Introduction. Starting from R. Merton’s pioneer works, social studies of science have been a major part of Western intellectual and scientific life. The total number of periodicals on the subject, that is over 20, illustrates the point best. Meanwhile Russian social studies of science are far less intensive. Moreover Western studies of social constructivist type still haven’t received sufficient coverage in Russian scientific literature. Our article is an attempt to somewhat reverse the situation. The aim of the article is to (...) analyze social constructivism evolution in the English speaking countries starting from Berger and Luckmann’s seminal work “The Social Construction of Reality” in 1966; to classify social constructivist versions of science together with their most prominent traits. Methods. When considering the problem, the author uses Y. Hacking’s schematic definition of social construction, P. Kitcher’s scheme of “socio-historical cluster” and M. Baghramian’s “objectivist conception of science”. Scientific novelty of the research. The analysis provides reasons for social constructivism popularity during the “science wars”; specifies social ontology and epistemic status of scientific knowledge in moderate versions of social constructivism; specifies some discourse peculiarities of radical versions of social constructivism (the consequence of somewhat unusual reception of continental tradition) and its view of the science. Results. The basic results are: a) certain convergence of ontological positions in analytic and moderate versions of social constructivist type, b) controversial issues of social (historical) approach to scientific explanation and c) controversial issues of postmodern rhetoric in radical versions. Conclusions. Social studies of science play an important role in science and society, the critical comments towards social constructivist versions notwithstanding. (shrink)

This paper investigates family multilingualism in a polymedia perspective, presenting results from a study of transnational communication among four families with Senegalese background, living in Norway. Ethnographic interview data collected in 2017 and 2018, including mediagrams, are analysed to get insight into the families’ uses of media and language. Furthermore, the moment-by-moment language practices through which family relationships are managed and sustained are examined through fine-grained analysis of interpersonal interaction. The paper thus both draws on and goes beyond polymedia to (...) investigate how linguistic repertoires are developed in digital communication. The aim is to explore ways in which this theory may help us rethink family multilingualism as digital language practices become increasingly significant. (shrink)