Cover not available

Article published In: Historiographia Linguistica
Vol. 29:1/2 (2002) ► pp.121–144

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload PDF
authorization required

Vološinov and Cassirer

A case of plagiarism?

 | University of Jyväskylä
Published online: 15 August 2002
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/hl.29.1.09lah
Summary
Recently, it has been suggested that Valentin Vološinov (1895–1936) plagiarised Ernst Cassirer (1874–1945). This claim is to be seen as grossly overstated, although Vološinov obviously benefited from Cassirer’s work on language. This article compares Vološinov’s and Cassirer’s concepts of the sign and discusses their views concerning the relation between language and reality. There are fundamental differences between their views on the nature of the sign which mainly stem from the fact that they are committed to different philosophical paradigms. Thus, the validity of the claims according to which philosophical sources of the dialogical conception of the sign can be found in Cassirer’s works should be seriously questioned.
Résumé
Selon une étude récente, Valentin Vološinov (1895–1936) aurait plagié Ernst Cassirer (1874–1945). Bien que Vološinov ait clairement bénéficié du travail de Cassirer sur le langage, qualifier cela de plagiat constitue à notre avis une exagération grave. Le présent article compare les concepts du signe chez Vološinov et Cassirer et discute de leurs points de vue en ce qui concerne la relation entre le langage et la réalité. Il y a des divergences fondamentales quant à leurs conceptions de la nature du signe. Ces divergences proviennent surtout du fait que les deux hommes appartiennent à des traditions philosophiques différentes. Aussi doit-on sérieusement remettre en question la validité des affirmations selon lesquelles les sources philosophiques de la conception dialogique du signe se trouvent dans l’oeuvre de Cassirer.
Zusammenfassung
In letzter Zeit ist behauptet worden, Valentin Vološinov (1895–1936) habe Ernst Cassirer (1874–1945) plagiiert. Diese Behauptung ist als stark übertrieben zu bezeichnen, wenn auch Vološinov offensichtlich von Cassirers Arbeiten über die Sprache profitiert hat. Der vorliegende Aufsatz vergleicht die Auffassungen über den Zeichen-Begriff bei Vološinov und Cassirer und befasst sich mit ihren Meinungen über das Verhältnis zwischen Sprache und Realität. Es bestehen fundamentale Unterschiede zwischen ihren Meinungen über die Natur des Zeichens, die hauptsächlich auf ihre Zugehörigkeit zu unterschiedlichen philosophischen Paradigmen zurückzuführen sind. Folglich sollte die Gültigkeit der Behauptungen, nach denen bei Vološinov philosophische Ursprünge der dialogischen Konzeption des Zeichens in Cassirers Arbeiten gefunden werden können, ernstlich in Frage gestellt werden.
References (41)
References
Alpatov, V[ladimir] M[ixajlovicˇ]. 1991. Istorija odnogo mifa: Marr i marrizm [The history of a myth: Marr and Marrism]. Moskva: Izd. “Nauka”.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Baxtin, M[ixail] M[ixajlovicˇ]. 1996. Besedy V. D. Duvakina s M. M. Baxtinym [V. D. Duvakin’s conversations with M. M. Baxtin]. Moskva: Izd. “Progress”.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bogdanov, A[leksandr] A[leksandrovicˇ]. 1995 [1918]. “Metody truda i metody poznanija [The methods of labour and the methods of cognition]”. Russkij pozitivizm: Lesevicˇ, Juškevicˇ, Bogdanov [Russian positivism: Lesevicˇ, Juškevicˇ, Bogdanov]. Ed. by S[tanislav] S[ergeevicˇ] Gusev, 241–258. Sankt-Peterburg: Izd. “Nauka”.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brandist, Craig. 1997. “Bakhtin, Cassirer and Symbolic Forms”. Radical Philosophy 851.20–27.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1999. “Bakhtin’s Grand Narrative: The significance of the Renaissance”. Dialogism 31.11–30.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2000. “Neo-Kantianism in Cultural Theory”. Radical Philosophy 1021.6–16.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2002. The Bakhtin Circle: Philosophy, culture, and politics. London: Pluto Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bühler, Karl. 1990 [1934]. Theory of Language: The representative function of language [Sprachtheorie: Die Darstellungsfunktion der Sprache]. Transl. by Donald. F. Goodwin. Amsterdam & Philadelphia: John Benjamins. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Buxarin, N[ikolaj] I[vanovicˇ]. 1921. Teorija istoricˇeskogo materializma: Populjarnyj ucˇebnik marksistskoj sociologii [The theory of historical materialism: A popular textbook of Marxist sociology]. Moskva: Gosudarstvennoe izdatel’stvo.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1926 [1921]. Historical Materialism: A system of sociology. Anonymous authorised translation. London: George Allen & Unwin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cassirer, Ernst. 1923. Philosophie der symbolischen Formen. Erster Teil: Die Sprache. Berlin: Bruno Cassirer.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1946 [1925]. Language and Myth. Transl. by Susanne K. Langer. New York: Dover Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1953 [1923]. The Philosophy of Symbolic Forms. Vol. I1: Language. Transl. by Ralph Manheim. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1957 [1929]. The Philosophy of Symbolic Forms. Vol. III1: The Phenomenology of Knowledge. Transl. by Ralph Manheim. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Deborin, A[bram] M[oiseevicˇ]. 