Article.
Serhiy Yermolenko, Halyna Zymovets’ DOI 10.31558/1815-3070.2018.36.16 УДК
811.161.2’373.2 SOME ISSUES IN RESEARCH OF EPONYMOUS BUSINESS
NAME MOTIVATION (WITH REFERENCE TO UKRAINIAN ONOMASTICON) У статті пропонується
комплексний лінгвістико-семіотичний підхід до вивчення внутрішньої форми
деонімічних ергонімів (як лексем, так і словосполук), що має враховувати
взаємодію і можливість суміщення різних аспектів і типів умотивованості,
забезпечуючи в цей спосіб повноту аналізу.
Ключові
слова: ономастика, ергонім, епонімія, мотивованість, внутрішня форма,
семантика, прагматика, умовність. In this country and elsewhere, onomastics
traditionally was, and sometimes still is, considered a predominantly
historical scholarly discipline of the philological cycle, indeed a branch of
historical linguistics par excellence.
Correspondingly, proper names, or onyms, have been regarded first and foremost
as an object of historical and etymological study, while such topics as their
usage in present-day language and society, in particular their secondary employment
to coin new proper names, both lexical and phrasal, still tends largely to
remain outside onomastic research scope. Mutatis
mutandis, it applies to new onomastic coinages, such as product names, or
chrematonyms, and business names, or ergonyms, and also (relatively) recently
created place names (as different from ancient ones), which are assessed at
times as unworthy of “serious” scholarly attention. Meanwhile, the said varieties of onomastic items, in particular
ergonyms, constitute a fast-growing section of modern language lexicon in
general and onomasticon in particular, and so, too, are becoming an
increasingly frequent object of interest of onomasticians in Ukraine and
elsewhere (Beley; Karpenko; Kutuza; Lyesovets; Otin, “Iz istorii”; Petrashyk;
Soboleva; Sydorenko; Tsilyna). In fact, as far as ergonyms and chrematonyms are
concerned, the importance of this new
vista in proper name investigation goes beyond linguistics proper as the
coining and functioning of business and product names in the modern world
involves issues of nature that is not only purely scholarly and theoretical but
legal and economic, i. e. practical, as well, being related to questions of intellectual property, naming, brand and
commercial names, and trademarks and therefore to laws regulating these,
including claims and controversies related to them (Zymovets, “Zasady”;
Yermolenko, “Linguistic description” 13-14). Besides, names of enterprises and
institutions have sociopolitical significance too, since they are aften coined to
reflect society’s ideological and cultural values and orientations (Yermolenko,
“Ukrains’ka eponimiya” 45; Zymovets, “Vidobrazhennia ideologichnykh
spriamuvan”). The subject matter of the
present article is discussing some theoretical
and methodological issues concerning the study of motivation of business names
built from onoma propria, with
particular reference to Modern Ukrainian ergonyms, which we shall alternatively
call business names, using the latter designation in a broad sense covering
institutions, organisations and enterprises, see (Podol’skaya 151). In this, we
will consider not only those business names that are lexemes but also phrases,
i.e. so called phrasal names (Booij 219). Business names, or ergonyms, can
be formed by using common as well as proper names (or onyms), cf. Бурячок (a L’viv restaurant ‘s name), on one hand, and промислово-будівельна
група Ковальська,
on the other. In the latter case, their derivation is called transonymization (Podolskaya 138). Another term applicable here is eponymy (Ukrainian епонімія), which, however, in modern
linguistic usage has a more general meaning, referring to items both
appellative and onomastic that are derived from proper names. Also, it can
denote both lexical and phrasal names (Yermolenko, “Linguistic description”
10-13). Still a novelty in this country’s onomastic usage and fairly common
elsewhere, this extended range of reference of the term eponymy (and, consequently, eponyms,
Ukrainian епоніми)
seems both feasible and worthwhile in that it puts the study of all kinds of
proper names deriving from proper names in a general framework of exploration
into deonomastic word and phrase formation as well as onomasiological
potentialities of onyms. That would induce onomasticians to take into consideration
all relevant linguistic material, i.e. all onomastic items sharing the said
property, so that the study of lexical proper names, on one hand, and phrasal
ones, on the other, would not be carried out separately; this, in its turn,
would allow to find their other common features along with differences existing
between them and so to make generalizations concerning both (Yermolenko,
“Ukrayins’ka eponimiya” 46). Accordingly, we will subsume under the heading of
eponyms both lexical and phrasal business names that are formed with the help
of onoma propria. However, speaking of eponymy in
general and eponymous ergonyms in particular, it is necessary to mention the
category of connotative proper names introduced by Y.S.Otin (Otin, “Slovar konnotativynkh” 5-14), since in his study of these he discussed instances of
business names derived from them by means of what may be called indirect
transonymization involving, as an intermediary step, a secondary appellative
meaning, e.g. Aркадия «a
region in the central part of the Peloponnesus peninsula in southern Greece;
also, as used in classical literature and 16th-18th century pastorals, an idyllic fabulous
country whose inhabitants lead unsophisticated and patriarchal yet happy
lives”; this connotative toponym was employed as the name of parks, leisure and
entertainment venues, and a steamboat (Otin, “Slovar’ konnotativnykh” 55-57). This category of connotative
onyms comprises the cases of more or less codified secondary (or, as Otin put
it, periphrastic) nominations performed by using proper names in metaphorical,
or symbolical, meaning to denote generalized referents that already have
stylistically neutral appellative designations. Alongside these, he registered
instances of further semantic evolution of such items again turning them into
proper names, although it is not quite clear how he assessed them in terms of
their inner semantic form. In any case he maintained that connotative names as
such should be distinguished from such words as бойкот or ампер which he regarded as resulting
from metonymy. Yet one cannot fail to notice that among entries in Otin’s
„Dictionary of connotative proper names” there are items that should be
qualified not only as metaphors but as metonymies as well, e.g.
the anthroponym Фриц «1. A German;
2. A soldier in Hitler’s German armed forces; 3. an enemy» (Otin,
“Slovar’ konnotativnykh” 367-368) (cf. also Ukrainian фрицувати «drill» <
Polish frycować “bully a rookie” <
fryc «a rookie” < German Fritz, the diminutive form of the
anthroponym Friedrich (ESUM 7: 13),
probably influenced by the name of Prussian king and military leader Friedrich
der Grosse; cf. also Цусима (the
elliptical form of the chrononym Цусимское
сражение) „defeat, destruction, annihilation”, Цусима being the name of the island in the Korea
strait near which Russia’s Pacific flotilla was completely defeated by Japanese
in 1905 (Otin “Slovar’ konnotativnykh”, 381-382) (for
other instances of the same pattern of toponym meaning shift, see (Akulshyna 104); in
all these examples the initial step of semantic change was based on the
association of contiguity between the original referent of the name and its
certain feature, such as Фриц being conceived Germans’ typical name or Цусима being
a place of catastrophic failure.) In the present paper, our attention will be focused on
the analysis of that aspect of those items that has to do with their
motivation. i.e. the semantic relationship between the underlying and derived
name, and also the extralinguistic relationship between their respective referents which the intralinguistic
relationship between names reflects. Serving as a derivation base, an
underlying item not only provides for the nomination, indication, and
identification of a derived unit’s referent, but it also gives the latter a
certain interpretation, constructing, with the help of its own primary meaning,
the latter’s certain mental image. Correspondingly, we will treat the
relationship of eponymy between a business name and an onym from which it was
derived, both linguistically and linguo-semiotically, regarding the meaning of
the underlying onym as a (part of) the inner semantic form as well as the
semiotic structure of the eponymous business name. As used in the scheme of
analysis that we propose, the linguo-semiotic approach is in its turn twofold,
too. Firstly, the traditional, Aristotelian in its origin (Aristotel’
174), typology of semantic change should be employed as well as Ch.S.Peirce’s
typology of the relation of semiotic representation between sign and object (Yermolenko, “Movne
modeliuvannia” 11-26). Yet in many instances the application of these
analytical tools is not sufficient to provide an adequate explanation of
motivation behind the choice of this particular onym to be used secondarily as
a designation (or a part of a designation) of this particular business venue
and what is the representational relationship between the two. It is our
contention that in such a case, to account for an opaque motivation or the
apparent lack thereof, on should have recourse to another facet of sign, that
of its pragmatic characteristics, and therefore a specific communicative-functional
context for which such nominations were designed. Invariably present in any
sign from the very beginning of its existence, its pragmatic aspect co-exists
with its semantic one, with which it interacts, sometimes penetrating into, and
overlapping with, it, and sometimes getting the better of, and even supplanting
it. Let us start with some clear-cut cases, such as the
name of Kyiv aircraft manufacturing company Державне підприємство „Антонов”: it is but natural that this
enterprise should be named after Oleh Antonov (Олег Антонов, 1906-1984
), an
outstanding aircraft designer and its first director (cf. also Aвіант, the name
of a plant within this company whose segment -ант represents
the same surname). Similarly, the confectionery shop Лісова пісня that existed for some time in
the Kyiv downtown, was fairly transparent too, since it reproduced the name of
very popular chocolate sweets produced at the local factory (now known as Roshen and then named after German
economist and philosopher Karl Marx); however, the situation is entirely
different with the motivation of these sweets’ name since it, also eponymous,
is originally the name of a literary work, namely, a fairy drama by Lesia
Ukrainka (1871-1913), one of Ukrainian
literature classics, and why should it have been referred to in this way is, at
first glance, anyone’s guess, yet, as we will show, there is actually a reason
behind the choice of the underlying item in this coinage, all the more so since
there is a tradition of long standing to name confectionary produce after
literary works and characters, e.g. the Polish confectionary factory and brand Goplana (after one of the main
characters of J.Słowacki’s tragedy “Balladyna”), or sweets with the Russian
names of Пиковая дама (after O.S.Pushkin’s story), Алеко (after his poem and its character), and Сказки Пушкина. Also, the name of a wine shop-bar that once used to be
on one of Kyiv’s central streets, Троянда Закарпаття, corresponded to that of one of the wines that were
sold there, a vintage white dessert one produced from the Pink Traminer sort of
grape and distinguished by its delicate bouquet resembling the aroma of tea
rose, the feature accounting for the wine’s name. These three are exemplary cases of metonymic
nomination, and in semiotic terms, they are indexical signs representing, as
such signs do, their object by virtue of the relation of contiguity between
them. With their motivation fairly transparent and, so to say, logical, such
(more or less) informative ergonyms can be further analyzed and consequently
classified into more concrete subclasses of metonymy according to what specific
feature of their denotatum is chosen to operate as an onomasiological marker by
which the former can be identified. So there are several such subclasses of
ergonyms formed with the help of anthroponyms. The
first anthroponomical subclass is eponyms commemorating people involved in
activities of, or in some other essential way related to, their referents. This
model is productive in naming large, predominantly state-owned agencies,
universities, and research centers. There are several recurrent patterns of
metonymic relation between an underlying onym and a derived ergonym: an
organization named after its founder: Донецький
державний університет економіки і торгівлі ім.
М. Туган-Барановського, Миронівський інститут пшениці ім. В.М. Ремесла; Музей мистецтв імені Богдана та Варвари Ханенків, Фабрика ім. Левинського; an
organization or business named after their former
managers: Національна кіностудія художніх фільмів Ім. О. Довженка, Державний трубний інститут ім. Я.Ю. Осади, Завод залізобетонних конструкцій ім. С. Ковальської. There are numerous examples of legal firms and private medical clinics named after their founders and partners, like Гаптер і Франц, Глєбов і партнери, Дмитрієва та
партнери, Клініка академіка Земскова, Клініка доктора Валіхновського, Клініка
Доктора Дідевича etc. А
university or college named after people who studied (and later worked) there: Національний медичний університет ім. О.О. Богомольця, Київський інститут музики ім. Р.М. Глієра. In
some cases, the metonymy relation is of a more complex nature in that there is
no immediate contiguity between an underlying anthroponym and a commemorative
ergonym whereas they are related through a feature they share, such as their
geographical location, the corresponding toponym also a part of such a phrasal
ergonym. For instance, several universities or other institutions were named
after famous people who were borne or lived in a respective area: Волинський державний університет ім. Лесі Українки, Тернопільський державний технічний університет ім. Івана
Пулюя, Сумський державний педагогічний університет ім. А.С. Макаренка,
Черкаський національний університет iм. Б.
Хмельницького, Фундація ім. князів-благодійників Острозьких. Another
semantic feature shared by an anthroponym and a derived ergonym is a field of
activities common to their referents, cf. enterprises named after prominent
people in respective areas: Інститут
бджільництва ім. П.І. Прокоповича УААН, Агрофірма ім. Мічуріна, Книжкова палата
України ім. Івана Федорова, Уманське державне
музичне училище ім. П.Д. Демуцького. The
following metonymic subclass includes cases of semantic shift from a name of
fictional character to a business name, their referents having a common field
of activity: Айболит (vet services), Кузня Вакули (smith equipment and
services), Робінзон (a travel
agency), Папа Карло (a carpenter) , Гобсек (a jewelry and pawn shop). This
semantic shift is also found in mythical names turned into ergonyms: Арго (a tourist agency), Посейдон (a ship company), Феміда (a legal firm), Гефест (smith services), Дріада (seeds and seedlings). In all
these eronyms, underlying items not only point to the specific nature of
business, but also acquire a metaphorical and even symbolical value, becoming a
graphic emblem of the business in question due to both contiguity and
similarity associations embedded in culture, in particular literary and
mythological texts. The
third, toponymic subclass comprises cases of semantic shift from a place name
to a business venue name. Among place names used as ergonyms there are 1)
horonyms, i.e. area names: Волинь, Нивки, Оболонь, Полісся, Таврія, Тавріда; 2)
hydronyms: Буг, Десна, Дніпро, Дністер, Світязь, Тиса;
3) mountain names: Бескид, Горгани, Карпати; 4) city
names: Бердянськ, Київ, Одеса.
Generally, these toponyms correspond to a place where a specific business venue
is located. However, place names can also specify the source area companies
deal with, which is the case for the following business names: Антарктика (fish), Автоцентр-Баварія (cars), Балтика
(fish), Богемія (glassware and
sanitary equipment), Валенсіа Фрут
(fruit), Мертве море (cosmetics). Thus,
continguity between the referents of underlying onyms and ergonyms is based on
relations within the lexical as well as notional frame of business venue, this
frame including such slots as location, field of activity, and person involved
in it. However, the metonymic character of the inner form of
a business name does not necessarily preclude this form from being at the same
time more or less arbitrary and (seemingly) unmotivated as well. Generally speaking,
certain arbitrariness is inevitable in any sign’s representational structure.
More specifically, it is also true of choosing an object’s feature to be used
onomasiologically. Drawing on evidence outside eponymous business names, we
will cite a few examples
of such ergonyms derived from common nouns. So, for instance, sugar and mustard
are staples to be ordinarily found in cafés and restaurant where they are
offered for free, and therefore naming catering businesses after them seems not
to convey any useful information and altogether irrelevant. And yet, there are
two coffee shops in Lviv called Цукор (Цукор red and Цукор black) whose advertisement in
internet mentions only crepes and breakfast, and no sugar, either red, black,
white, or brown, and in Kyiv, there is a restaurant-café of French haute cuisine Гірчиця. Obviously, it is some other function that these
names are intended to perform, such as an anti-aesthetic one, attracting
potential patrons by appealing to “raw” basics rather than the exquisite and
the elegant. The arbitrariness is still higher in the another Kyiv restaurant’s
name Дрова which may project an image of something traditional
and rustic yet does not imply dishes really prepared on wood-fuelled stoves or
in ovens. Returning to deonymic business names, here, too, one can encounter
cases of rather loose relationship of contiguity, as in Фігаро, the name
of a restaurant of Hispanic and European cuisine in Kyiv, Figaro being the central character of P.Beaumarchais’ play and
G.Rossini’s opera The barber of Seville.
