In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

10 Segmented Assimilation: Issues, Controversies, and Recent Research on the New Second Generation Min Zhou THE SEGMENTED ASSIMILATION theory offers a theoretical framework for understanding the process by which the new second generation-the children of contemporary immigrants-becomes incorporated into the system of stratification in the host society and the different outcomes of this process . Alejandro Portes and I (Portes and Zhou 1993,82) have observed three possible patterns of adaptation that are most likely to occur among contemporary immigrants and their offspring: "One of them replicates the time-honored portrayal of growing acculturation and parallel integration into the white middle-class; a second leads straight into the opposite direction to permanent poverty and assimilation into the underclass; still a third associates rapid economic advancement with deliberate preservation of the immigrant community's values and tight solidarity." We refer to the divergent destinies from these distinct patterns of adaptation as "segmented assimilation," posing an important theoretical question ofwhat makes some immigrant groups become susceptible to downward mobility and what allows them to bypass or depart from this undesirable route. This chapter examines the issues and controversies surrounding the development of the segmented assimilation theory and reviews the state of recent empirical research relevant to this theoretical approach. ASSIMILATION TO WHAT? CONCEPTS, ANOMALIES, AND CONTROVERSIES Classical Assimilationism Revisited In the literature on immigrant adaptation, the assimilation perspective has dominated much of the sociological thinking on the subject for the most part of this century. Central to this perspective are the assumptions that there is a natural process by which diverse ethnic groups come to share a common culture and to gain equal access to the opportunity structure of society; that this process consists of gradually deserting old cultural and behavioral patterns in favor of new ones; and that, once set in motion, this process moves inevitably and irreversibly toward assimilation. Classical assimilationists argue that migration leads to the situation of the "marginal man": the immigrant is pulled in the direction of the host culture but drawn back by the culture of his or her origin (Park 1928; Stonequist 1937). This painful bipolar process, as Robert Park sees it, entails a natural race relations cycle of contact, competition, accommodation . Under the influence of biotic forces (impersonal competition) and social forces (communication and cooperation), diverse immigrant groups from underprivileged backgrounds are expected to abandon their old ways of life eventually and to become completely "melted" into the mainstream through residential integration and occupational achievement in a sequence of succeeding generations. While Park emphasizes the natural process that leads to the reduction of social and cultural heterogeneity and neglects structural constraints, Lloyd Warner and Leo Srole (1945) higWight the potency of such institutional factors as social class, phenotypical ranking, and racial or ethnic subsystems in determining the rate of assimilation (also in terms of residential and occupational mobility ). According to Warner and Srole, the assimilation of ethnic minorities is especially problematical because the subordination of minority groups is largely based on ascribed characteristics. They argue that, although differences in social status and economic opportunity based on culture and language will disappear over the course of several generations, the social mobility of readily identifiable minority groups, especially blacks, is likely to be confined within racial-caste boundaries. They thus identifY skin color, language of origin, and religion as key factors in determining the level of acceptance of minorities by the dominant group. These factors, they maintain, are combined with socioeconomic status to set the speed of complete assimilation for various groups. 'While Warner and Srole make an important contribution to the Parkian tradition by introducing into the framework the interaction effects between internal group characteristics and external institutional factors in explaining the pace of assimilation , Milton Gordon (1964) provides a typology of assimilation to capture the complexity of the process, ranging from cultural, structural, marital , identificational, attitude-receptional, and behavior -receptional to civic assimilation. In Gordon 's view, immigrants begin their adaptation to their new countIy through cultural assimilation, or acculturation. Cultural assimilation is for Gordon a necessary first step and the top priority on the agenda of immigrant adjustment. However, Gordon argues, acculturation does not automatically lead to other forms of assimilation (that is, largescale entrance into the institutions of the host society or intermarriage), and acculturation may continue indefinitely even when no other type of assimilation occurs. Ethnic groups may remain distinguished from one another because of spatial isolation and lack of contact, and their full assimilation will depend ultimately on the...

Share