CC BY
14Oriental Renaissance: Innovative, educational, natural and social sciences Scientific Journal Impact Factor Advanced Sciences Index Factor
О
R
VOLUME 2 | ISSUE 3 ISSN 2181-1784 SJIF 2022: 5.947 ASI Factor = 1.7
FUNCTIONS OF TOPONYMIC INDICATORS IN COMPOUND
TOPONYMS
D. Islomova
Teacher of the department Russian Linguistics of Nam SU
ABSTRACT
This article analyzes the essence of the concept of "toponymic indicator" and its functions in the multistructural and multilingual oikonyms of Russia.
Keywords: toponym, oikonym, term, indicator, topoformant, topobase, appellative, composite geographical term, multistructuraltoponym, multilingual toponym.
В данной статье анализируется сущность понятия «топонимический индикатор» и его функции в разноструктурных и разноязычных ойконимах России.
Ключевые слова: топоним, ойконим, термин, показатель, топоформант, топобаза, апеллятив, составной географический термин, полиструктурный топоним, многоязычный топоним.
INTRODUCTION
Toponyms have a special place in the language system. The interest of researchers in solving many issues of toponymy is based on the complex of its interdisciplinary nature, which in turn causes the complexity of solving many toponymic problems.
Toponyms are an indispensable element in the development of society and humanity as a whole. D.S. Likhachev noted: "The toponikon of the people is a collective work of the people's genius. They serve as landmarks in time and space, creating the historical and cultural image of the country."[1] Being a toponymic picture of the world, toponymy reflects the features of a particular natural language, reflects the mentality of the people, stores information about the nature of interethnic contacts, their intensity. The toponymic systems formed over the centuries are usually heterogeneous and combine the material of several languages.
The development of the discipline, its integral essence requires clarification of some terms, in the definition of which at this stage of the development of science there is still no unambiguity In this article, we will try to explain the use of the term indicator on the example of multi-structural toponyms.
АННОТАЦИЯ
Oriental Renaissance: Innovative, educational, natural and social sciences Scientific Journal Impact Factor Advanced Sciences Index Factor
О
R
VOLUME 2 | ISSUE 3 ISSN 2181-1784 SJIF 2022: 5.947 ASI Factor = 1.7
DISCUSSION AND RESULTS
Researchers are no longer interested in the toponym as a whole as a natural-climatic or spatial indicator, but in the structure of the toponym and each of its minimum significant elements as a linguistic indicator.
Having studied the theoretical material on the definition of geographical terms, we came to the conclusion that there is still no consensus on the definition of the term toponymic indicator. One of the main features of the term is the deprivation of the possibility of ambiguity. Terms should be short and unambiguous, in which the nominative-definitive function is important. In order to acquire the features of a term, a word or concept must go through the path of semantic evolution, which involves the loss or transformation of a number of meanings, overcoming synonymy and final stabilization. Researchers are faced with the question of identifying the true, deep meaning and definition of the term.
According to the definition of the explanatory dictionary of S.I. Ojegov and N.Y.Shvedova, the Indicator is special. 1. a device (device, element) that reflects some process, the state of the observed object; 2. a substance that is a chemical reagent. In this interpretation, we are interested in the definition of an indicator as "an element that reflects the state of an object".[2]
In the Dictionary of Russian Onomastic Terminology, the indicator term indicates "to which toponymic type the given toponym belongs."[3] The interpretation clarifies that it may be a local geographic term. This feature of the indicator is confirmed by P. McLatin. In his opinion, any definable can be distinguished as indicators, which is rarely recorded in the toponymy of a particular region (once or twice), but after studying the toponymy of other areas, the range of their application can expand, go beyond the distribution of a dialect or language.
The most precise definition of the term toponymic indicator, in our opinion, is given by Gvenetadze L.I. : "Indicators are defined words that are part of composite geographical names, which are repeated in various toponyms in different frequencies, but they are geographical terms on their own"[4] Based on these definitions, we will analyze the structure of composite oikonyms in Russia containing elements of Turkic origin, such as булак, куль, юрт, аулкент (кан, кнат).
To analyze the names of localities with the indicated topoformants, we chose the site https://russia.tury.ru for tourists wishing to visit Russia. On this site, 161395 names of localities in Russia were presented in alphabetical order, including the smallest settlements. In Russian toponymy, according to this site, we identified 71 oikonyms with the Turkic word булак.[5]Булок, булаг, булок- a source, a spring, a
Oriental Renaissance: Innovative, educational, natural and social sciences Scientific Journal Impact Factor Advanced Sciences Index Factor
о
R
VOLUME 2 | ISSUE 3 ISSN 2181-1784 SJIF 2022: 5.947 ASI Factor = 1.7
stream. In the oikonyms of this group, most of the onyms contain two indicators. The first indicator (it can be called the "first level" indicator) is the geographical terms -деревня, село, поселок, the second indicator ("second level" indicator) is булак., because it denotes a local geographical term indicating the type of toponym: village Булак. (Irkutsk region), the village of Булак.ovo (Yaroslavl region), the village of Ключи-булак. (Irkutsk region), the village of Чернобулак. (Saratov region), the village of Кызuлбулак.(Chelyabinsk region), the village of Карабулак. (Saratov region), the village of(Шойбулак. (Mariy El), the village of СухойКарабулак. (Saratov region)etc. As you can see, these toponyms contain a third element, in some it is a topoformant: -ово(Булаково), ключи (in the meaning of a spring), in others it is an appellative сухой (СухойКарабулак.), in others it is simply a formant черно-, кора-, кызил-, fourthly, the topographic base of the шой- (Shoya River).
Referring to the study by Dyzhitova E.S.[6] it can be clarified that a geographical term can be called a determinant if it performs the function of a formant in a complex or compound toponym.[7] Then we refer to the determinants the elements of булак.т the oikonymsKyzylбулак., Shoi6^raK., Chernoбулак., etc. The authors of the article "On the question of a geographical term" distinguish between the concepts of determinatives and indicator, calling them not equivalent.[8] This means that toponymists are faced with the task of researching and defining these concepts.
Of particular interest is the toponym village Булак.Шш (Buryatia, Russia). We can assume that such a "trilingual" toponym contains three "multi-level indicators". In addition to the above, it contains the formant "ulus". Ulus - - settlement, ail, camp (Turk.. Bur., Kalm.,Mong.), people, state, country. In the Arkhangelsk region - the correct form of arable land, fields located in a row. Borrowed in Persian.language: ulus - people, horde, possession, settlement.[9] As can be seen from this definition, there is no exact indication of which language the given word specifically belongs to and what etymological meaning it carries. Let's turn to the Uzbek explanatory dictionary.[10] : ulus - (from Mongolian - state, people,); 1) Families, clans living in dependence on the lands of Nuen Mongolian owner; 2) Property, lands seized during the Mongol invasion and divided to the children of Genghis Khan; 3) People, people, tribe, clan, crowd, population, inhabitants.
Ulus in the meaning of a settlement can also claim to be an indicator. Then we can talk about the third level of the indicator. Three level indicators may contain "bilingual" or "trilingual" toponyms.
Oriental Renaissance: Innovative, educational, natural and social sciences Scientific Journal Impact Factor Advanced Sciences Index Factor
o
R
VOLUME 2 | ISSUE 3 ISSN 2181-1784 SJIF 2022: 5.947 ASI Factor = 1.7
An analysis of 120 toponyms with the topoformant "kul" (phonetic derivatives kol, kel, kel, gel) - lake (Turk.) shows that in multistructuraltoponyms several of its elements act as an indicator. In oikonymsAksa-Kul village (Tatarstan), Balakul village (Kurgan region), Barlakul village (Novosibirsk region), Isilkul city (Omsk region) and other indicators of the first level village, village, village, city, second level indicator - a stump indicating the proximity of a body of water.
The oikonyms of this group may also contain a third-level indicator: Yurtkul village (Ulyanovsk region) - yurt - country, region, house, aul, camp (Turk.); village of Yalankul (Omsk region) - yalan (phonetic version of yalan) - steppe, clearing in the forest, village of Yarkul (Novosibirsk region) - yar - 1) high steep bank (phonetic variants of heat (Turk.), 2) lake (Mari. ), 30 sand (Nenets).[11]
In the oikonyms the village of Russkiysaskul (Boshkortostan), the village of NovyYankul (Stavropol Territory), the village of TatarskiySaskul (Boshkortostan), the elements Russian, new, Tatar are appellatives.
The village of StepnoyYurtkul (Tatarstan) is interesting from the point of view of performing the functions of an indicator. Needs an explanation whether the indicator is the steppe element in this oikonym, since it indicates the location of the oikonym, and therefore indicates the toponym.
Analysis of 85 oikonyms with an element of yurts - country, region, house, aul, camp (Turk.).[12] Three-level indicators contain the oikonym village zakan-Yurt (Chechnya), which includes the element zakan - (Turk.) means a ditch designed to remove moisture from the soil.[13]
In the oikonyms of Russia, about 40 different settlements have the topoformant -kan (phonetic variant -kent, -kend, -kon, -gon, -gan), which denotes a city, a settlement:[14] the city of Abakan (Siberian Federal District, Russia), the city of Mallakent ( Dagestan, Russia), the village of Yangikent (Dagestan, Russia), the village of Agayakan (Yakutia, Russia), the village of Aryskan (Tuva, Russia), the village of Leninkent (Dagestan, Russia), etc.
Disputes may arise in the interpretation of other meanings of topoformants -kent (top) and kend (pit). In the indicated oikonyms, the indicator of the first level is a city, a village, a settlement. The photoformant -kan - can be an indicator of the second level only in toponyms, indicating a small settlement - a village, a village, a village, etc. In toponyms related to the city type, it is not an indicator, since kent and city are synonyms. In such indicators, this element does not provide additional information.
Oriental Renaissance: Innovative, educational, natural and social sciences Scientific Journal Impact Factor Advanced Sciences Index Factor
o
R
VOLUME 2 | ISSUE 3 ISSN 2181-1784 SJIF 2022: 5.947 ASI Factor = 1.7
In the analyzed oikonyms there is no indicator of the third level. This is explained by the fact that the geographical term city itself does not refer to primary, natural objects of toponymy, but to secondary, artificial objects.
In 60 oikonyms with the topoformantaul, there may also be indicators of two levels, since aul means "village, settlement, camp, tent of Asian and Caucasian peoples": the village of Abaul (Tyumen region), the village of Zhanaaul (Omsk region), the village of Kzyl -Aul (Rostov region), the village of Yangi-aul Three-level indicators contain not only multilingual, but also monolingual toponyms: Gora Novoselka village (Yaroslavl region), Lesostep village (Rostov region), Vodogora village (Arkhangelsk region), Gornorechensky village (Primorsky Territory), Gorki-Dubrava village (Tulskaya region), the village of Gorka-Zarechye (Vologda region), etc.
In oikonyms indicating a small settlement, "two-level" indicators can also be distinguished if in a given language there are fundamental differences in the subspecies of these toponyms, for example, a village, a village and a small village: the village of Zaselitsa (Tver region), the village of Priselye (Smolensk region), the village of Selishki (Smolensk region), the village of Selo (Arkhangelsk region), the village of Seltso (Vladimir region). It should be noted that in the data of the above site, we identified 672 oikonyms with the topoformant -sel(o)-. Now, with regard to the administrative status of the settlements of a village, a village and a village, there are no differences, but they have etymological and semantic differences, which are the subject of another article. We can pay attention to the fact that in the data of the analyzed site there are 85 villages with the name Seltso, 10 villages with the name Selo, 11 villages with the name Seltsy and 20 villages with the name Selishche.
Based on the analysis of multilingual and multistructural groups of toponyms, we applied the concepts of toponymic appellative, topoformant, topobase, determinative, indicator and found out that in relation to these terms, specialists face the issue of clarifying the true, deep definitive meaning of these terms. The instability and dynamism of modern onomastic terminology leads to difficulties in the use of terms. Skillful use of terminological wealth requires clarification when an element of a toponym can be an appellative, serve as an indicator, or be a determinative. one must skillfully use terminological richness.
CONCLUSION
Based on the analysis of multilingual and multistructural groups of toponyms, we applied the concepts of toponymic appellative, topoformant, topobase,
Oriental Renaissance: Innovative, educational, natural and social sciences Scientific Journal Impact Factor Advanced Sciences Index Factor
o
R
VOLUME 2 | ISSUE 3 ISSN 2181-1784 SJIF 2022: 5.947 ASI Factor = 1.7
determinative, indicator and found out that in relation to these terms, specialists face the issue of clarifying the true, deep definitive meaning of these terms. The instability and dynamism of modern onomastic terminology leads to difficulties in the use of terms. Skillful use of terminological wealth requires clarification when an element of a toponym can be an appellative, serve as an indicator, or be a determinative. one must skillfully use terminological richness.
REFERENCES
1. Basik S.N. General toponymy. M .: 2006.
2. Gvenetadze L.I. Dissertation for the degree of candidate of philological sciences. "The Toponymy of Okriba".Moscow, 2006.
3. Murzaev E.M. Dictionary of popular geographical terms. M.: 1984.
4. Ozhegov S.I. and ShvedovaN.Yu.Explanatory dictionary of the Russian language.
5. Pentsova M.M. To the question of the geographical term. Journal "FILOLOGOS". Yelets State University I.A. Bunin.
6. Pentsova M.M. To the question of the geographical term. Journal "FILOLOGOS". Yelets State University I.A. Bunin.
7. Podolskaya N.V. Dictionary of Russian onomastic terminology. 2nd edition revised. and additional Rep. Ed. A.V.Superanskaya, M.Nauka, 1988.
8. Podolskaya N.V. Dictionary of Russian onomastic terminology./otv. Ed. A.V.Superanskaya, M.Nauka, 1978.
9. Explanatory dictionary of the Uzbek language. Ed. A.Madvaliva. ziyouz/comkutubhonasi. Idum.uz. Talimvatarbiyagaoidportal.
10. Kadirov, N. M. (2019). Social and physical experience of information and information culture. Scientific Bulletin of Namangan State University, 1(3), 165-170.
11. Kodirov, N. M. (2019). Transformation and globalization of information media. Scientific Bulletin of Namangan State University, 1(12), 83-93.
12. Mamasoliyevich, N. K. (2021). Current issues of formation of information culture in youth.
13. Kodirov, N. M. (2019). Transformation and globalization of information media. Scientific Bulletin of Namangan State University, 1(12), 83-93.
M. 2017.
