Menu: Home :: go to Journal :: switch to Russian :: switch to English
You are here: all Journals and Issues→ Journal→ Issue→ Article

ABOUT SOME ASPECTS OF DEVELOPMENT OF ANTROPONYMIC SYSTEM OF TURKIC LANGUAGE

Annotation

The proper name, which contains a huge amount of cultural information, as a reflector of ethnic and esthetic installations is considered. It is associated with various periods of social and cultural life, characterized by stereotypes about the function of name in a society which represent the events of a political or spiritual life. Generally in the world the principles of anthropocentrism were preserved and when the person in itself does not mean anything, when elected by other valuations. Three large groups in the pre-Islamic and Islamic periods demonstrate the ability of self-preservation of their ancient Turkic anthroponymic system with its semantic structure and anthroponym. One reason for the “longevity” antroponym is a keeping up the ancient ethnic traditions, which are resistance, viable and traditional patriarchal consciousness of the Turkish people, which manifests in respect of their ancestors and their names. Anthroponyms give a rich and unique material for studying the primordial word-formation models, ethnic history. The study of proper names in synchronic and diachronic parts allows to move from the description of particular laws to general research of anthroponymicproblems. Today’s approach to study of language is so complicated and serious that unites the efforts of linguists, psychologists and sociologists. The relevance of the research interfaces with undying interest to the names of people: printed information publication bypasses do not lose a chance, genealogical sites are popular on the Internet and get one of the first places.

Keywords

antroponymic system; naming; new-Turkic epoch; ancient Turkic and Kipchak antoponyms; identification

Full-text in one file

Download

DOI

10.20310/1810-0201-2015-20-10-206-213

UDC

81-2

Pages

206-213

References

1. Superanskaya A.B. Obshchaya teoriya imeni sobstvennogo. M., 1973. 2. Matveev A.K. Onomatologiya. M., 2006. 3. Shcherbak A.S. Osnovnye tipy onomasticheskikh kontseptov (na materiale regional'noy kontseptosfery) // Vestnik Tambovskogo universiteta. Seriya Gumanitarnye nauki. Tambov, 2009. Vyp. 10 (78). 4. Shcherbak A.S. Kognitivnyy podkhod k izucheniyu onomastiki // Problemy nauki i obrazovaniya v usloviyakh mirovoy globalizatsii: trudy 7 Mezhdunarodnoy nauchno-prakticheskoy konferentsii, posvyashchennoy 20-letiyu Yuzhno-Kazakhstanskogo gumanitarnogo universiteta im. M. Saparbaeva. Shymkent, 2015. T. 2. 5. Nikonov V.A. Imya i obshchestvo. M., 1974. 6. Dzhanuzakov T.D. Ocherk kazakhskoy onomastiki. Alma-Ata, 1982. 7. Makhpirov V.U. Imena dalekikh predkov (istochniki formirovaniya i osobennosti funktsionirovaniya drevnetyurkskoy onomastiki). Alma-Ata, 1997. 8. Nikonov V.A. Sistemy lichnykh imen // Sistemy lichnykh imen u narodov mira. M., 1989. 9. Redmonds G. Christian Namesin Localand Family History. Toronto, 2004. 10. Penkethman J. Onomastophylacium: or the Christian Names of Men and Women now used within this Realm of Great Britaine, alphabetically expressed as well in Latine as in English. L., 1626. 11. Hanks P., Hardcastle K., Hodges F. A Dictio-nary of First Names. Oxford, 2006.

Received

2015-08-11

Section of issue

Language. cognition. culture

Для корректной работы сайта используйте один из современных браузеров. Например, Firefox 55, Chrome 60 или более новые.