Besides, the association of the ergonym Фігаро with the colloquial expression
Фігаро тут,
Фігаро там (originally a fragment from
Figaro’s aria, Figaro qua, Figaro là)
referring to work which requires constant quick movements, and also with the
comparative phrase як Фігаро “incessantly moving” (literally “like Figaro”), metaphorically
alludes to the restaurant’s efficient service, so that the ergonym’s inner form
combines metonymy with metaphor. Another Kyiv restaurant, Фелліні, occupies the ground floor of the Україна cinema
edifice in Kyiv, this particular location influencing, along with its
specializing in Italian cuisine, the choice of its name: Federico Fellini
(1920-1993) was an outstanding Italian film director. As to this cinema’s name,
it, of course, has a very indirect relation to it being actually located in Ukraine,
and rather indicates «Україна»’s status as one of Kyiv’s and Ukraine’s most well-known historical movie
theaters. Yet another kind of metonymy combined with
arbitrariness is found in the name of the Lviv restaurant Голодний Микола. Микола being a fairly common Ukrainian masculine
anthroponym, the phrasal name indicates its referent by portraying its typical
customer as an average male Ukrainian hungry after day’s work, the absence of
any title (such as пан or добродій) before Микола emphasizing the
ordinary rather than upscale character of its clientele. Such use of a widely met anthroponym to
denote a typical representative of some nationality or any other community
occurs in various languages (Soshko 31-32) cf. also the already mentioned name Фриц (< German Fritz, a short form of Friedrich) which also has the
generalized meaning “a German; a German soldier”, or the Russian name Наташа which in present-day Turk usage refers to any Russian female tourist (Otin
“Slovar’ konnotativnykh” 252-254). This way to employ anthroponyms bears certain resemblance to the figure of
speech called antonomasia, in which a proper name initially referring to a
person known for something or having a distinctive trait comes to express a
general idea, such as Cicero for a
skilled orator (Taranenko 20). However, antonomastic names (such as Крез, Венера etc.) tend to be used predicatively (e.g. виявляється, чоловік у неї
справжній Отелло), whereas in the case when an anthroponym as such does not have a unique
reference, it is primarily a means of nomination (although possibly not devoid
of imagery value and emotional connotation). As we see, pragmatic factors, along with semantic
ones, can bear upon the semantic as well as semiotic structure of an onym. The
influence of pragmatics becomes still more pronounced when we turn to metaphor
and iconicity in business names. Yet as far as metaphorical ergonyms are concerned they
seem to be mostly of the kind that is derived not directly from the underlying
proper name but from its secondary appellative metaphorical meaning, cf. the
company name Еверест, the
corresponding mountain name first becoming a metaphor of highest achievements
(Otin, “Slovar’ konnotativnykh” 374), and the like. While there are plenty of
business names that are linked to underlying common names by the association of
similarity (cf. yet another Lviv restaurant Вулик boasting house specialties,
dishes as well as beverages, made with the addition of honey), yet, generally
speaking, it seems uncertain whether an onym can be used metaphorically to form
another onym. For instance, there is a
café in Lviv called Блеквуд Кава і Бургер, while
in Los Angeles, Ca., there is a coffee bar with basically the same name Blackwood Coffee Bar; are we to assume that
one of these names was coined as a metaphor of another highlighting the resemblance
between the two cafés, or maybe the owners of one of them, instead of creating
a name that is genuinely new and original, just appropriated an already
existing one? The following motivation variety is based on pun, i.e.
a linguistic joke realized by means of the juxtaposition of two or more
formally identical or similar linguistic entities, such as the same word in its
different meanings or words that look alike but have different meanings, to
produce humorous effect, cf. the name of a shop in a town near Kyiv, Вербена, whose name relates not only to
the plant Verbena (cf. the nearby shop’s name Ромашка) but also to the Christian
name of its owner, Вера; cf. also the name of the betting company Паріматч (founded in 1995 in Kyiv), superficially resembling that of the French
weekly Paris Match, yet its first
component at the same time is similar to the word парі „agreement as to the what the person who has lost has to do; bet” (SUM 6: 70), and the second to матч „game”, their composite
meaning pointing to betting on the result of a sport event. One of the
restaurants at the Besarabska square in Kyiv is called Беcсарабія; the choice of this name obviously reflects the
restorateur’s Odessa background and the restaurant’s Bessarabia cuisine, yet at
the same time it relates by means of a fanciful back-derivation to the square’s
name (actually deriving from Бесарабія). As in the previous cases, this kind of motivation can
be found in ergonyms whose formation involved appellative items: e.g., on Shota
Rustaveli street in Kyiv, there used to be a restaurant that had a name У Сені і Гоги, whose two principal
components corresponded to the short forms of the anthroponyms Ceня (< Семен) і Гога (< Георгій); at the same time, the combination of the two
resembled the word синагога. With the Brodsky Choral Synagogue situated nearby,
the said resemblance had to be the reason for choosing the restaurant’s
particular name. Arguably, to describe this kind of motivation
adequately, the semiotic category of iconicity should be employed referring to
the relationship of representation between the sign and its object in which the
very form of the former reflects the latter. Thus, as different from metaphor,
the association of similarity does not link here the denotata of two words;
also, contrary to most iconic signs, the relation of reflection connects in
this case two signs rather than the (linguistic) sign and its (extralinguistic)
object, so that iconicity is language-internal here. The pragmatic factor reigns supreme in the formation
of ergonyms lacking usual motivation. For instance, in naming the Kyiv
university after the greatest Ukrainian poet Taras Shevchenko (Київський національний університет
імені Тараса Шевченка), at
least one of the reasons could be that of commemoration due to the fact that
Shevchenko once worked with the Kyiv Archeographic Commission which was housed
in the principal edifice of the university; therefore the university’s full
name is to a certain extent metonymic. However, Shevchenko’s name within the
full name of the Kyiv Opera (Національний академічний театр
опери та балету України імені Т.Г.Шевченка) obviously fulfills another role, honorifying both the theater and
Shevchenko as leading representatives of the Ukrainian culture. Then there are countless names of cafés, restaurants,
pizzerias, stores and the like which have little or nothing to do with their
referents (such as the restaurant and hotel Шопен in Lviv or, say, numerous
catering venues or hotels that have sonorous names of various iconic European
and American cities). Instead of
reflecting some objective features, they are chosen to project, by exploiting
significance associated with their
primary reference, a lucrative image of what they secondarily come to refer to,
commercially promoting it by inducing interest of potential customers. Yet
these choices, too, are indicative of society’s cultural
preferences, requirements and fashions. Semantically,
referents of such eponymous ergonyms can be compared, mutatis mutandis, with
what R.Ingarden termed intentional objects created in fictional discourse
rather than existing objectively (Ingarden 179-243). Also, as linguistic items
whose actualization creates a new state of affairs (albeit an imaginary rather
than real one), they can be regarded as performatives of sorts. The same also applies to the formation of chrematonyms
(product names). So “the human factor” in its many embodiments can more
or less overrule the “usual” motivational approach to nomination, making the
sign producer voluntarily or forcibly to renounce “logical” strategies and
established patterns found in appellative nomination, instead intentionally
adopting ones that would impose some world view and system of values
(ideological or cultural, or just fashionable and “trendy”) upon both the
signified object and future recipients and users of his coinage.
Summing up, in investigating the motivation of
eponymous proper names it is advisable to examine it within a framework that is both
linguistic and linguosemiotic, analyzing it from the viewpoint of the typology
of semantic shifts as well as that of semiotic representation. An integrated
approach of this kind, while taking into consideration the whole gamut of
cases, traditional as well as modern and clear-cut as well as borderline and
heterogeneous, will be able to give them all a unified systemic interpretation.
