Comrade Stalin, you are a great scientist,

You know a lot about linguistics...

Not least thanks to this song by Yuz Aleshkovsky, the fact of Stalin's "involvement" in the science of language is widely known. And the stereotype of thinking begins to work: if the "leader and teacher" interfered in this science, then he probably did something criminal.

This is not true, but it is not easy to refute an ingrained misconception. There was even such a curious incident. In Literaturnaya Gazeta (No. 5, 1992) there appeared an article written jointly by Natalia Ilina, a writer and scientist, and L. L. Kasatkin, a Doctor of Philology. Authoritative authors have provided convincing evidence that Stalin's intervention in linguistics was not only not disastrous for this science, but even played a positive role. But on another page of the same issue of the newspaper, an author far from linguistics declared that after the appearance of the article "father of nations", " the elimination of all classical linguistics began." Such is the" record of pluralism "set by"Literatura"! And most recently, this year, in the program "Orbeli Dynasty" on the Kultura TV channel, the phrase was heard: "... the infamous article of Stalin appeared."

In the journalistic articles of recent decades, the idea was repeatedly carried out that Stalin "defamed" the great scientist-N. Ya. Marr. Non-linguists ' ideas about the history of Russian language science are surprisingly far from the truth. An article dedicated to the centenary of S. I. Vavilov was published in Moskovskaya Pravda on 23.3.91. Here is how its author imagines the position of linguistics among other sciences in the years when the Academy of Sciences was headed by S. N. Vavilov: "It was a time when genetics and cybernetics were smashed, psychology and quantum mechanics were stifled, when it was not safe to mention the theory of relativity, and in linguistics they equaled the" works " of the father of nations." To appreciate the author's "awareness" of this issue, it should be noted that S. I. Vavilov was president of the USSR Academy of Sciences from 1945 to 1951, and the work of the "father of peoples" appeared in 1950.

page 123

No, the picture of Soviet linguistics at that time was completely different. Since the second half of the 1930s, and with particular force-in the late 1940s, linguistics had its own "Lysenkoism" - the "new teaching on language" by Academician Marr. He himself, who died in 1934, did not see the "flourishing" of the destructive effect of his ideological spells on linguistic science.

Paradoxically, Stalin's intervention in linguistics, which ended the so-called "free discussion" that unfolded in 1950 in the pages of Pravda, brought this science more positive than negative. It dealt a devastating blow to Marrism and what the" great leader "called the" Arakcheev regime in linguistics." This was done, of course, by the same method that the regime itself enjoyed, so that Stalin could be portrayed as a Taras Bulba saying "to the Arakcheev regime": "I begot you" I will kill you!"

The "Works of Genius" did not, of course, contain anything brilliant, but there were quite sound thoughts, in particular, the absurd position about language as a superstructure over the basis was exposed. Comparative-historical linguistics was "rehabilitated", and many major scientists who were attacked for not recognizing the "new teaching about language" breathed freely. I will mention such famous names as Academician V. V. Vinogradov, corresponding member R. I. Avanesov, Professor A. A. Reformatsky.

The latter recalls this as follows: "The 40s were difficult for linguistics: the first half - the war, the cessation of printing and other hardships, and the second - a frenzied relapse of marrism and the creation of the "Arakcheev regime", and only after the" discussion "in Pravda in 1950 did favorable conditions and opportunities not only arise. "write to the table", but also print... " (A. A. Reformatsky. From the History of Russian phonology, 1970).

These are facts that, unfortunately, are almost unknown to non-linguists. And a simple scheme is widely used: Stalin is bad, he overthrew Marr, so Marr is a great scientist who needs to be "rehabilitated". But life doesn't follow primitive patterns.

A well-known politician once wittily remarked that no new facts will make Stalin's figure even darker, just as Malevich's black square cannot become even blacker. In the same way, Stalin's image does not become" brighter", even if some myths are exposed" in his favor". The history of any science should be seen as it really was.

Two books have been written about this page of the history of Soviet linguistics, published in 1991: V. M. Alpatov. The story of a myth. Marr and marrism; M. V. Gorbanevsky. First there was the word... Little-known pages of the history of Soviet linguistics.

Permanent link to this publication: