Middle class fractions, childcare and the 'relational' and 'normative' aspects of class practices

The emphasis in class research remains on the structural aspects of class, class processes are neglected. This paper focuses upon some relational and normative aspects of class through an examination of social divisions produced and constructed within middle class families’ choices of childcare. Working with data from two contrasting settings in London (Battersea and Stoke Newington) three issues are addressed in the paper; the extent to which childcare arrangements both substantively and structurally position children differently within long term educational careers; the ways in which the use of choice in a market system of child care and education, works to produce patterns of social closure that quietly discriminate via the collectivist criterion of class and racial membership; and the ways in which child care choices also point‐up and perpetuate subtle distinctions and tensions of values and lifestyle within the middle class, between class factions. Concepts drawn from the work of Bourdieu are deployed throughout.     

The Roots of Linguistic Organization in a New Language

It is possible for a language to emerge with no direct linguistic history or outside linguistic influence. Al-Sayyid Bedouin Sign Language (ABSL) arose about 70 years ago in a small, insular community with a high incidence of profound prelingual neurosensory deafness. In ABSL, we have been able to identify the beginnings of phonology, morphology, syntax, and prosody. The linguistic elements we find in ABSL are not exclusively holistic, nor are they all compositional, but a combination of both. We do not, however, find in ABSL certain features that have been posited as essential even for a proto-language. ABSL has a highly regular syntax as well as word-internal compounding, also highly regular but quite distinct from syntax in its patterns. ABSL, however, has no discernable word-internal structure of the kind observed in more mature sign languages: no spatially organized morphology and no evident duality of phonological patterning.     

How is disability understood? An examination of sociological approaches

This paper considers sociological understandings of what constitutes disability. Current meanings of disability in both disability studies and medical sociology are examined and compared, using selected articles from leading authors in each discipline as case studies. These disciplines are often represented as offering starkly contrasting approaches to disability, with their differences amounting to a disciplinary 'divide'. It is argued that, on closer inspection, common ground can be found between some writers in disability studies and medical sociology. It is suggested that this situation has arisen because, in disability studies, the social relational understanding of disability developed by Vic Finkelstein and Paul Hunt in the 1970s has been lost over time, overshadowed by the rise to prominence of its offspring: the social model of disability. The paper concludes with some reflections on the need to revive a social relational understanding of disability.     

Fieldwork in forbidden terrain: the state,privatization and human subjects regulations

In this paper we explore the intersection of the modern-state and fieldwork practices within the social sciences. Our contention is that during the past decade or so there has been an expansion in forbidden or restricted research terrain that threatens the present and future conduct of social research. We argue that this restriction has been engendered by two related developments: privatization and human subjects regulations. The social and political implications of these trends are considered. Her most recent books areMadwives: Schizophrenic Women in the 1950s (Rutgers University Press, 1987) andGender Issues in Field Research (Sage, 1988). He is the author ofCastles of Our Conscience: Social Control and the American State, 1800–1985 (Forthcoming, Polity Press, Cambridge, U.K.)     

Analyzing gender in public places: Rethinking Goffman’s vision of everyday life

In this study, I discuss critically some of Goffman’s work on public places, with regard to how that work represents women’s experience in public and how women’s experience changes the notions of public places that Goffman portrayed. I draw on an eighteen-month participant observation of one small city (Santa Fe, NM) and a set of in-depth interviews done with both female and male residents of the city. Here, I concentrate on three areas: the normalized distaste for public places that is encouraged in women by their fear of crime in public and the measures they are informed they must take as crime-conscious pedestrians and shoppers; street remarks that are often difficult to manage and impossible to resolve successfully; and access information—information the woman discloses that can be used as a clue to her identity and home and, potentially at least, as ammunition for further harassment of her. I use these areas to illustrate how gender-conscious appraisal is necessary in order to appreciate the character of public places. Her book,Urban Ritual, is forthcoming from University of California Press.     

School, Family and County Effects on Adolescents’ Later Life Chances

This paper explores the links between family, school and area background influences during adolescence and later adult economic outcomes. The empirical analysis is based on data covering the period 1979 to 1996, drawn from the 1979 US National Longitudinal Survey of Youth. For a sample of individuals aged 14–19 in 1979, we estimate the association between family, school and area characteristics when growing up, on adult earnings capacity and poverty risk. We show that including all these influences jointly, family and school quality generally have significant associations with adult outcomes, but that area influences generally do not.Simon Burgess, Department of Economics, University of Bristol and CASE, 8 Woodland Road, Bristol BS8 1TN, UK; e-mail: Simon.Burgess@bristol.ac.ukKaren Gardiner, Department of Social and Policy Sciences, University of Bath, Claverton Down Bath BA2 7AY, UK; e-mail: K.S.Gardiner@bath.ac.ukCarol Propper, Department of Economics, University of Bristol and CASE, 8 Woodland Road, Bristol BS8 1TN, UK; e-mail: Carol.Propper@bristol.ac.uk