1935. “Novoe ucˇenie o jazyke i dialekticˇeskij materializm [The new doctrine of language and dialectical materialism]”. Otdel’nyj ottisk iz Jubilejnogo sbornika v cˇest’ N. Ja. Marra, 3–60. Moskva: Izd. Akademii Nauk SSSR.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gardiner, Michael. 1992. The Dialogics of Critique: M. M. Bakhtin and the theory of ideology. London: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hoffmann, Johann Joseph. 1877. Japanische Sprachlehre. Nach der holländischen Ausgabe von 1868 ins Deutsche übertragen. Leiden: Brill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Krois, John Michael. 1987. Cassirer: Symbolic forms and history. New Haven & London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lähteenmäki, Mika. 1998. “On Dynamics and Stability: Saussure, Voloshinov, and Bakhtin”. Dialogues on Bakhtin: Interdisciplinary readings ed. by Mika Lähteenmäki & Hannele Dufva, 51–69. Jyväskylä: Centre for Applied Language Studies.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lotze, Hermann. 1874–1879. System der Philosophie. 21 vols. Leipzig: S. Hirzel.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Marr, N[ikolaj] Ja[kovlevicˇ]. 1926. Po etapam razvitija jafeticˇeskoj teorii: Sbornik statej N. Ja. Marra [On the stages of the development of the Japhetic theory: A collection of articles by N. Ja. Marr]. Moskva & Leningrad: Naucˇno-issledovatel’-skij institut etnicˇeskix i nacional’nyx kul’tur narodov vostoka SSSR.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mathews, Robert H. 1902. “Aboriginal Languages of Victoria”. Journal and Proceedings of the Royal Society of New South Wales 361.71–106.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Moss, Kevin. 1994. “Byla li Ol’ga Frejdenberg marristkoj? [Was Ol’ga Freidenberg a Marrist?]”. Voprosy jazykoznanija 1994: 51.98–106.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Noiré, Ludwig. 1877. Der Ursprung der Sprache. Mainz: Victor von Zabern.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Poole, Brian. 1998. “Bakhtin and Cassirer: The philosophical origins of Bakhtin’s carnival messianism”. The South Atlantic Quarterly, Summer/Fall 1998, 3/41.537–578.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2001. “From Phenomenology to Dialogue: Max Scheler’s phenomenological tradition and Mikhail Bakhtin’s development from ‘Towards the philosophy of the act’ to his study of Dostoevsky”. Bakhtin and Cultural Theory, revised and expanded second edition prepared by Ken Hirschkop & David Shepherd, 109–135. Manchester: Manchester University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Spitzer, Leo. 1922. Italienische Umgangssprache. Bonn & Leipzig: K. Schroeder.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Thomas, Lawrence L. 1957. The Linguistic Theories of N. Ja. Marr. Berkeley & Los Angeles: University of California Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Tihanov, Galin. 1998. “Vološinov, Ideology, and Language: The birth of Marxist sociology from the spirit of Lebensphilosophie ”. The South Atlantic Quarterly, Summer/Fall 1998, 3/41.599–621.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2001. “Contextualising Bachtin: Two poems by Mandel’štam”. Russian Literature 50:2.165–184. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Vološinov, V[alentin] N[ikolaevicˇ]. 1926. “Slovo v žizni i slovo v poezii [Discourse in life and discourse in poetry]”. Zvezda 61.244–267.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1930. “Stilistika xudožestvennoj recˇi: Cˇ to takoe jazyk [Literary stylistics: What is language]”. Literaturnaja ucˇeba 21.48–66.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1973 [1929]. Marxism and the Philosophy of Language. Transl. by Ladislav Matejka & Irwin R. Titunik. New York & London: Seminar Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1983a [1926]. “Discourse in Life and Discourse in Poetry”. Bakhtin School Papers transl. by John Richmond, ed. by Ann Shukman, 5–30. Oxford: RPT Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1983b [1928]. “The Latest Trends in Linguistic Thought in the West”. Bakhtin School Papers transl. by Noel Owen, ed. by Ann Shukman, 31–49. Oxford: RPT Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1983c [1930]. “Literary Stylistics: What is language?”. Bakhtin School Papers transl. by Noel Owen, ed. by Ann Shukman, 93–113. Oxford: RPT Publications.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1987 [1927]. Freudianism: A critical sketch. Transl. by Irwin R. Titunik. Ed. by I. R. Titunik & Neal H. Bruss. Bloomington & Indianapolis: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1995. “Licˇnoe delo V. N. Vološinova [V. N. Vološinov’s personal file]”. Dialog. Karnaval. Xronotop 21.70–99.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
White, James. 1995. “Ot filosofii k vseobšcˇej organizacionnoj nauke: istocˇniki I predšestvenniki tektologii A. Bogdanova [From philosophy to universal organisation science: sources and precursors of A. Bogdanov’s tektology]”. Voprosy filosofii 81.38–49.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Wittgenstein, Ludwig. 1953. Philosophical Investigations. Transl. and ed. by Gertrude E. M. Anscombe. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Cited by (1)

Cited by one other publication

Lähteenmäki, Mika
2006. Nikolai Marr and the idea of a unified language. Language & Communication 26:3-4 ► pp. 285 ff. DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 10 december 2025. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.

Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue