Ideologizacijos raiška pokario lietuvių kalbotyroje

DanguoLė mikuLėnienė. expression of ideologization in postwar Lithuanian linguistics 39 DANGUOLĖ MIKULĖNIENĖ Institute of Lithuanian Language oRciD id: orcid.org/0000-0001-7781-7236 Research fields: geolinguistics, dialectology of Baltic languages, synchronic and diachronic dialectology, morphology, history of Lithuanian language and linguistics. Doi: doi.org/10.35321/bkalba.2023.96.02 English to Lithuanian translation KEY WORDS: Lithuanian linguistics, lexicography, dialectology, language history, ideologization, simplification. This article, based on the early post-war publications of prominent Lithuanian Language Institute researchers – the linguists Juozas Balčikonis, Jonas Krupas and Kazys Ulvydas – aims to examine the methods of ideologization used in the linguistic scientific literature and to clarify how the content of Lithuanian linguistics was formed after the war. taking into account the specificity and structure of linguistic works, the diversity of ideologization expression is tried to be identified. abstRact this article aims to analyse the methods of ideologization applied in Lithuanian linguistic academic literature during the post-World War ii period. Based on a series of publications by the prominent academic linguists Juozas Balčikonis, Jonas Krupas and Kazys Ulvydas, the study investigates the shaping of Lithuanian linguistics in the 1950s with a view to identifying the diversity of forms of ideologization reflected in the nature and structure of post-war linguistic activities. Įvadas In the 1950s, the early post-war period ended, marked by repression of the Lithuanian population and the end of the armed resistance struggle. In the history of the Lithuanian Academy of Sciences, 1945–1953 is called the period of strengthening applied research (krikštopaitis 2013: 242). For Lithuanian 40 common language | 96 not suitable: at the end of 1952, the independence of LtsR ma Lithuanian Language Institute ceased, its then composition was joined to the Lithuanian Literature Institute and became a joint entity – the Lithuanian Language and Literature Institute, its director – kostas korsakas. studies, so far, when discussing post-war Lithuanian studies, a broader interest has been shown in the history of the writing of the Great Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language and in the political and ideological context of the scientific activity of the linguist Juozas Balčikonis – what goals and tasks were set for him, as the chief editor of the Great Dictionary, by the then authorities. less deepen into the systemic aspects that would reveal how post-war Lithuanian studies were directed by the Soviet ideology from the early 1950s. The aim of this article is to analyze selected linguistic publications based on primary sources, i.e. articles written by linguists in the early post-war period, and to develop an algorithm suitable for more detailed studies of Soviet linguistic works. 1) based on the publications of the time, to examine the methods of ideologization used in the linguistic scientific literature and their expression; 2) to clarify how the content of Lithuanian linguistics was formed after the war; 3) summarize the results of this study. the beginnings of ideological “innovation” are best revealed by analyzing the linguistic works of the reorganized Lithuanian Language Institute. and regardless of the field – lexicography, dialectology or the history of the Lithuanian language – they open up a vivid but poor picture of post-war linguistics. Thus, the research material chosen for the analysis is the articles of the most famous linguists of the time – Kazis Ulvydas (1953), Jonas Krupas (1953) and Juozas Balčikonis (1953) – published in the same collection (Lkkk 1953)1. When analyzing them, the abbreviations will be used in the work – ku, jk and jb, respectively. This publication is selected as the first (or one of the first) known attempt to bring the subjects of Stalinist worldview into the discourse of Lithuanian linguistics2. Although published in the year of stalin’s death, the collection is associated with stalin’s name not only by its title – Lithuanian Language and Culture Issues The work of J. V. Stalin in the light of linguistic science. According to the long-time 1 Set had to be very carefully prepared and very highly valued. This is shown by the names of the editor-in-chief of the collection, j[uozo] Žiugžda, and the members of the editorial board – academics j[uozo] matulis, k[azimieras] bieliukas, vl[ado] Lašas, Dz[ido] budrio; the responsible secretary of the editorial board – i[rmija] zaksas (Lkkk 1953: 2). Two years earlier, a similar publication, prepared on the basis of the conference in Joniškis, was also engaged by the then Lithuanian Literature Institute (ktLtL 1952). DanguoLė mikuLėnienė. 41 LtsR ma President Juozas Matulis, the publication was based on Stalin’s “genius works On Marxism in Linguistics, On Some Questions of Linguistics and Answer to Friends, which became the most important event in the life of Soviet science” (matulis 1953: 3). It should be emphasized that, in the fight against the effects of the Stalin cult, this collection of articles was abandoned: neither the publication itself nor the articles published in it are mentioned in the bibliographical lists of the Institute in the 1970s (LkLi 1973: 53–78; seselskytė 1981: 73–91). true, k. ulvydo article was later included in the bibliography of his works (ulvydas 1995: 10). Due to strong ideologization, the publication of Jonas Kropas was refused to be included in Rinktiniai raštai (keinys et al., 1998: 9), and Juozas Balčikonis’ article was reprinted with significantly changed notes (balčikonis, 1982: 193–200). Thus, these sources adequately illustrate the chosen object – the expression of the ideologization of Lithuanian linguistics in the early post-Soviet period. The diversity of ideologization forms of expression is tried to be identified taking into account the specificity and structure of linguistic sources. Although it is stated that there is no single model typical of all humanities articles, and that the entire text can be “presented as a continuous argument”, in linguistics articles written in Lithuanian and published between 2007 and 2012, at least five (or even six) component macrostructure parts are distinguished – Introduction, Literature review, Research material and methods, Results, Conclusions (the formulation of their titles may differ) and Acknowledgement as part of the scientific article (for more details see šinkūnienė 2014: 28–30). Such a breakdown of the macrostructure of the scientific article seems appropriate not only for contemporary, but also for early post-Soviet publications, since it allows to more accurately identify the parts of the article most affected by ideologization and reveal the extent of its impact. However, in this case, the boundaries of each macrostructural element have to be set by the user (see table). It should be noted that the sources chosen for the analysis differ in volume (K. Ulvydo publication is three times larger than J. Balčikonio article, and J. Krupo – almost five times), but they all have retained a relatively similar macrostructure (see table). therefore, it can be assumed that the authors of the articles strictly adhered to the general requirements. 42 common language | 96 Table. sources macrostructure struk tūIntroduction Literatūros /exclused /exclused) part / niai otherwise background is not tūros medis-Rezulišvados Thanks (their otherwise) is not otherwise) otherwise otherwise is krupo art. rinės (otherwise /ap žvalga ga ir otherwise) volume) excluded) knowledge excluded, (33 p.) is not tatai (otherwise /(as parts juozo otherwise background is kazio otherwise otherwise is not without pava-(background not is not otherwise otherwise otherwise otherwise is ulvydo art. methods (is not is not article balčikonio knowledge dedicated, excluded, excluded source) knowledge /(otherwise dedicated art. (7,25 p.) is not iono (24.5 p.) no Note. For the purposes of comparison of post-war and modern publications, the same section titles and evaluation formulations have been retained in the table (see šinkūnienė 2014: 27–35). For example, the first and last paragraphs of the articles are characterized by a particularly strong ideological content. The first (introductory) sentences of the articles introduce the readers to the significance of Stalin’s works, cf. : Comrade Stalin’s works on linguistics have great significance for Soviet linguistics. These brilliant works of comrade Stalin laid the theoretical foundations of Marxist linguistics, opened a new era in this branch of science, set the tasks for Soviet scientists to further develop the problems of language. And the linguists of Soviet Lithuania opened wide perspectives to develop and raise the Lithuanian language science jb 59. Two years have passed since the publication of Stalin’s brilliant work “Marxism and the Questions of Linguistics”. This epoch-making work set the principles for the development of Soviet linguistics and other sciences, sparked creative thought and initiative, and inspired the creation of works worthy of the great Stalinist era. After the sun of Stalin’s Constitution, in the light of Stalin’s linguistic science, the most favourable conditions were created, the widest perspectives were opened for the research and education of the Lithuanian language jk 133. With his work “Marxism and the Questions of Linguistics”, our friend Stalin laid the solid foundations of Soviet linguistics, outlined a clear path for the further development of Soviet DanguoLė mikuLėnienė. 