Marxism and Problems of Linguistics - From Marx to Mao

they have been preserved precisely as the foundation of themodern Russian language.Further, the superstructure is a product of the base, but thisby no means implies that it merely reflects the base, that it ispassive, neutral, indifferent to the fate of its base, to the fateof the classes, to the character of the system. On the contrary,having come into being, it becomes an exceedingly activeforce, actively assisting its base to take shape and consolidateitself, and doing its utmost to help the new system to finishoff and eliminate the old base and the old classes.It cannot be otherwise. The superstructure is created by thebase precisely in order to serve it, to actively help it to takeshape and consolidate itself, to actively fight for the eliminationof the old, moribund base together with its old superstructure.The superstructure has only to renounce this roleof auxiliary, it has only to pass from a position of activedefence of its base to one of indifference towards it, to adoptan equal attitude to all classes, and it loses its virtue andceases to be a superstructure.In this respect language radically differs from the superstructure.Language is not a product of one or another base,old or new, within the given society, but of the whole courseof the history of the society and of the history of the basesfor many centuries. It was created not by some one class, butby the entire society, by all the classes of the society, by theefforts of hundreds of generations. It was created for thesatisfaction of the needs not of one particular class, but ofthe entire society, of all the classes of the society. Preciselyfor this reason it was created as a single language for thesociety, common to all members of that society, as the commonlanguage of the whole people. Hence the functional roleof language, as a means of intercourse between people, con-5