Marxism and Problems of Linguistics - From Marx to Mao

There can be no doubt that the crossing theory has littleor no value for Soviet linguistics. If it is true that the chieftask of linguistics is to study the inherent laws of languagedevelopment, it has to be admitted that the crossing theorydoes not even set itself this task, let alone accomplish it —it simply does not notice it, or does not understand it.QUESTION. Did Pravda act rightly in starting an open discussionon problems of linguistics?ANSWER. Yes, it did.Along what lines the problems of linguistics will be settled,will become clear at the conclusion of the discussion. But itmay be said already that the discussion has been very useful.It has brought out, in the first place, that in linguisticbodies both in the centre and in the republics a regime hasprevailed which is alien to science and men of science. Theslightest criticism of the state of affairs in Soviet linguistics,even the most timid attempt to criticize the so-called “newdoctrine” in linguistics, was persecuted and suppressed bythe leading linguistic circles. Valuable workers and researchersin linguistics were dismissed from their posts or demotedfor being critical of N. Y. Marr’s heritage or expressing theslightest disapproval of his teachings. Linguistic scholarswere appointed to leading posts not on their merits, butbecause of their unqualified acceptance of N. Y. Marr’stheories.It is generally recognized that no science can develop andflourish without a battle of opinions, without freedom ofcriticism. But this generally recognized rule was ignored andflouted in the most unceremonious fashion. There arose aclose group of infallible leaders, who, having secured them-29