Academic literature on the topic 'Oikonymicon'

In the Northern Khmelnytskyi region, we recorded 1,258 names of settlements, including 872 main oikonyms and 386 their variants. Among the nominations of the settlements we single out both the actual oikonyms – names of cities, towns, villages and microoikonyms – names of settlements, manors, farms and other similar small denotations. In the oikonym system, we distinguish between modern nominations and former ones, the number of which, as we can see, is almost the same, due to which the coefficient of dynamics of oikonymicon is 2,003, which means that on average settlement has two proper names. This is one of the highest rate due to the long (sometimes up to a thousand years) period of denotation and the presence of many extralingual factors that influenced the nomination of settlements. Traditionally, in modern onomastics, researchers divide onyms, according to their structure, into simple (monobasic), complex (two- and multi-basic) and compound (phrases and sentences) constructions. The largest number of analyzed oikonyms are simple names, represented by nouns. Thus, the proper names of settlements and their parts are quantitatively the largest groups of names of geographical objects of the Northern Khmelnytsky region. Quantitative differences can be traced territorially, as in Izyaslav district we recorded 1,459 (34.22%) such nominations, Polonskyi – 631 (14.8%), Slavutskyi – 998 (23.4%), and Shepetivskyi – 1176 (27, 58%); a total of 4,264 onyms. The coefficient of dynamics of such names is the highest among the proper names of cities, towns and villages, and the lowest – among the nominations of corners and neighborhoods. A characteristic structural feature of proper names of settlements and their parts is the dominance of simple forms over compound and especially complex ones.

This article is devoted to the issues of historical oikonyms, whose general background is illustrated by etymological comments on specific examples from the oikonymicon of the Kyiv region. The etymology of an oikonym is not limited to the analysis of the etymon but also refers to the development of a particular word in general. Conceivably, reconstruction of the original oiko- nymicon is hardly possible, but a new discovery, even the attestation of a hitherto unknown renaming contributes to furthering our knowledge about the onomastic heritage. The article presents fragments of word-formation and etymological research relatable to the Kyiv region. The author reconstructs some Proto-Slavic forms, fills gaps in practically destroyed lexical nests, and looks in the lost appellatives and anthroponyms. Since the disappearance of words from the historical vocabulary is natural, the lexical basis of the onym, e.g., Berezan, Deremezna, Shkneva, largely remains almost the only evidence of plausible East Slavic features. The author uses the comparative-historical (etymological) method and the method of internal reconstruction. This is a reliable way not only to reconstruct the lost lexical structure of the language and local dialect rarities tending to enrich the lexicon but also to discover ethnic movements and migration processes of the population on both the right and left banks of the Dnieper River. Keywords: oikonym, etymology, word-forming model, anthroponym, appellative.

during the Turkish-Tatar (Nogai) history of this region. Much attention is given to the genetic Turkic names, which the Bulgarian settlers moved to a new place of residence from their homeland in the late XVIII — in the first half of the XIX century, and which were renamed during 1944‒1945. It is specially noted formation of the oikonomy of Odessa region during the end of XV‒XVIII centuries took place in a Turkic-speaking environment. This is confirmed by names of settlements such as Akmangit, Bugaz, Karamahmet, Tatarbunary, etc., which appeared here. It should be stressed that the stable linguistic and ethnic situation in this area was disturbed by the Russian-Turkish wars of 1768‒1774, 1787‒1791, 1806‒1812, 1828‒1829, as a result of which, with the assistance of the government of the Russian Empire, the processes of foreign development of this territory intensified, primarily immigrants from across the Danube, who brought here from their land many Turkic names, such as: Burguji (now Vynohradivka Bolgrad district), Iserli (Esirli; now Vilne Bolgrad district). Such names of settlements organic supplemented mainly the Turkish-Tatar component of the local oikonymicon. The greatest changes in the oiconymic system of Odessa region took place in the Soviet period, after 1944, when the new government initiated the renaming of the so-called unsympathetic and etymologically opaque names of Turkic origin. As a result of such administrative intervention, many historical oikonyms disappeared, for example: Anadolu became Dolynsky (now Izmail district), Tashlyk became Kamyansky (now Bolgrad district), Turlak became Vypasny (now Belgorod-Dniester district), and so on. From etymological and structural-semantic analysis of genetically Turkic oikonyms of Odessa region, one may conclude that most of the renamed names do not take into account either the derivational model, according to which the primary oikonym was introduced, or the internal form (appellate meaning) of its solid basis, which led to the appearance of random, artificial names. In independent Ukraine, especially in the Odessa region, the process of restoring the historical names of settlements continues, it is necessary to intensify it, to return the settlements to their original, historically formed, names.