Establishing semantic and pragmatic factors relevant for ergonym inner form
structuring, and elucidating them from both the socio-cultural and
language-internal perspective, this scheme of analysis will enable the
researcher to find out how different aspects and types of eponym motivation,
rather than remain isolated, interact, combine and overlap in individual
ergonyms determining their specificity. Investigating business names in such a
way will yield results that would be significant for onomastic and
word-formative as well as sociolinguistic and sociocultural studies, at the
same time giving useful insights in the nature of proper name meaning as well
as frame semantics underlying eponym formation. Coincidentally they will
necessitate the development of new methods and technique of semantic analysis
designed specially to be applied to the meaning of proper names in general and
ergonyms in particular.
References.
Akul’shyna Natalia. Suchasna vijs’kova terminoligiya: kgnityvno-pragmatychni vymiry (na
materiali pers’koyi, ukrayins’koyi ta angliys’koyi mow (Modern military
terminology: cognitive-pragmatic parameters (with reference to Iranian,
Ukranian and English). Diss. Kyiv National Taras Shevchenko University,
2016. Print. Aristotel’. “Poetika. Book III
(Aristoteles.
Poetics. Book III)”.Aristotel’ i antichnaya literatura
(Aristoteles and Antique Literature). Moscow: Nauka, 1988. 107-299. Print. Beley,
Oleh. Suchasna ukrayins'ka erhonimiya:
vlasni nazvy pidpryyemstv Zakarpattya (Modern Ukrianian Ergomys: Proper Names
of Businesses of Transkarpathian Region). Uzhhorod, 1999. Print. Booij,
Geert. “Phrasal names: a constructionist analysis”. Word structure 2 (2009): 219-149. Print. Ingarden
Roman. O dziele literackim. Badania z
pogranicza ontologii, teorii języka i filozofii literatury (On a work of
literature. Studies on the borderline of ontology, language theory and filozofy of
literature). Warsaw: PWN, 1988. Print. Karpenko
Yuriy . “Sovremennoye razvitiye russkoy onomasticheskoy sistemy (Modern
Development of Russian Onomastic System)”. Aktualnyye voprosy russkoy
onomastiki (Current problems of Russian onomastics). Kyiv: UMK VO, 1988,
5-14. Print. Kutuza,
Nataliya “Strukturno-semantychni modeli
erhonimiv (na materiali erhonomikonu m. Odesy) (Structural and Semantics Models
of Ergonyms (Based on Ergonyms of Odessa)”. Diss. Odesa National U, 2003.
Abstract. Print. Lyesovets', Nelia. „Erhonimiya m. Luhans'ka: strukturno-semantychnyy i sotsial'no-funktsional'nyy aspekty (Ergonyms of Luhansk City – Structural, Semantical and Social Functional Aspects”. Diss. Luhansk National U., 2007.
Abstract. Print. Otin
Yevgeniy. „Iz istorii russkoy ergonimii (From the History of Russian
Ergonyms”). Izbrannyye trudy po yazykoznaniyu (Selected Works in Linguistics).
Donetsk: 1999. 155-166. Print. Otin,
Yevgeniy. Slovar konnotativnykh
sobstvennykh imen (Dictionary of Connotative Proper Names)”. Donetsk: OOO
«Yugo-Vostok. Ltd». 2004. Print. Petrashyk, Yurii. „Erhonimiya Ternopil'shchyny kintsya XX– pochatku XXI st. (Ergonyms of Ternopil Region of the late 20th
and the early 21st century)”. Diss
Chernivtsi National U., 2013. Abstract. Print. Podolskaya, Natalia. Slovar’
russkoy onomasticheskoy terminologii (Doctionary of Russian Onomastic
Terminology). Moscow: Nauka, 1988. Print. Shestakova, Svitlana “Leksyko-semantychni innovatsiyi v systemi ukrayins'koyi nominatsiyi (na materiali erhonimiv i prahmonimiv) (Lexical and Semantical Innovations in
the System of Ukrainian Nomination (Based on Business and Products Names)“.
