Ask the Scholar
Page 13 of 18
I can add historical knowledge about this page.
Page image
OCR
No Objection To Declassification 2007/11/23 NLT-PSF-51-6-3-8
25X1
a world-wide study is a question which only time and linguists can
answer. In the Soviet Union, however, Stalin was able to destroy
the whole basis for Marr's theses with the brief statement that
"language is not a part of the superstructure, but of the base,"
which means, in greatly oversimplified terms, that language, in-
stead of being determined by environment is a part of environment
itself. Language is to be considered as a tool in the category of
instruments of production, like railroads and factory machinery.
To those under the spell of Marxist mysticism, this distinction has
profound consequences. To the layman, however, it has relatively
little meaning. From the lay point of view, Stalin's approach differs
from that of Marr primarily in that, whereas Marr started with
Marxism and tried to build a new linguistics to conform with it,
Stalin began with a particular concrete situation he wanted to cor-
rect, and interpreted the Marxist-Stalinist mythology to fit his
tactics.
Such a reinterpretation of Marxism is not the least contra-
dictory to previous positions taken by Stalin. The words of Marx
and Engels, who said, "Our teaching is not a dogma, but a guide to
action," have often been repeated. And Lenin once wrote, "It is
essential to realize the incontestable truth that a Marxist must
take cognizance of real life, of the concrete realities, and must not
continue to cling to a theory of yesterday." Stalin brought these
words into play once more in attacking the "dogmatists and
Talmudists" in linguistics "who see the letter of Marxism, but not
its essence."
Although theories tend with time to become solidified to
some extent in all fields in all countries where a particular
science is widely studied, there is a great difference in degree
between the usual scientific dogmatism and the Marr case. Perhaps
there are certain qualities inherent in Soviet culture which cause
the Soviet scientist to assume a dogmatic approach. Stalin refers
to Marr's "immodest, boasting, haughty tone" and his "abrupt and
light-headed denial of all that existed in linguistics before Marr."
Indeed, many of the disputes in Soviet science seem based more on
emotion than on logic. But the factor which contributes most to
dogmatization is probably the absence of free discussion. Through-
out the Marr case there was a minimum of intermingling, com-
parison, compromise, and synthesis of theory. The "either-or"
TRUMAN
relationship which seems to prevail in Soviet science was emphasized
by the fate of Marrism itself. While Marrism was in ascendency,
NARA HARRY S.
it was the sole permissible doctrine. Now that it has been attacked
by Stalin, it is anathema.
- 8 -
25X1
No Objection To Declassification 2007/11/23 NLT-PSF-51-6-3-8
Page data
- Page
- 13
- Source index
- 0
- Type
- photo
- Media ID
- e7e5e846be5e54d1
- Size
- unknown
Document data
- ID
- 470154901
- Core
- doc
- Type
- document
DTO data
{
"id": "470154901",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/470154901",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Central Intelligence Agency, Scientific Intelligence Report, CIA/SI 111-50, Implications of the Marr Linguistics Controversy for Soviet Science",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/470154901",
"collections": [
"President's Secretary's Files (Truman Administration)",
"Intelligence Files"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-psf/602196/875436/875436-02-001.tif",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-psf/602196/875436/875436-02-001.tif",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-psf/602196/875436/875436-02-001.tif",
"imageCount": 18,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Context sent to Scholar
Document identity
{
"localId": "470154901",
"label": "Central Intelligence Agency, Scientific Intelligence Report, CIA/SI 111-50, Implications of the Marr Linguistics Controversy for Soviet Science",
"core": "doc",
"dtoType": "document",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/470154901"
}
Document source metadata
{
"id": "470154901",
"sourceUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/470154901",
"contentType": "document",
"title": "Central Intelligence Agency, Scientific Intelligence Report, CIA/SI 111-50, Implications of the Marr Linguistics Controversy for Soviet Science",
"citationUrl": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/470154901",
"collections": [
"President's Secretary's Files (Truman Administration)",
"Intelligence Files"
],
"iiifBase": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-psf/602196/875436/875436-02-001.tif",
"thumbnailUrl": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-psf/602196/875436/875436-02-001.tif",
"largeImageUrl": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-psf/602196/875436/875436-02-001.tif",
"imageCount": 18,
"hasImages": true,
"source": "import",
"hasTranscription": false
}
Document source extras
{
"url": "https://catalog.archives.gov/id/470154901",
"naId": 470154901,
"levelOfDescription": "item",
"productionDates": [
{
"day": 15,
"logicalDate": "1950-12-15",
"month": 12,
"year": 1950
}
],
"recordType": "description",
"ocrSource": "nara-archive"
}
Page context
{
"seq": 13,
"pageIndex": 0,
"type": "photo",
"url": "https://s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/NARAprodstorage/lz/presidential-libraries/truman/hst-psf/602196/875436/875436-02-013.tif",
"mediaId": "e7e5e846be5e54d1",
"ocrText": "No Objection To Declassification 2007/11/23 NLT-PSF-51-6-3-8\n25X1\na world-wide study is a question which only time and linguists can\nanswer. In the Soviet Union, however, Stalin was able to destroy\nthe whole basis for Marr's theses with the brief statement that\n\"language is not a part of the superstructure, but of the base,\"\nwhich means, in greatly oversimplified terms, that language, in-\nstead of being determined by environment is a part of environment\nitself. Language is to be considered as a tool in the category of\ninstruments of production, like railroads and factory machinery.\nTo those under the spell of Marxist mysticism, this distinction has\nprofound consequences. To the layman, however, it has relatively\nlittle meaning. From the lay point of view, Stalin's approach differs\nfrom that of Marr primarily in that, whereas Marr started with\nMarxism and tried to build a new linguistics to conform with it,\nStalin began with a particular concrete situation he wanted to cor-\nrect, and interpreted the Marxist-Stalinist mythology to fit his\ntactics.\nSuch a reinterpretation of Marxism is not the least contra-\ndictory to previous positions taken by Stalin. The words of Marx\nand Engels, who said, \"Our teaching is not a dogma, but a guide to\naction,\" have often been repeated. And Lenin once wrote, \"It is\nessential to realize the incontestable truth that a Marxist must\ntake cognizance of real life, of the concrete realities, and must not\ncontinue to cling to a theory of yesterday.\" Stalin brought these\nwords into play once more in attacking the \"dogmatists and\nTalmudists\" in linguistics \"who see the letter of Marxism, but not\nits essence.\"\nAlthough theories tend with time to become solidified to\nsome extent in all fields in all countries where a particular\nscience is widely studied, there is a great difference in degree\nbetween the usual scientific dogmatism and the Marr case. Perhaps\nthere are certain qualities inherent in Soviet culture which cause\nthe Soviet scientist to assume a dogmatic approach. Stalin refers\nto Marr's \"immodest, boasting, haughty tone\" and his \"abrupt and\nlight-headed denial of all that existed in linguistics before Marr.\"\nIndeed, many of the disputes in Soviet science seem based more on\nemotion than on logic. But the factor which contributes most to\ndogmatization is probably the absence of free discussion. Through-\nout the Marr case there was a minimum of intermingling, com-\nparison, compromise, and synthesis of theory. The \"either-or\"\nTRUMAN\nrelationship which seems to prevail in Soviet science was emphasized\nby the fate of Marrism itself. While Marrism was in ascendency,\nNARA HARRY S.\nit was the sole permissible doctrine. Now that it has been attacked\nby Stalin, it is anathema.\n- 8 -\n25X1\nNo Objection To Declassification 2007/11/23 NLT-PSF-51-6-3-8"
}