Abstract: The research of the history of a particular region involves the study of the history of its settlement, which is manifested in the names of settlements. Thus, oikonyms as linguistic phenomenons contain linguistic, as well as historical, geographical and ethnographic information. They can be found out using the help of special onomastic studies. Historical and etymological research of the names of villages, settlements, cities, towns is one of the priority tasks not only of Ukrainian or Slavic, but also of world onomastics in general. The names of settlements provide different periods of history of that time in other regions, accumulate extremely diverse information about the peculiarities of the development of a particular area, namely: the ethnic composition of the first settlers, the specialty of their material and spiritual culture, the characteristic features of topographic objects called by the corresponding oikonyms. Of fundamental importance for the formation of the oikonymicon of a certain region is time and with the help of its settlement. As you know, Podolsk land belongs to the long-developed regions of man. A review of the history of this region shows that the formation of a system of settlement names within the modern Vinnytsia and Khmelnytsky regions, which are the main part of the historical Podillya, dates back to ancient times, at least the ancient Ukrainian period. This is indicated primarily by the specific word-forming structure of local oikonyms and the nature of their creative bases. The ancient settlements of these areas, the names of which were formed on Ukrainian soil, include such, for example, Bershad, Brailiv, Bratslav, Vinnytsia, Kopaihorod, Tyvriv (Vinnytsia region), Velyka Yaromyrka (initially Yaromyrka), Volochysk (initially Volochyshcha), Dobrohoshcha, Zhvanets, Kytaihorod, Medzhybizh, Smotrych (Khmelnytsky region) and other. The article focuses on the peculiarities of the formation of the oikonymykon of Podillya within the modern Vinnytsia and Khmelnytsky regions, analyzes the main structural and derivational types of names of settlements in these regions, found that the characteristic feature of oikonyms of the studied areas is the presence of many names the ancient nature of the settlement of these areas. Keywords: appellation, anthroponym, history of Podillya, oikonym, oikonym system, word-forming model.

Some aspects of the formation of the oikonymic system of the local territory during the second half of the II millennium, which is caused, on the one hand, by the development of the settlement structure, and on the other, by the laws of toponymic nomination are discussed in the article. The material for analysis was information from historical documents (cadastres, census lists, lists of populated areas) of the 16th - early 20th centuries, as well as the results of field gatherings in the territory of the northwestern Onega inhabited by Karelian people. It is proved that the system of oikonyms includes elements dating back to different chronological periods. At the same time, oikonymic models are identified that mark individual stages in the development of the system. Particular attention is paid to the existence of oikonyms on two levels: official (written) and unofficial (oral). Of these, the former was more conservative, and the latter was more responsive to changes in circumstances related to the life of the settlement, change of ownership of the courtyard, etc. It was revealed that the widespread adoption and consolidation in the official practice of popular names occurred in the middle of the XIX century. The relevance of the study lies in a number of new etymological interpretations of oikonyms, for which historical sources are used, which made it possible to build chains of successively changing variants of the name. As a result, some Karelian folk forms of Orthodox names were reconstructed, and the list of non-calendar Karelian anthroponyms was expanded.

The definition of linguo-ecology as an interdisciplinary science that studies language phenomena as part of the system, as well as through the prism of the communicative needs of native speakers, is taken as the starting point. The object of the research is the geographical names proper, nominating settlements, – oikonyms. The concept of the oikonymic space of a region is introduced, which is a set of fixed nominations of settlements located in a certain territory. The main problems that violate the criteria for the ecology of the names of settlements are characterized. A scale of oikonyms was developed and presented in accordance with the degree of their uniqueness within the region, including four degrees of uniqueness: the unique degree itself has the maximum degree; high degree-single-root morphemic close names; medium degree-complex or compound oikonyms; completely identical, doublet oikonyms are characterized by a low degree. The zones of linguo-ecological risk in the oikonymic space of the Volgograd region are indicated, which are connected with the arising contradictions between the desire for accuracy in nomination and the tendency to save speech. Defectiveness of symbolic names of settlements, which do not reflect their possible relationship with specific geographic objects, as well as the unjustified nature of certain renames, leading to a violation of the principle of historical continuity, was demonstrated.