Diss. Kharkiv National U, 2002.Abstract. Print. Soboleva,
Tatiana, and Aleksandra Superanskaya. Tovarnye znaki (Trade Marks).
Moscow: Nauka, 1986. Print. Soshko,
Oksana. Frazeologichna reprezentatsiya
vnutrishnikh ryc ludyny: osoblyvosti semantyky i vnutrishnioyi formy
(Fraseological representation of human inner qualities: peculiarities of
semantics and inner form). Diss. Kyiv National Taras Shevchenko Univ. 2014.
Print. Sydorenko, Olena. “Nominatsiyni protsesy v polilinhval'niy erhonimiyi Donechchyny (Nomination Processes in Multilingual Ergonym System of Donetsk Region” . Diss. Donetsk National U, 2013. Abstract. Print. Taranenko Oleksandr. “Antonomaziya (Antonomasia).” Ukrayins’ka mova. Entsyklopediya (The Ukrainian Language. An Encyclopedia). Kyiv: Ukrayins’ka Entsyklopedia, 2009. 20. Tsilyna, Maryna . “Erhonimy m. Kyyeva: struktura, semantyka, funktsionuvannya) (Ergonyms of Kyiv city: structure, semantics, functioning)” Diss. Kyiv
National Drahomanov U,, 2006. Abstract. Print. Yermolenko
Serhiy. Movne modeliuvannia diysnosti I znakova struktura
movnych odynyts’ (Linguistic modelling of reality and semiotic structure of
language items). Kyiv, Vydavnychyi Dim Dmytra Buraho. 2006. Print. Yermolenko Serhiy, “Linguistic
description of eponymy: parameters and problems”. Movoznavstvo (Linguistics) 4 (2018): 10-26. Print. Yermolenko, Serhiy. “Ukrayins’ka eponimiya v sotsiokul’turnomu
aspekti (Ukrainian eponymy: a socio-cultural aspect” II Mizhnardna Naukova
Konferentsiya “Sotsiolingvistychne
Znannia Yak Zasib Formuvannia Novoyi Kul’tury Bezpeky: Ukrayina i Svit”, 22-23
lystopada 2018.Lviv (Second International Scientific Conference”
Sociolinguistic Knowledge as a Means of Formation of New Culture of Security:
Ukraine and the World”, November 22-23, Lviv). Ed. by Halyna Matsiuk. Lviv:
LNU, CISP, 2018. 45-47. Print. Zymovets’ H. “Vidobrazhennia
ideolohichnykh spriamuvan’ i dominantnykh identychnostey u klasi erhonimiv
(Reflexion of ideological orientations and dominant identities in the class of
bysiness names)”. II Mizhnardna Naukova
Konferentsiya “Sotsiolingvistychne
Znannia Yak Zasib Formuvannia Novoyi Kul’tury Bezpeky: Ukrayina i Svit”, 22-23
lystopada 2018.Lviv (Second International Scientific Conference”
Sociolinguistic Knowledge as a Means of Formation of New Culture of Security:
Ukraine and the World”, November 22-23, Lviv). Ed. by Halyna Matsiuk. Lviv:
LNU, CISP, 2018. 47-48. Print. Zymovets’, Halyna. “Zasady
movnoyi polityky v haluzi neymingu (Principles of language policy in naming).
Mova i suspil’stvo (Language and Society) 4 (2013): 152-157. Print. List of Abbreviations EDUL
Etymological dictionary of the Ukrainian language (Etymologichnyi slovnyk
ukrayins’koyi movy). Кyiv: Naukova dumka, 1982-2012. V. 1-12. DUL
Dictionary of the Ukrainian language (Slovnyk ukrayins’koyi movy). Kyiv:
Naukova dumka, 1070-1980. V. 1-11.
Надійшла до редакції 25 листопада 2018 року.
|
