.png)
https://doi.org/10.20339/PhS.5-19.017
Fedotova Tatyana V.,
Doctor of Philology, Associate Professor, Professor of the
Russian Language and Speech Communication Department
Kuban State Agricultural University
е-mail: Fedotova66@mail.ru
Article is devoted to the analysis of current trends in the choice of motive and a way of formation of the prozvishchny names functioning in the student's environment. Key installation becomes that nicknames are an additional name which reflects as physiological and mental properties of the person, and expresses a neutral position, depending on existence or lack of fatichesky function. The characteristic of nicknames in motivational aspect allows to define the main principle for creation of onim — the contact or diskontaktny use of a nickname between communicants. In turn, the mechanism of correlation of the formed nicknames is based on two levels: fonetiko-phonologic and derivational. The analysis of prozvishchny units in aspect of rate of formation and functioning grants the right to draw a conclusion that onima of diskontaktny use are most active as they don’t serve for communication don’t perform fatichesky function, therefore, allow to express actively the assessment of the person through a nickname. From here we come to a conclusion that external data — the most widespread motive during creation of a nickname among young people, often being result of a transonimization of slang unit. According to the principles of motivation several ways of formation of nicknames from a position of activity of functioning are allocated: onimization of appellatives; transonimization; truncation; telescopic word formation. The understanding of that fact that nicknames — the richest material for studying of mentality of modern youth, their tastes, their ideals, creative potential, and formation of onim (in aspect of reflection of these or those signs of the person) depends also on the structure of society, and on that social collective in which the nickname has appeared was result of a research.
Keywords: antropony, nickname, motivation, derivation, fatichesky function, onimization, transonimization, truncation.
References
1. Nikitina T.G. Problemy leksikograficheskoi reprezentatsii slengovogo prozvishcha // Vestnik NovGU. 2009. No. 54. S. 51‒54.
2. Mezhueva O.V., Shcherbak A.S. Regional’nye prozvishcha: vtorichnaia nominatsiia // Vestnik TGU. 2010. No. 10. URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/regionalnye-prozvischa-vtorichnaya-nom... (data obrashcheniia: 10.08.2018).
3. Fedotova T.V. Universal’nost’ zoonimov v aspekte otrazheniia kartiny mira cheloveka // Filologicheskie nauki. 2018. No. 3. S. 23‒29.
4. Suprun V.I. Onomasticheskoe pole russkogo iazyka i ego khudozhe-stvenno-esteticheskii potentsial: monografiia. Volgograd, 2000. 172 s.
5. Podol’skaia N.V. Slovar’ russkoi onomasticheskoi terminologii. Moscow: Nauka, 1988.
6. Madieva G.B., Suprun V.I. Antroponimy kak sredstvo vyrazheniia natsional’noi kul’tury // Izvestiia VGPU. 2010. No. 6. S. 96‒102.
7. Shcherbak A.S. Problemy izucheniia regional’noi onomastiki. Onomastikon Tambovskoi oblasti: monografiia. Tambov, 2006. S. 147‒168.
8. Shostka E.S. Sovremennye prozvishcha, sootnosimye s drevnerusskimi // Vestnik TGU. 2009. No. 6. URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/sovremennye-prozvischa-sootnosimye-s-d... (data obrashcheniia: 10.07.2018).
9. Teliia V.N. Vtorichnaia nominatsiia i ee vidy // Iazykovaia nominatsiia (Vidy naimenovanii) / pod red. B.A. Serebrennikova, A.A. Ufimtsevoi. Moscow, 1977. S. 129‒221.