I happened on the OED entry for Marrism (revised December 2000), and I thought it was so well done, concisely presenting a fairly difficult concept, that I wanted to share it here (along with the first few, very well chosen, citations):
The body of Marxist linguistic theories put forward by Marr and his followers (esp. I. I. Meshchaninov), in which language was regarded as monogenetic (with all languages developing from four elements, sal, roš, jon, and ber) and as belonging to social class rather than nationality (being, in Marxist terms, part of the social and economic superstructure rather than the base); advocacy of such theories.
Marrism dominated Soviet linguistics after Marr’s death until it was denounced by Stalin in 1950.
1950 Archivum Linguisticum 2 116 The quintessence of Marrism, he [sc. B. Serebrennikov] tells us, resides in four fundamental theses, viz. the four elements as the source of the world’s vocabularies, linguistic growth by hybridisation, stadial evolution, and the semantic transformation of primitive totem-names.
1950 Archivum Linguisticum 2 118 It is he [sc. V. Vinogradov] who summarises the three existing attitudes to Marr among Soviet scholars, viz. (1) that Marrism is Marxism in linguistics, [etc.].
1963 V. Kiparsky in Current Trends in Linguistics 1 94 From 1925 to World War II, when the only officially accepted linguistic school in Soviet Russia was Nikolaj Marr’s ‘Japhetology’, later simply called ‘Marrism’, there was no interest..in Slavic languages.
1966 B. Collinder in H. Birnbaum & J. Puhvel Anc. Indo-European Dial. 199 Marrism, which was officially encouraged in Russia for political reasons, has raged as a kind of Asiatic flu in some European universities west of the Iron Curtain.
The etymology is excellent too:
< the name of Nikolaj Jakovlevič Marr (1865–1934), Georgian-born Russian linguist, archaeologist, and ethnographer + –ism suffix, probably after Russian marrizm (c1930).
Until the correspondence in Pravda that led to the discrediting of Marr, his theories were officially referred to in Russian as novoe učenie o jazyke the new teaching on language; Marr himself had called his approach jafet(id)ologija Japhet(id)ology or jafetičeskaja teoriija Japhetic theory. The term marrizm does not appear to have been used by Stalin in his contributions to the debate in 1950.
The one (mild) criticism I would make is that they don’t explain why the theory was called “Japhetic” (to quote Wikipedia, “Marr adopted the term ‘Japhetic’ from Japheth, the name of one of the sons of Noah, in order to characterise his theory that the Kartvelian languages of the Caucasus area were related to the Semitic languages of the Middle East (named after Shem, Japheth’s brother)”), but that’s more than made up for by their unparsimonious decision to include the four primordial syllables, one of my earliest memories from the study of linguistics (I remember them in the order “sal, ber, yon, rosh”) and a truly inspired piece of crackpottery. The sad thing is that Marr (whose father was a Scot and his mother a Georgian; according to Wikipedia, neither of them understood Russian) was a perfectly good Orientalist scholar before a newfound obsession with language cracked his pot, as it has done for so many.