the most widespread features that are claimed to be found right across the country. The chapter then describes contemporary non-standard grammatical variation in England, examining, in turn: verbs, negation, adverbs, prepositions, plural marking, pronouns, comparison forms, articles and conjunctions. Beyond an account of contemporary morphosyntactic variability, this survey also helps us to locate those linguistic features and those geographical areas about which we hold very little up-to-date information, and, in the light of reports of widespread traditional dialect levelling, points to those non-standard features whose vitality appears to be precarious.

The author makes the case for a new understanding of the role of consent in international law. She begins by noting that the question of consent should be as central to international law as it is in other fields of law because legal norms give rise to power relations and impose constraints upon those to whom they apply, and those in power want these constraints to be accepted. Yet, the question of consent was, as the chapter claims, never raised in the classical era when State sovereignty made it possible for States to adopt international norms without their subjects’ consent. With the Enlightenment, however, the people’s consent through representation became the foundation of domestic law. Yet, most of the time, representation is, according to the author, formal and serves to justify the law as if it were produced by the general will. Because international law reflects the fickle concurrence of States’ wills, the world community’s law does not rely on popular consent. The world community is confronted with difficult challenges, and it needs, more than ever, norms that can meet this moment.

This chapter locates the Sophists within the context of earlier Greek wisdom traditions and efforts by a variety of individuals (from Hesiod to Parmenides and Pindar) to establish and communicate their own poetic and/or intellectual authority. The Sophists participated in long-standing debates over the relationship between sophia and technê, and over tensions surrounding physical versus intellectual skills, learning, and teaching. They also looked back to the practice of wisdom and maxim collection. There was no dominant tradition under which one could unify the manifestations of sophia in Archaic and early Classical Greece; this complexity was an important aspect of the sophistic inheritance, and is the background against which we must measure individual efforts to claim distinctive achievement. The analysis traces the importance of Hesiodic and quasi-Hesiodic wisdom collections, the emergence of the inquiry into nature and of intellectual and cultural experts known as “sages” (sophoi), and the representation of sophia in sympotic and epinician poetry.

This essay approaches David Tracy’s theme of conversation (‘which animates … the whole posture and method of Tracy’s career’) primarily as social and civil practice. Tracy’s Plurality and Ambiguity (1987) is brought into conversation with present-day cultural critic Sherry Turkle regarding how digitalised communications magnify the ‘interruptions’ of plurality and ambiguity that Tracy suggested mark all conversation. Some early critics suggested that Plurality and Ambiguity: (1) insufficiently considered the ambiguities of one’s interlocutors in conversation; and (2) ignored imperatives for some participants to resist powerful others’ framings of the rational task. Here, our digital situation can help highlight how deep down plurality and ambiguity stretch within any given conversation; as well as how socially fragile and crucial this phenomenon of conversation is. The world of deliberately designed digital platforms highlights how there is always some particular design to ‘the table’ at which conversation participants convene. Theology must learn the necessity of building a culture of genuine theological conversation by means of deliberate and detailed design decisions.

Since its appearance on the Western landscape three centuries ago, modern capitalism has given rise to a mythology that, unlike previous socio-economic orders, is so powerful that it can function without an ethical embedding – or simply create one in its own image. This essay argues that this end-of-ethics talk is premature, and only obscures the fact that capitalism is plural in its political and ethical forms, and equally varied in its social organizations and relation to the state. Rather than capitalism everywhere creating a homogeneous ethical landscape by bulldozing intermediary institutions and extra-market value spheres, capitalist societies have given rise to an agonistic plurality of political and moral embeddings and contentions. The essay explores this diversity through a comparison of modern capitalisms in Western, East Asian, and Islamic world areas.

This chapter explores three dimensions on which logical plurality may arise. The first is concerned with the application of logic. Traditionally, logic was taken to be universally applicable in the sense that a deductively valid argument can be applied in any discourse or inquiry whatsoever. Some pluralists oppose that view by arguing that there are arguments which, though deductively valid, cannot be applied across the board. Deductive validity, on that view, is domain-dependent. The second dimension concerns semantics. Typically, if logics differ in their logical vocabulary, then they will draw the line between valid and invalid arguments in different ways. Even if the logical vocabulary of two logics is superficially the same, the sets of arguments the logics classify as valid may differ due to differences in the meaning of the logical vocabulary. The third dimension concerns the nature of validity. The most substantial kind of pluralism amounts to claiming that there is more than one extra-systematic relation that qualifies as a relation of logical consequence. The chapter outlines both the pluralist and the monist positions on those dimensions and identifies some core commitments.

