- •I. Read and translate the text. Sociology
- •II. Answer the following questions:
- •VIII. Answer: What are the sociologists concerned with? Use the words in brackets.
- •IX. Translate the following sentences into Russian:
- •Unit II
- •I. Read and translate the text: Social Barometer
- •II. Answer the following questions:
- •Word study
- •IV. Complete the following sentences:
- •Unit III
- •I. Read and translate the text: The Origins of Sociology
- •II. Answer the following questions:
- •III. Complete the following sentences:
- •IV. Divide the text into logical parts and make up an outline of the text.
- •V. Speak on:
- •VI. Read the text and entitle it:
- •Word study
- •Unit IV
- •I. Read and translate the text: Sociological Theory
- •II. Answer the following questions:
- •III. Agree or disagree with the following:
- •IV. Divide the text into logical parts and make up a plan of the text.
- •VI. Contradict the following statements:
- •VII. Translate the text in writing: Social Change and the Development of Sociology
- •Word study
- •I. Find in the text «Sociological Theory» English equivalents for:
- •II. Find in the text antonyms for:
- •III. Fill in the blanks with the words given below in the brackets:
- •IV. Read and translate the following sentences taking into account different meanings of the word 'experience':
- •V. Role-play.
- •I. Read the text and answer the following questions:
- •Theoretical Paradigms
- •II. Be ready to speak on:
- •III. You have just heard three reports. What paper do you think to be the best one? Give your arguments. Use the following:
- •IV. Read and translate the text: The Methods of Sociological Research
- •Experiments.
- •Survey Research
- •Questionnaires and Interviews
- •V. Enumerate all methods of sociological research. What method do you consider to be the most productive? Give your reasons.
- •VI. Answer the following questions:
- •Word study
- •III. Translate the following sentences into Russian with:
- •V. Develop the following situations:
- •Unit VI
- •I. Read and translate the text: The Structure of Social Interaction
- •Social Structure and Individuality
- •II. Answer the following questions:
- •Summary
- •Word study
- •I. Find in the text “The Structure of Social Interactions” English equivalents for:
- •II. Arrange the following words into pairs of antonyms:
- •III. Make up sentences choosing an appropriate variant from 1) – 7):
- •IV. Make up dialogues according to the following situations:
- •Unit VII
- •I. Look through the text and find the definitions of:
- •II. Read and translate the text. Role
- •Figure 1. Status Set and Role Set
- •Strain and Conflict
- •Dramaturgical Analysis: “The Presentation of Self”
- •IX. Answer the questions:
- •Word study
- •I. Find in the texts English equivalents for:
- •III. Read and translate the following sentences:
- •IV. Make up questions and ask your friend on:
- •V. Complete the following sentences:
- •Unit VIII
- •Kinds of Groups
- •IV. Find the facts to prove that:
- •V. Divide the text into three logical parts.
- •VII. Discuss in the group the following problems:
- •The Nature of Group Cohesiveness
- •XIV. Read and translate the text. Primary and Secondary Groups
- •XV. Answer the following questions.
- •XVI. Contradict the following statements. Start your sentence with: “Quite on the contrary...”
- •XVII. Ask your friend:
- •Divide the text into logical parts and give a heading to each part.
- •Find a leading sentence in each paragraph of the text.
- •Primary Groups and Secondary Groups
- •Give examples of primary and secondary groups.
- •Characterize in brief:
- •XXIV. Read the text and say what new information is contained in it. Networks
- •Word study
- •I. Find in the text “Primary and Secondary Groups” English equivalents for:
- •II. Make up word-combinations and translate them into Russian.
- •IV. Make up your own sentences with — “to be of importance, to be of value” - and ask your partner to translate them.
- •Unit IX
- •I. Read and translate the text. Group Dynamics
- •Group Leadership
- •The Importance of Group Size
- •Figure 3. Group Size and Relationships
- •VII. Read the text again and note the difference between in-groups and out-groups.
- •VIII. Prepare a report on “Group Dynamics and Society.” unit X
- •I. Read and translate the text.
- •Deviance
- •Biological Explanations of Deviance
- •VII. Speak on:
- •VIII. Translate the text in writing. Deviance is a Product of Society?
Biological Explanations of Deviance
Human behaviour was understood - or more correctly, misunderstood - during the nineteenth century as an expression of biological instincts. Along with other patterns of human behaviour, criminality was explained on biological grounds.
Lombroso: early research
In 1876, Caesare Lombroso (1835-1909), an Italian physician who worked in prisons, developed a biological theory of criminality. Lombroso described criminals as having distinctive physical characteristics - low foreheads, prominent jaws and cheekbones, protruding ears, hairiness, and unusually long arms - that resemble human beings’ apelike ancestors. In other words, he viewed criminals as evolutionary throwbacks to lower forms of life.
Because of their biologically based inadequacy, Lombroso reasoned, such individuals would think and act in a primitive manner likely to run afoul of society's laws. Although toward the end of his career Lombroso acknowledged that social factors play a part in criminality, his early claim that some people are literally born criminals was widely influential in an era in which biological explanations of human behaviour were popular.
Lombroso’s findings were based on seriously flawed research methods. He failed to see that the physical characteristics he found in prison and linked to criminality also existed in the population as a whole. Early in the twentieth century, the British psychiatrist Charles Buck-man Goring (1870-1919), who also worked in prisons, published the results of a comparison of thousands of convicts and noncriminals. There was a great deal of physical variation within both groups, but Goring’s research showed there were no significant physical differences between the criminal and noncriminal categories of the kind suggested by Lombroso.
Delinquency and body structure
After Lombroso’s theory of born criminality was disproved, others continued to search for biological explanations of criminality. William Sheldon advanced the idea of body structure in terms of three general types: ectomorphs, who were tall, thin, and fragile; endomorphs, who were short, and fat; and mesomorphs, who were muscular and athletic. Sheldon noted that no one conforms exactly to any of these pure types. Rather, he thought the average person shows some combination of body types, although one type usually predominates. After comparing hundreds of young men - half of whom were known to have been engaged in criminal activity and half of whom, were believed to be noncriminal - Sheldon reported an apparent association between criminality and the mesomorphic body type. In other words, he found a link between criminality and a muscular, athletic body structure. Like Lombroso, however, Sheldon was criticized for basing his work on samples that were not representative of the entire population.
Further, more carefully designed research based on these basic body types was conducted by Sheldon and Eleanor Glueck. The Gluecks also concluded that there is a link between criminality and a mesomorphic body structure, although they did not claim that physical characteristics are a direct cause of criminality. Rather, they concluded that the mesomorphic body type is associated with personal characteristics - such as insensitivity to frustration - that seem likely to promote criminality. The Gluecks also noted the importance of social environment in explaining criminality; they found that young men with mesomorphic builds were typically raised with little affection and understanding from family members.
Although these findings indicate that there may be an association between body type and criminality, they do not establish any causal connection between the two. Indeed, the association may very well have a social explanation. Young men with muscular builds have the ability to be the “bullies on the block,” which some of them may become.