Your shopping cart is empty.
Log in

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Библиотека журнала      
"Филологические науки"

 

Все подробности в разделе
"Книжная полка"

 

 

 

Max Fasmer and Oljas Suleymenov in search of etymon

M. Dzhusupov
80,00 Р

 

https://doi.org/10.20339/PhS.4-20.036     

 

Dzhusupov Mahanbet,

Doctor of Philology, Professor,

Professor of the Modern Russian Language Department

Uzbek State University of World Languages

e-mail: mah.dzhusupov@mail.ru

 

The article considers the problem of etymology of a word on the material of Max Vasmer’s “Etymological dictionary of the Russian language” and Oljas Suleymenov’s book «The code of a word. Introduction into Universal etymological dictionary “1001 words”». Comparative analysis of the contents of M. Vasmer’s dictionary entries and the provisions of the book by O. Suleimenov has been carried out in the paper. Similarities and differences of their scientific views on the problem are revealed in their works: M. Fasmer — a word, meaning, pronunciation in different living and dead languages; O. Suleimenov — a hieroglyph (artistic image), concept, a word, meaning, pronunciation in various living and dead languages. Both researchers go deeply into antiquity in the search for the etymon of a word. O. Suleimenov explores the source of a word in unity with the appearance of letter — cuneiform, rock paintings, etc. According to O. Suleymenov, the first names of words were common to all mankind of that time and spread in different pronunciations and meanings along with the resettlement of ethnic groups, tribes, and clans on the earth. O. Suleimenov was accused by the government for his scientific research on Turkism in the “The Song of Igor’s Campaign” (the book “Az and Ya”). M. Fasmer has been recently blamed by the author of another dictionary — V.L. Pisanov (but not by the government) in antirussism and in his adherence to the fascist ideology, which is not grounded accuse. The language and style of M. Vasmer is strictly scientific, linguistic. The language and style of O. Suleimenov is linguistic-poetic-historical and philosophical with a way, which in most goes out of the norms of scientific style, interspersed with colloquial, artistic and figurative expressions. It can be explained by the dominance of poetic-artistic psycho-images of language-speech means formed in the author’s mind.

Keywords: etymological dictionary, scientific position, comparison, word code, hieroglyph, concept, word, meaning, pronunciation.

 

References

1.         Ivanov V.V. Ot bukvy i slova k ieroglifu. Sistemy pis’ma v prostranstve vremeni. 2-e izd. Moscow: Izd. Dom IaSK, 2016. 272 s.

2.         Preobrazhenskii A.G. Etimologicheskii slovar’ russkogo iazyka. Moscow – Leningrad: Izdatel’stvo Akademii nauk SSSR, 1949. 142 s.

3.         Fasmer M. Etimologicheskii slovar’ russkogo iazyka: v 4 t. T. 2 / рer. s nem. i dop. O.N. Trubacheva. 4-e izd., ster. Moscow: Astrel’: AST, 2007. 672 s.

4.         Suleimenov O.O. Az i Ia. Kniga blagonamerennogo chitatelia. Almaty: Zhazushy, 1975. 304 s.

5.         Suleimenov O.O. “Kod slova. Vvedenie v Universal’nyi etimo-logicheskii slovar’ ‘1001 slovo’”. Almaty: Izdat. dom “Biblioteka Olzhasa”, 2014. 146 s.

6.         Shanskii N.M., Ivanov V.V., Shanskaia T.V. Kratkii etimologicheskii slovar’ russkogo iazyka. Moscow: Prosveshchenie, 1975. 544 s.

7.         Shanskii N.M., Bobrova T.A. Shkol’nyi etimologicheskii slovar’ russkogo iazyka: Proiskhozhdenie slov. Moscow: Drofa, 2003. 400 s.

8.         Varbot Zh.Zh. Etimologiia // Bol’shoi entsiklopedicheskii slovar’. Iazykoznanie. Moskva: Bol’shaia rossiiskaia entsiklopediia, 2000. S. 596–597.

9.         Arapova N.S. Etimon // Bol’shoi entsiklopedicheskii slovar’. Iazykoznanie. Moscow: Bol’shaia rossiiskaia entsiklopediia, 2000. S. 597.

10.       Pisanov V. Mina, zalozhennaia Maksom Fasmerom // Literaturnaia gazeta 2018. No. 12 (6636). URL: http://lgz.ru/article/-12-6636-21-03-2018/mina-zalozhennaya-maksom-fasme...

11.       Dzhusupov M. Etimologicheskii slovar’ russkogo iazyka — dostoianie russkoi i mirovoi lingvistiki // Filologicheskie nauki. NDVSh. 2019. № 3. C. 68–77.

12.       Anikin A.S. Omrachennyi iubilei // Troitskii variant. Nauka. 17.05.2018. URL: http://trv-science.ru/2018/05/17/omrachennyj-yubilej/

13.       Dzhusupov N.M. Teoriia vydvizheniia v lingvisticheskikh issledovaniiakh: istoki, tendentsii, voprosy interpretatsii // Vestnik RUDN. Seriia: Teoriia iazyka. Semiotika. Semantika. 2016. No. 2. C. 41–50.

14.       Dzhusupov M. Mezh"iazykovoe i mezhkul’turnoe kontaktirovanie: poniatie, slovo, psikhoobraz, interferentsiia // Filologicheskie nauki. NDVSh. 2016. No. 5. C. 22–34.

15.       Suleimenov O.O. Iazyk pis’ma. Vzgliad v doistoriiu — o proiskhozhdenii pis’mennosti i iazyka malogo chelovechestva. Almaty – Rim, 1998. 502 s.

16.       Suleimenov O.O. Tiurki v doistorii. Almaty, 2002. 319 s.

17.       Dzhusupov M. “Iazyk pis’ma” ili “Pis’mo — iazyk v grafike” (odinakovoe v raznom i raznoe v odinakovom) // Vestnik Rossiiskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. Seriia: Polilingvial’nost’ i transkul’turnye praktiki. 2018. T. 15. No. 3. C. 422–445.

18.       Suleimenov O.O., Bakhtikireeva U.M., Dzhusupov M. I dr. Kod slova // Vestnik Rossiiskogo universiteta druzhby narodov. Seriia: Voprosy obrazovaniia: iazyki i spetsial’nost’. 2018. T. 15. No. 1. S. 128–165.

19.       Dzhusupov N.M. Tiurkskii simvol v khudozhestvennom tekste (lingvokognitivnyi aspekt). Astana: Saryarka, 2011. 218 s.

20.       Araeva L.A. Iazykovaia kartina mira teleutov: monografiia. Kemerovo: Kemerovskii gosudarstvennyi universitet, 2016. 237 s.

21.       Giliarevskii R.S., Grivnin V.S. Opredelitel’ iazykov mira po pis’mennostiam. Moscow: Nauka. Glavnaia redaktsiia Vostochnoi literatury, 1965. 376 s.