In stressing the cultural determinants of a child’s worth， Zelizer takes issue with practitioners of the new “sociological economics，” who have analyzed such traditionally sociological topics as crime， marriage， education， and health solely in terms of their economic determinants. Allowing only a small role for cultural forces in the form of individual “preferences，” these sociologists tend to view all human behaviors as directed primarily by the principle of maximizing economic gain. Zelizer is highly critical of this approach， and emphasizes instead the opposite phenomenon： the power of social values to transform price. As children became more valuable in emotional terms， she argues， their “exchange” or “surrender” value on the market， that is， the conversion of their intangible worth into cash terms， became much greater.
1. It can be inferred from the passage that accidental-death damage awards in America during the nineteenth century tended to be based principally on the
（A） earnings of the person at time of death
（B） wealth of the party causing the death
（C） degree of culpability of the party causing the death
（D） amount of money that had been spent on the person killed
（E） amount of suffering endured by the family of the person killed
2. It can be inferred from the passage that in the early 1800’s children were generally regarded by their families as individuals who
（A） needed enormous amounts of security and affection
（B） required constant supervision while working
（C） were important to the economic well-being of a family
（D） were unsuited to spending long hours in school
（E） were financial burdens assumed for the good of society