43 the path of ideologization in post-war Lithuanian linguistics, explained the essence of language as a social phenomenon, its specific characteristics, social functions, structure, connection with thinking, revealed the main laws and paths of language development. Of particularly great significance for the practice of life and for all sciences, including linguistics, is the fact that Comrade Stalin in his works on the issues of linguistics further developed one of the most important laws of Marxist dialectics – the law of the transition from the old quality to the new quality, which 67. : Taking advantage of the excellent conditions provided by the Soviet authorities, and based on the brilliant works of comrade Stalin on linguistics, the linguists of Soviet Lithuania must continue with double energy the work of researching their native language, developing the Soviet linguistics, for which the great master of science, comrade Stalin, helped to lay a solid foundation jb 66. Our literary language is becoming richer and more diverse. It has become a powerful tool of struggle and development, which we must use skillfully and effectively in the struggle for peace against the instigators of a new war, the bloody American-English imperialists, in the struggle for the establishment of communism in our Great Fatherland. Comrade Stalin’s brilliant works on linguistics, which opened a new page in Soviet linguistics and showed how Marxism-Leninism should be used to solve language problems, are mobilizing linguists for great work. The linguists of Soviet Lithuania will devote all their efforts and knowledge to the creation of such works in the field of linguistics, which are necessary for Soviet society in its great march towards communism, which 91. These concluding paragraphs cannot be called conclusions, but it is obvious that they, although not directly related to the linguistic content of the articles, nevertheless perform a certain generalizing function. macrostructural analysis suggests that the introductory parts of the publications could have had more of such “uniform” content commonality. For example, in addition to exalting Stalin’s works, j. balčikonis (1953: 59) and k. ulvydas (1953: 67) have also mentioned the criticism of maro (marro)3 works. such almost unisonous sentences from the point of view of ideology, which were compulsory in the introduction (see the examples given), were obviously only a formal element to confirm the authors’ loyalty and devotion to the Soviet order. linguistics. This is shown, for example, by the stepwise structure of the introduction to J. Krupo’s publication: the author, separating by asterisks, presents even several introductory sections: first – the mandatory section on Stalin and his works (kruopas 1953: 133), secondly – in Article 3 the spelling and punctuation of the sources under consideration are retained, the original or current form used is written in brackets. 44 benDRinė kaLba | 96 generally about the concept of literary language (kruopas 1953: 133–137), and the third introduction begins to tell the history of the Lithuanian literary language (kruopas 1953: 137). Although all three publications are of a historical nature, it is clear that no one has written reviews of theoretical, historical (methodological) or other literature. Background information may include sources and/or names of linguists mentioned in publications. For example, J. Balčikonis mentions Filipp Fortunatov and his followers – Šachmatov, Uljanov, Ščepkin, Porzežinskis, Ušakov, Potebnia, Baudoin de Courtenay, and with them, the tambourine and the jablonski as the most deserving of Lithuanian studies (Balčikonis 1953: 60–65). j. kruopas sums up many names and sources from various periods of the history of the Lithuanian language: from Mažvydas, Bretkūnas, Daukša, Širvydas (Sirvydas) to j. Rėza and Donelaitis; from Daukanto, nezabitauskio, Poškos, uvainio, sutkevičiaus, stanevičiaus, tatara, akelaičio, marcinskio and others to Žemaitės, biliūno, janonio, venclovos, cvirkos, salomėjos nėries, j. šimkaus and korsako himself... (kruopas 1953: 139–149). k. ulvydas did not indicate the sources of diversity of the chosen research object – Lithuanian language lexicon. In publications, sources are mentioned without bibliographical references, and the names of scientists are often without names (some even without the first letters of the surname). The most commonly cited (ideological content) publications of Stalin, Lenin, Gorky, etc. are listed in the footnotes. A kind of exception (from the point of view of the macrostructure of the article – perhaps even thanks) could be considered j. balčikonis reverence to viktor vinogradov and the whole tsRs ma institute of linguistics, cf. : After the appearance of the brilliant works of our friend Stalin on linguistics, famous Soviet Russian linguists, with Academician Vinogradov at the head, were called to the leadership of linguistics. The Institute of Linguistics of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR was established, which, encompassing all branches of linguistics, directs and coordinates the work of linguistics, maintains close relations and cooperates with linguistic institutions of all republics, provides all kinds of assistance in solving linguistic problems. The task of the linguists of Soviet Lithuania is to further strengthen and expand the scientific relations with this center of language science of our socialist homeland and with its help to solve all problems of Lithuanian language science jb 65–66. The name of the academician vinogradov is mentioned by j. krupas (1953: 134–136) alongside the names of Gorky and Lenin. Understandably, the ideological mission of the publications determined not only the choice of research material, but also the descriptive philological method of description, not mentioned anywhere in the articles. DanguoLė mikuLėnienė. 45 2. iDeoLogizacijos Raiškos eLementai The degree of ideologization of publications can be judged not only from macrostructural elements, but also from the specific expression of ideas characteristic of the post-war Soviet period. in all the articles of the time, the use of certain press clichés, cf. : – about Stalin: the great master of science jb 66; the great geniuses of humanity V. I. Lenin and Y. V. Stalin <...> ku 74, comrade Stalin proved with wonderful clarity ku 68, comrade Stalin gave unbreakable proof ku 68; – about the works of Stalin: the genial works of comrade Stalin jb 59, 65; opened a new era jb XX, the genial work of Y. V. Stalin jk 133; the genial linguistic works of comrade Stalin jk 133; the light of the Stalinist language science ku 73; the works of comrade Stalin in the light of language science ku 74; the genial works of comrade Stalin ku 85, 91; – about the Russian nation and its people: the famous Soviet Russian linguists jb 65; the scientists of the great Russian nation jb 59; – about the Russian language: the progressive influence of the Russian language jk 144; the language of the great Russian nation jk 144; the progressive role of the Russian language ku 90; – reflections of the historical class struggle: the church-feudal jargon jk 156; the feudal-church jargon poisoned the popular consciousness jk 157; the reactionary means of the czarist power jb 64; [language] as a tool of struggle and development, as a powerful means of communist education and the construction of communism in our country jk 137; [language] became a powerful tool of struggle and development jk 165; fought against the bourgeois imperialism jb 66; purism jk 143; fight for peace against the instigators of a new war <...>, fight for the establishment of communism jk 165; – about the “goodness” provided by the Soviet authorities: great help and cooperation jb 65; the best conditions for fraternal cooperation between nations jb 65; all kinds of help jb 65; excellent conditions jb 66; solid foundation jb 66; the most favorable conditions jk 133; the widest perspectives jk 133; the unprecedented in history flourishing of Lithuanian national culture ku 71; – about the country in which we live: our socialist homeland jb 65; under the sun of Stalin’s Constitution jk 133; our Great Homeland jk 165; in the victorious country of socialism ku 70, 79, in our Homeland where socialism was implemented ku 75. Thus, in linguistic publications, ideologization was realized through certain linguistic clichés – metonyms, metaphors, etc., cf.: philological front workers jk 133; [stalinist works] mobilize linguists but there were also distortions of 46 benDRinė kaLba | 96 dideliems darbams ku 91; Lithuanian literary language moves towards even greater achievements jk 144 and so on. (see also the quotes provided). In the late Soviet period, when the conditions of “mature socialism” were already in place, these rather primitive elements of ideologization were easily recognisable in scientific publications, and they were avoided. even though some of the old early post-war works were recognized as important and not lost their scientific value, they were not avoided from being stamped, abbreviated or otherwise corrected. This happened, for example, with the article of J. Balčikonis printed in this collection, which in the late Soviet period was published in the collection of writings (see balčikonis 1982: 193–200). In this way, the Lithuanianist truth of science was not violated, but the objective conditions of the early post-Soviet period, under which Lithuanian studies existed, could be said to have been embellished. 3. SimPLiFication as a Form of Expression of iDeoLogization It is often talked about the uneven degree of ideologization, especially when it is realized that it can be expressed in both form and content. but it is obvious that in the early post-war period it was impossible to separate form and content from each other – there was so much Soviet expression there. scientific content that led to a simplified representation of the linguistic phenomenon, or simplification (about simplification see mikulėnienė 2022: 137–139). First of all, the simplification of the ideologized content is expressed by silence – the authors chose to use it in order to reveal not the whole truth, but only a part of it. For example, in J. Krupo publication the professions of Anton Baranauskas and Kazimieras Jaunius are not mentioned (jk 150), and A. Baranauskas’s place of work – Kaunas Seminary – is not named accurately (jk 150). Algirdas sabaliauskas has also written about linguistic distortions in J. Krupo’s publications (1998: 16). nevertheless, the most recognizable form of simplification is related to various Marxist-Leninist dogmas applied to linguistic content. in addition to the aforementioned criticism of plague theory, the content was attempted to be ideologized with various stalin(ist) ideas, for example, to show the peculiarities of language functioning through the relation of base and superstructure, cf. : N. J. Maras and some other linguists, looking at language as a superstructure, believed that in the Soviet epoch, after a grandiose social revolution and the formation of Soviet culture, a major revolutionary revolution must take place or be accomplished by artificial means in the language itself. DanguoLė mikuLėnienė. 47 Comrade Stalin proved with remarkable clarity that language is born not from one or another base, but from the history of society and the history of the bases throughout the centuries; it is not created by one class or one generation, but by the efforts of the whole society, of all classes, of hundreds of generations. Therefore, it is pointless and wrong to aim for the existing structure of the language, its grammatical structure and basic vocabulary to be destroyed and replaced by new ones after each revolution. It is also absurd to look for explosions in the development of language, which are present in the development of social phenomena of a basic and superstructural nature. A vivid image of the class struggle, the West and the East – as enemies and friends – which distorts Lithuanian history, cf. : The establishment of the Russian language in our writing is understood under the conditions of the time, when the Grand Duchy of Lithuania included areas inhabited by Russians, Belarusians and Ukrainians, where political and cultural cooperation of nations was manifested: when Christianity was brought to the Lithuanian nation from the West with swords and swords, and the influence of higher culture from the East came as a manifestation of free cooperation; when Lithuanians and Russians united in their efforts to defeat the common enemy – the German predators; when the influence of Russian culture and language was strongly felt at the grand duke’s court and among the nobility. This language played a major role in Lithuanian political and cultural life jk 137–138. The theory of class struggle was also applied to dialectology – distinguishing not only territorial but also social dialects, the latter being immediately given a negative connotation and directly called church-feudal jargon (jk 156, 157). in general, stalini(sti)n education could influence (and influenced) the difficult fate of Lithuanian dialectology and dialectologists (juozas senkaus and juozas aleksandravičius) of that period, cf. : Today it can be said that the dialects of the Lithuanian language as separate linguistic systems no longer exist, that they are rapidly assimilating the lexicon and forms of the literary language, that their old unnecessary elements are important only for the history of the language <...>. Therefore, any attempt to restore and revive dialects in an artificial way would be reactionary, contrary to the development of the nation and the national language jk 161. or, in the promotion of atheism, constantly emphasizing the negative influence of the church, cf. : Despite their reactionary content and purpose, the most famous monuments of ancient writing played a certain positive role in the formation and development of the Lithuanian written language jk 140. The ruling strata of society were attracted by the privileges, customs and language of the Polish lords, and they, having renounced their language and become denationalized, became completely alien and hostile to Lithuanian culture and the affairs of their country. They were concerned to keep the Lithuanian people