The article analyzes the oikonymy of Cherkasy area in accordance with the defined motives of nomination and semantics of derivational bases, follows the formation of settlement names from the moment of their first fixation in documents to the present day. The lexical and semantic analysis of the basic names of the oikonimikonu of a studied territory within three lexical and semantic groups: appellative, onymic and onymic and appellative is carried out. Attention is focused on the connection of an oikonimna system of a studied area with its historical past, geographical location and dialectal diversity. It is resolved that among vidonimnykh derivatives, the names based on anthroponyms of various origins dominate, in particular, Christian names of various structures and ancient Slavic autochthonous vidapeliatyvni names, as well as later nicknames and surnames, and much less often - ancient Slavic vidkompozytni names. Such formations contain an indication of both a direct relation of a designated territory to a specific owner and an indirect belonging of a certain denotation to an entity (or group of entities). The vidantroponimnykh oikonymy of Cherkasy area are characterized by a presence of specific suffix topoformants that indicate that an object belongs to a certain person: -iv-, -sk-, -ivk(a), -yivk(a). The predominance of vidantroponimnykh propriatives is explained by a fact that they were once owned by someone. The bases of the vidoikonimnykh varieties reflect the names of nearby settlements, and the vidhidronimnykh ones reflect the names of water bodies localized near the appropriate settlements. A significant group among the vidapeliatyvnykh names is made up of oikonymy motivated by nomenclatural names of elevations, low, open, marshy places, geographical names of natural and artificial water basins, and flora. The structural and word-formation aspect allows to distinguish simple, complex, and compound nominations. The largest group of the oikonimikon of Cherkasy area is made up of monosyllabic names of settlements realized by lexical and semantic, morphological and morphological and syntactic methods, as well as by foundation (usually by combining two lexemes). The significant quantitative dominance of single-word derivatives is due to a tendency to unify linguistic resources. The compound names include two-word (attributive) compounds, prepositional constructions and descriptive formations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Iryna Gontsa (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: