The subject of the article are personal names of the Ukrainian population living in the former Chełm land, presented within the context of historical and cultural and religious conditions, as determinants of national identity. Language, in addition to tradition, a sense of religious, historical and territorial community and national consciousness, being one of its basic elements. Shown is the relationship between certain types of anthroponyms and their linguistic structure together with their ethnic and social origin and, to some extent, the system of values professed. Attention has also been paid to the phenomenon of the infiltration of Polish features present in the anthroponymy of the inhabitants of the area in question.
In the Middle Ages, several name-formation processes played a role in the creation of the anthroponyms in Hungarian. The main name-formation mechanisms were:
1. Semantic name-formation. Within this mechanism, the anthroponym develops through the use of internal elements of the language in such a way that the anthroponymic meaning is created without any change in morphological structure. In Old Hungarian naming practices, the most frequent types of semantic name-formation were:
a. metaphoric name-giving (e.g. farkas ʽfarkas’ [wolf] > anthroponym Farkas),
b. metonymic name-giving (e.g. when an “instrument” of a profession becomes the name of the person practising the given profession; ökör ʽökör’ [ox] > anthroponym Ökör as the name of a butcher),
c. semantic split: e.g. ethnonyms, names of professions, etc., often become anthroponyms without the use of any morphological tool (kovács ʽkovács’ [smith] > anthroponym Kovács).
2. Morphematic construction. In the Old Hungarian period, several suffixes contributed to the creation of anthroponyms, among which the most common ones were: -d(i) ~ -t(i), -s, -a/-e etc. This morphological solution was the most important tool for adapting foreign names in the Middle Ages: Petrus in Latin > Petr-i, Pet-e, Pet-i, Pet-es in Hungarian.
3. Syntagmatic construction. This process, through the combination of two existing lexemes, creates an anthroponym composed of two constituents, in which both elements provide a certain information about the named person.
In this essay I provide an overview of the typical name-formation processes characterising the formation of anthroponyms in Old Hungarian.
The article presents the achievements of professor Aleksandra Cieślikowa in the field of word-formation of proper names. The most important issues concerning the creation of anthroponyms in the Old Polish era selected from monographs and scientific articles are detailed. These issues include the problems of motivation in onomastic word-formation, the onimization process and the way of describing non-derivatized words by word formation and the participation of paradigmatic derivation in the emergence of Old Polish personal names. The views of Aleksandra Cieślikowa regarding Old Polish anthroponymy contributed to the development of onomastic word-formation, an integral part of the grammar of proper names and gave methodological foundations for the description of Old Polish personal names from a synchronic perspective.
There are many ways of choosing or creating a name, the ways of which vary from culture to culture, and from language to language. Chinese onyms are usually constructed of one or more elements, being mostly lexical items (morphemes or words), and retaining in most cases their own lexical meaning in a name, therefore they are usually semantically transparent. However, the “true” significance of some names is sometimes very difficult to discover, and the conclusion is often based upon guesswork. What is evident, Chinese onyms are not random combinations; they usually have a certain underlying significance, reflecting the reason or reasons why particular lexical items are used in the naming process. Chinese researchers usually do not mention “the meaning” of names as a criterion for their semantic divisions. Their classifications are mainly based upon the variously termed “reasons”, “methods”, “motivations”, or “sources of naming”. Therefore, this paper deals with some selected, typical and untypical, “methods” of creating Chinese names, especially given names and place names.
Scribes of the oldest part of the manuscript posted their names in two notes. In the fi rst note the final letter of the scribe’s name is seriously damaged. It is generally believed that his name was Mičьka (Мичька). The author proves that the scribe’s name is a derivative from the suffi x –ko (Mičьko). In the second note the name of the scribe is heavily damaged in the initial part, which results in a number of interpretations. According to the author’s studies the name of the scribe was Potamij (Потамий, gr. PÒtamoj).