Marrist linguistics

Where in the source: Public extract, opening paragraph; October 1957 article

Contemporary scholarly review stating that Soviet linguistics was dominated from about 1930 to 1950 by officially recognized Marrist theory and that substantial deviations were severely suppressed. Its final sentence records Stalin's 1950 repudiation and the disbanding of Marr's followers. This is evidence of the official reversal.

Where in the source: Main entry, paragraphs 1–2

Institutional history of the institute founded by Marr, renamed the Institute of Language and Thought in 1931, led by Marr and then Ivan Meshchaninov, and merged into the new Institute of Linguistics after the 1950 repudiation of Marrism. The entry establishes the institutional succession and merger; the repudiation is documented separately.

Where in the source: 21 July 1949 entry, pp. 291–292; ARAN, fond 2, opis 6 (1949), delo 74, fols. 126–167

Reproduces the Presidium's criticism of attempts to rehabilitate comparative methods and proto-language research, names linguists accused of bourgeois influence, and records instructions to change the Academy's linguistic work. This establishes Academy action in support of the doctrine, beyond merely naming the institute's parent body.

Where in the source: Public chapter extracts: chapter 6, Fedorova, Introduction, paragraphs 1–2; chapter 3, Lähteenmäki, opening paragraphs

Historical study of the political and institutional rise of Marr's supposedly Marxian linguistics against traditional comparative linguistics. The inspected public extracts also distinguish Marrism from other Soviet approaches to language and society. They provide political and intellectual context; detailed institutional controls are documented by the Academy resolutions.

Where in the source: 21 July 1949 entry, pp. 291–292; 1 July 1950 entry, p. 374

The 1949 resolution directed criticism of comparative and proto-language research. In July 1950 the Presidium described appointments conditioned by adherence to Marr's school and removal of critics from posts. These records document the use of administrative authority to constrain linguistic work, including the Academy's account during its own reversal.

Where in the source: Public extract, opening paragraph, sentences 1–2

The extract documents suppression of substantial departures from Marrist foundations, supporting the first and third consequences at that general level. The more specific research and teaching provisions are evidenced by the Academy resolutions and the contemporary repudiation text.

Where in the source: 21 July 1949 entry, pp. 291–292; 1 July 1950 entry, p. 374

The 1949 resolution named linguists for ideological criticism and called for changes in the Academy's research. The 1950 resolution described recommended Marrist teaching texts and removal of critics. These passages support the documented research and teaching promotion in the second consequence, as well as institutional pressure on competing work and scholars.

Where in the source: 20 June 1950 article, fourth question (“Did Pravda act rightly”), paragraph beginning “To give one example”

In the political repudiation, Stalin described the republication of Marr's Baku Course and its listing as a recommended student textbook. This is a contemporary account of the teaching promotion in the second consequence, attributed to the intervention that ended the doctrine's official standing.

Where in the source: Main entry, paragraphs 1–3

Dates the institute's origins to 1921 and its name change to 1931, describes its research, education and propaganda departments, and records its Proceedings in 1932–1949. The episode's approximate 1930 start concerns Marrist dominance, not the first use of the later institute name.

Where in the source: Main entry, paragraph 2, final sentence

Records the 1950 union of the Institute of Language and Thought with the Institute of the Russian Language into the Academy's Institute of Linguistics. This supports the institutional merger; the dated leadership and government decisions are documented in the Academy archive chronology.

Where in the source: 20 June 1950 article, fourth question (“Did Pravda act rightly”), final paragraphs and publication date

Stalin explicitly called for rejection of Marr's theories and criticized his dismissal of comparative-historical work. The text documents the public political repudiation on 20 June 1950; it is not used as the scientific basis of the present linguistic correction.

Where in the source: 1 July 1950 entry, p. 374; 6 October 1950 entry, p. 384, citing the 3 July government order

Records the Presidium's removal of Meshchaninov and Serdyuchenko from institute leadership, its merger request, and its October confirmation of the reorganization under the July government order. These are concrete actions by the institutional system that had upheld Marrism and support withdrawal of its privileged official position.

Where in the source: Paragraphs beginning “Since the existence”, “The official name” and “Marr did not attempt”; closing paragraph on the 1950 intervention

Yakubovich explains Marr's replacement of language families with developmental stages and his failure to justify a replacement for the comparative method. This is scholarly context for the doctrine and its scientific assessment. The entry dates Stalin's intervention to 20 July 1950; the primary text gives 20 June, which is the date used here.

Where in the source: “Is the English language changing?” and “Why does language change?”, PDF p. 3

The Linguistic Society of America describes language change through speakers' needs, social interaction, innovation, borrowing, and changes in word order and pronunciation. This supplies the modern linguistic context; it does not document the Soviet authorities' 1950 decisions.

Where in the source: Chapter 14.8, “Reconstructing the past”: “Direct evidence”, “Comparing cognates” and “Pitfalls when searching for cognates”; publisher-hosted chapter: https://ecampusontario.pressbooks.pub/essentialsoflinguistics2/chapter/14-8-reconstructing-the-past/

Explains reconstruction of common ancestors from related languages and the need to distinguish inherited cognates from borrowings. The same edition's publisher-hosted chapter supplies this scientific context separately from the political repudiation of Marrism.