Marxism and Problems of Linguistics - From Marx to Mao

More documents

Recommendations

Info

to your article I was firmly convinced, in conformity with yourspeech at the Sixteenth Congress of the C.P.S.U.(B.), thatunder communism, languages would merge into one commonlanguage.”Evidently, having discovered a contradiction between thesetwo formulas and being deeply convinced that the contradictionmust be removed, Comrade Kholopov considers it necessaryto get rid of one of these formulas as incorrect and toclutch at the other as being correct for all periods and countries;but which formula to clutch at — he does not know.The result is something in the nature of a hopeless situation.Comrade Kholopov does not even suspect that both formulascan be correct — each for its own time.That is always the case with textualists and Talmudistswho do not delve into the essence of the matter, quotemechanically and irrespective of the historical conditions ofwhich the quotations treat, and invariably find themselvesinv a hopeless situation.Yet if one examines the essence of the matter, there areno grounds for considering the situation hopeless. The factis that Stalin’s pamphlet Concerning Marxism in Linguistics,and Stalin’s speech at the Sixteenth Party Congress, referto two entirely different epochs, owing to which the formulas,too, prove to be different.The formula given by Stalin in his pamphlet, in the partwhere it speaks of the crossing of languages, refers to theepoch prior to the victory of socialism on a world scale, whenthe exploiting classes are the dominant power in the world;when national and colonial oppression remains in force; whennational isolation and mutual distrust among nations areconsolidated by differences between states; when, as yet,there is no national equality of rights; when the crossing of50
languages takes place as a struggle for the domination of oneof the languages; when the conditions necessary for the peacefuland friendly co-operation of nations and languages areas yet lacking; when it is not the co-operation and mutualenrichment of languages that are on the order of the day, butthe assimilation of some and the victory of other languages.It is clear that in such conditions there can be only victoriousand defeated languages. It is precisely these conditions thatStalin’s formula has in view when it says that the crossing,say, of two languages, results not in the formation of a newlanguage, but in the victory of one of the languages and thedefeat of the other.As regards the other formula by Stalin, taken from hisspeech at the Sixteenth Party Congress, in the part thattouches on the merging of languages into one commonlanguage, it has in view another epoch, namely, the epochafter the victory of socialism on a world scale, when worldimperialism no longer exists; when the exploiting classes areoverthrown and national and colonial oppression is eradicated;when national isolation and mutual distrust among nationsis replaced by mutual confidence and rapprochementbetween nations; when national equality has been put intopractice; when the policy of suppressing and assimilatinglanguages is abolished; when the co-operation of nations hasbeen established, and it is possible for national languagesfreely to enrich one another through their co-operation. Itis clear that in these conditions there can be no question ofthe suppression and defeat of some languages, and the victoryof others. Here we shall have not two languages, one ofwhich is to suffer defeat, while the other is to emerge from thestruggle victorious, but hundreds of national languages, out ofwhich, as a result of a prolonged economic, political and cul-51
Page 1:
J. V. STALINMARXISMAND PROBLEMSOF L
Page 8 and 9:
From Marx to MaoML© Digital Reprin
Page 10 and 11:
First Edition 1972PUBLISHER’S NOT
Page 13: MARXISM AND PROBLEMSOF LINGUISTICS
Page 16 and 17: ase. If the base changes or is elim
Page 18 and 19: sists not in serving one class to t
Page 20 and 21: grammatical system and its basic st
Page 22 and 23: single and common language of a soc
Page 24 and 25: language.” For this reason, stran
Page 26 and 27: geoisie.” 4 Certain comrades conc
Page 28 and 29: aristocracy? How can one possibly d
Page 30 and 31: Reference is further made to Lenin,
Page 32 and 33: The mistake our comrades commit her
Page 34 and 35: is conceivable without it. But the
Page 36: slowly than the basic word stock. W
Page 39 and 40: elements of the new quality, and he
Page 41 and 42: There can be no doubt that the cros
Page 43 and 44: N. Y. Marr’s “disciples” begu
Page 45 and 46: CONCERNING CERTAINPROBLEMS OF LINGU
Page 47 and 48: tion: instruments of production man
Page 49 and 50: itself, which is free of the “nat
Page 51 and 52: Hence, the existence of specific wo
Page 53 and 54: REPLY TO COMRADESTO COMRADE SANZHEY
Page 55 and 56: TO COMRADES D. BELKIN AND S. FURERI
Page 57 and 58: negligible. Properly speaking, this
Page 59 and 60: concluded that a socialist revoluti
Page 61: plied to all periods of development
Page 65 and 66: communist society. As a science, Ma
Page 67 and 68: nationalism and separatism in the R
show all

Marxism and Problems of Linguistics - From Marx to Mao

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?