Ідеологізація теоретичного українського та румунського мовознавства в ХХ ст.: спільне та відмінне

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

The imposition of official state ideology (Marxism-Leninism) is characteristic for Ukrainian and Romanian theoretical linguistics of the middle and second half of the 20th century. It was the leading methodology for solving the problems of nature and essence of the human language. With its help, it was possible to study internal structure of the linguistic system and use linguistic research methods, which are the subject of general linguistics. Issues that are related to the problems of ideology and specific linguistics (Ukrainization, Russification, Romanization, Magyarization, etc.) are not considered and addressed. The subject of research is the penetration of official state ideology into linguistic questions about the nature and essence of language, its reflection in the methods of linguistic research. In Ukrainian Soviet theoretical linguistics of the 1930–1940s, Marism was officially propagated as a proletarian ideology directed against bourgeois comparative studies. Some Ukrainian linguists, following Ivan Meshchaninov (which then was the official head of Soviet linguistics), used the name Marr as a “shield”. They started with quoting Marr in their own works, but that did not affect much the language material investigation (for example, Academician Mykhailo Kalynovych (1888-1949) and others). After appearance of Stalin’s work “Marxism and Problems of Linguistics” (1950), well-known quotes from this work occured widely in Ukrainian and Romanian theoretical linguistics. They were about the class nature of the language, developed the ideas of revolutionary upheavals in it, stated the need for a dialectical combination of language learning with the history of the society. They have been quoted in the linguistic literature of Ukraine until the 22nd Congress of the CPSU (1961). In Romania, they have been quoted until the death of Gheorghe Gheorghiu-Dej (1965). Only by this time the development of linguistic structuralism had begun, because the linguistic outlook of the “leader” allowed comprehending lingual facts exclusively within the framework of comparative-historical and descriptive paradigm.