(redirected from statuses)
Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Medical, Legal, Idioms.


Law the legal standing or condition of a person


  1. any stable position within a social system associated with specific expectations, rights and duties. 'Status’ in this sense is equivalent to ROLE, although it is the latter term which has the wider currency.
  2. the positive or negative honour, prestige, power, etc., attaching to a position, or an individual person, within a system of SOCIAL STRATIFICATION (often referred to as social status).
Both conceptions derive from forms of society in which individual social locations were relatively fixed (see ASCRIBED STATUS, MAINE), for example by religion or by law (see CASTE, ESTATE). In modern societies status positions tend to be more fluid. See also STATUS GROUP, CLASS, STATUS AND PARTY, SOCIOECONOMIC STATUS, STATUS CONSISTENCY AND INCONSISTENCY.



in the Hamito-Semitic languages, a grammatical category of the noun that determines whether the noun is definite and whether it has a relationship with other parts of the sentence; in particular, whether the noun has a genitival attribute. A noun’s status also indicates possession, as in Arabic - i(”my”), and demonstrativeness, as in Somali -k-an (”this,” masculine) and -t-an (”this,” feminine). The category of status exists in the Semitic, Coptic, Berber, Cushitic and Chad languages. It is expressed by means of suffixes, prefixes, internal inflection, and distinctions in declensional paradigms.


D’iakonov, I. M. Semito-khamitskie iazyki. Moscow, 1965.
Tucker, A. N., and M. A. Bryan. The Non-Bantu Languages ofNorth-Eastern Africa. London, 1966.
References in periodicals archive ?
Using the theoretical constructs associated with each of these statuses as an initial checklist, the counselor can explore the client's issues in each status.
The framework itself, its six constituent statuses, the actual relevance of the suggested interventions for each of these statuses, and the extent of applicability of the framework across diverse populations need to be empirically tested.
Participants assigned to the foreclosed status on the EIPQ had only a 32% chance of also being assigned to foreclosure on the EOM-EIS-II, with most (55%) of the disagreements involving assignment to achievement on the EQM-EIS-II Participants classified as moratorium on the EIPQ had a 43% chance of also being placed in moratorium on the EQM-EIS-II, with classification discrepancies fairly evenly distributed among the other three statuses (diffusion, 41%; foreclosure, 26%; and achievement, 32%).
Participants classified as foreclosed on the EOM-EIS-II had a 38% chance of also being classified as foreclosed on the EIPQ, with disagreements primarily involving assignment to the diffused and achieved statuses (36% each).
In ascending order of mean commitment score, the EOM-EIS-II statuses were ordered as follows: moratorium, diffused, foreclosed, and achieved.
For the ideological and interpersonal domain clusters, mean diffusion scores did not differ significantly between the foreclosed and moratorium statuses.
For both clusters, foreclosure scores were significantly higher in the foreclosed and diffused statuses than in the moratorium and achieved statuses.