Open Access“It Turns Out Glavlit Has Not Yet Signed Off on Ostrovsky Dictionary…” (Correspondence of N. S. Ashukin and S. I. Ozhegov 1940—1960s)
Author(s) -
Оleg V. Nikitin
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
naučnyĭ dialog/naučnyj dialog
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
eISSN - 2227-1295
pISSN - 2225-756X
DOI - 10.24224/2227-1295-2021-6-113-135
Subject(s) - philology , ideology , value (mathematics) , sociology , history , linguistics , politics , epistemology , law , political science , philosophy , computer science , feminism , machine learning
The little-known factsof the work of N. S. Ashukin, S. I. Ozhegov and V. A. Filippov on the original lexicographic edition of the 1940s — “Dictionary to the plays of A. N. Ostrovsky” is analyzed in the article. The connection between the socio-cultural situation in the country and the scientific research of those years is shown. Special attention is paid to the facts of ideological pressure on philological thought. The circumstances that hindered the publication of the Dictionary are revealed. For the first time, genuine letters from the participants in this project, telling about the ambiguous situation in Glavlit (Soviet Main Administration for Safeguarding State Secrets in the Press) and the intention of the authors to save the manuscript from death are published in the appendix. It tells about further attempts of scientists and their descendants to resume the preparation of the publication of the book in the 1960—1970s. The facts given in the correspondence are commented on from the standpoint of history and philosophy of science, the necessary references are indicated, possible comparisons are made with the events and persons mentioned in the letters. The presented fragment of the linguistic picture of the world is also considered in the key of the development of linguistic personality and its role in the era of dictatorship. Attention is drawn to the high historical value of the undertaken work and its place in the lexicographic tradition of the XX century. It is concluded that archival materials play a key role in reconstructing the real picture of the life and activities of Soviet scientists, supplement the chronicle of science with valuable observations and contribute to an objective assessment of the achievements of philologists, show their firm position in upholding the interests of science during the dominance of ideologization in society.