Open Access

Alen Sućeska

• The practical aim of this work is twofold. Firstly, it is to construct a theory of language based on historical-materialist premises, i.e. a theory which stresses the sociality and historicity of language, and finds in them the fundamental characteristics which make language one of the central phenomena of human life. Such a theory is inherently counterposed to the dominant theories and philosophies of language in the last century, be they Saussurean, idealistic, structuralist, psychologistic or Chomskyan etc. It also rejects vulgar materialistic accounts of language, where language is seen merely as a “reflection” of the economic base of society, as well as the version proposed in Stalin’s short pamphlet, Marxism and Linguistics, which sees language merely as a means of communication, regardless of society or class, therefore neutralised and consequently branded irrelevant for Marxist theory. In short, the first aim would be showing what language is not and what it cannot be by showing what it is. The second aim is related to Marxist theory in general. Following the presuppositions of this work, a Marxist account of language proves to be an immensely important field of research for Marxism. The reasons are fairly simple, if one is willing to accept them: language is a certain type of social practice, it is related to the way people act, which also means that it is interconnected with consciousness, i.e. to the way people think and to the content of their thought. Language is ideological and political; it is an element of class rule and class struggle. Thus, understanding language should be of utmost importance for any socialist revolutionary project, as ideological struggle is central not only to a revolutionary period, but, perhaps even more, to a period where revolution is not even in sight. I do not wish to derogate other Marxist fields of research, but, on the contrary, to simply insist on their equal importance. Ideological phenomena should not be a secondary or inferior object of research to strictly economic phenomena, or vice-versa. In reality, those phenomena form a dialectic unity; only if theory follows suit, can a pregnant Marxist philosophy be formed.