In the Oresteia’s central scene, Cassandra tells of being cursed by Apollo to foretell the future but be disbelieved. The Trojan princess, who “cheated” the god in a violent sexual encounter, who survived her city’s extirpation, goes to her own known doom bravely, predicting Agamemnon’s death and vengeance to come. Yet there is an unexplored aspect to this famous and moving scene – Cassandra’s hint of her own continuation in the afterlife. It seems (eoika) to her that she will soon be singing prophecies in Hades. This chapter argues that attention to Cassandra’s potential afterlife changes how we view her prophecies of death and vengeance, her rebellion against Apollo and Clytemnestra, her bravery, her language of closure, and the ironies each of these entail. Moreover, the “poetics of plurality” uncovered in Cassandra’s statement and its uncertain status sophisticate and perhaps even reverse our understanding of her fate.

Shifting to an examination of identity formation from below, Chapter 4 observes popular culture through music and opens a discussion on the nature of Iranian identity. Music is not only a cultural expression; in Iran it has also been used as a political tool and as part of resistance movements. Iranians voiced their allegiance with the revolution and their identity as Shiite Muslims through song-like protest chants and musical tracks. Protest chants and group singing heighten the meaning of words and help facilitate a sense of unity. These techniques were employed as an emotive force during the revolution and by later generations to proclaim their identity and as a form of resistance after the controversial election of 2009. The Green Movement is a pertinent example of how popular music is utilized by Iranians as a mode of expression. Consequently, popular music can be used as a tool for investigation in order to facilitate a better understanding of contemporary Iranian identity and society.

This chapter examines how we think about questions of plurality and the relations between legal orders. It does so through a specific history of the engagement between Indigenous legal orders and the Australian common law from the perspective of the latter. This chapter approaches legal plurality through the specific lens of thinking, both conceptually and practically, with jurisdiction. It looks at the ways in which the technology of jurisdiction has worked to obscure Indigenous legal orders and hence plurality. The chapter notes the increasing division between the approach of the High Court of Australia to plurality – as a matter to be contained or ignored –and the increasingly careful histories being written of our plural pasts and present.

Crafting successful privatization programs depends on capable governments. Even in countries whose institutions are flawed or underdeveloped, we often see public units at subnational levels acting as pockets of good government capabilities. This chapter advances the argument that privatization depends on good governments that not only set performance standards in dimensions that may not be prioritized by private firms but also guarantee that the whole process is diligently crafted and monitored. In other words, private firms and capable governments are complementary. With improved government capabilities, plurality ensues: capable governments not only experiment with outright privatization but may also use multiple forms of delivery, including hybrid public–private collaborations and even improved state-owned operations.

Beginning with an illustration of the potential and perils of engaging private operators to run prisons, this introductory chapters lays out the focus and argument of the book: the need to pursue a comparative analysis of the pros and cons of public, private, and public–private forms of service delivery, and the importance of government capability to successfully scrutinize and implement plural arrangements.

This chapter outlines potential failures of privatization and presents a sequence of steps to successfully design, implement, and monitor privatization processes. Regarding cases where proposals for offering privatized services face strong opposition and become unfeasible, the chapter also examines how various reform initiatives can lead to better and more effective public organizations, which may also interact with and complement the services of private firms. The chapter concludes by observing that, over time, societies have learned to propose and build on diverse experiences, often exploring multiple paths of improvement where public and private organizations coexist and experiment with plural solutions.

Defining an entity so geographically, culturally and linguistically varied as the Latin west is difficult: despite the spectacular achievements of the Carolingians and Ottonians, fragmentation and plurality prevailed. Smaller political structures proved more durable, and, while the English and French realms gained sharper definition from the twelfth and thirteenth centuries on, the western empire became a loose federation headed by secular princes, lesser nobles and urban communities – all setting their own codes of conduct. New polities emerged on Christendom’s margins, adopting some Carolingian and Ottonian norms and administrative practices. The church – especially the papacy from the thirteenth century on – set the tone, holding kings and other secular rulers to account, while universities were both agents of clerical control and breeding grounds of dissent. But the range of participants in the political game was expanding, imposing limits on royal power, bringing access to additional resources and offering a potential counterweight to papal power. This was one of the west’s many paradoxes: strong elements of unity alongside the gravitational pull of many different centres.

The contribution of our paper is thus twofold. First, it documents the phenomenon of the singulative operation in the Galilee dialect of Palestinian Arabic. Second, we show that the singulative operator is predictably constrained in what nouns it applies to, and that the output of the operation varies depending on the properties of the denotation of the input noun - whether it denote liquids, granular substances, solid matter or a collection of individuals. To the best of our knowledge, while the singulative operation is recognized as part of Modern Standard Arabic grammar as well in at least some dialects, this kind of systematic semantic mapping between denotation of the input and denotation of the output has not yet been carried out before.

We propose that pluralization of bare nouns in Western Armenian and Turkish is a two-step process. First, the noun is atomized giving a singular form (this is achieved via a null exponent of number under Num) and a new noun is created providing a brand new semi-lattice to serve as the underlying semantic domain. Second, the higher NumP operates morphosyntactically on the singular, and returns a set of atoms from the semi-lattice introduced by the higher n. This is a case of morphological compositionality where one number is built out of another. Our proposal gives a satisfying solution to the puzzle of how “indeterminate nouns” in these languages can express singularity and plurality, depending on the context.