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


Law the legal standing or condition of a person
Collins Discovery Encyclopedia, 1st edition © HarperCollins Publishers 2005


  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.
Collins Dictionary of Sociology, 3rd ed. © HarperCollins Publishers 2000
The following article is from The Great Soviet Encyclopedia (1979). It might be outdated or ideologically biased.



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.
The Great Soviet Encyclopedia, 3rd Edition (1970-1979). © 2010 The Gale Group, Inc. All rights reserved.
References in periodicals archive ?
Following the example set by the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator ("iNtuition" following "Introversion"), this status of the INCOME framework is identified by its second letter, N, to avoid having two statuses start with the letter I.
This status, together with the next two statuses of the framework (Obtaining and Maintaining), derive from Danley and Anthony's (1987) Choose-Get-Keep model for employment of persons in psychiatric rehabilitation (Beveridge et al., 2002).
An individual may be in the Exiting status a number of times over the course of her or his career and may consider exiting while in other statuses (e.g., while simultaneously maintaining one job and imagining himself or herself in a different job) but then decide not to act on it.
Having examined the six statuses of the INCOME framework and career development theory concepts that are applicable to each of these statuses, I present some examples of career interventions that are pertinent to each status.
Schwartz and Dunham (2000) have classified objective identity measures into two broad categories based on the algorithms they use to assign identity statuses to participants.
The degree of consistency between the empirical results and the model's assumptions was evaluated in two ways: (a) degree of association between continuous measures of the statuses and of exploration and commitment, and (b) consistency of categorical identity status classifications between the direct and derived measures.
Within each cluster of domains (ideological, interpersonal, and overall), each participant's scores for the four statuses are converted to standard scores.
To test the hypothesis that the identity statuses would relate to exploration and commitment in ways consistent with the status model, a correlation matrix among the EIPQ and EQM-EIS-II scales, reported separately by domain cluster (ideological, interpersonal, and overall), was computed.
Despite the results of previous studies, frequencies from this study revealed that there were more blind and visually impaired disability beneficiaries successfully rehabilitated or closed in status 26 (986 or 74.14% of the total) than those unsuccessfully rehabilitated or closed in statuses 28 and 30 (30 or 25.86% of the total).