The versatility of zoonyms in the aspect of the reflection of world-view

https://doi.org/10.20339/PhS.3-18.023

Fedotova Tat’yana V.,

Doctor of Philological Science, Associate Professor,

Professor in the Department of Russian language and verbal communication

Kuban State Agrarian University

e-mail: Fedotova66@mail.ru

The purpose of this article is to analyze the specifics of Russian language zoonyms as a universal category in terms of motivation and principles of the nomination in relation to the language picture of the world of man. The article describes the principles of nomination and the processes of transversely names of other discharges in the discharge zoonyms. The analysis is carried out on the comparison of similar processes in the formation of the commonly-used proper names: anthroponyms, toponyms, ergonomov. Description of the system zoonyms from a position of education allows us to speak about the universality of this category as the most voluminous in terms of absorption of existing nouns, as in names of how in the receiving category not only transfonemizimit a large number of names available, but actively used perceptual feature (the exterior, the habits, character, etc.) of the animal. The analysis was subjected and motifs of naming in the animal world. Typical motives can be considered the influence of media and TV, the influence of literature and folklore, the distinctive features of the exterior, the distinctive traits of a pet. Analysis of the collected material gives the right to assert that in the beginning of XXI century the process of naming in the field of fauna is accompanied by linguistic and extralinguistic factors. All selected motifs of naming suggests a conscious rational strategies calls.

Keywords: onomastics, anthroponymy, toponymy, zoonomia, motivation, transnistia, language picture of the world.

References

1. Superanskaia A.V. Obshchaia teoriia imeni sobstvennogo. M.: Izd-vo LKI, 2007. 368 s.
2. Blinova O.I. Motivologiia i ee aspekty // Vestn. Tomskogo gos. un-ta. 2003. No. 277. S. 65–68.
3. Suprun V.I. Onomasticheskoe pole russkogo iazyka i ego khudozhestvenno-esteticheskii potentsial. Volgograd: Peremena, 2000. 172 s.
4. Fedotova T.V. Sovremennyi kubanskii imennik: intentsii imia-narecheniia / V sbornike: Problemy obshchei i regional’noi onomastiki. Materialy X Mezhdunarodnoi nauchnoi konferentsii, posviashchennoi iubileiu professora R.Iu. Namitokovoi. Maikop: AGU, 2016. S. 235–239.
5. Fedotova T.V. Russkaia toponimiia Zabaikal’skogo kraia: formirovanie, semantika, funktsionirovanie. Novosibirsk: Nauka, 2010. 256 s.
6. Kanalash O.P. Dvoistvennyi aspekt zoonima v lingvokul’turologii // Lingua mobilis. 2009. No. 5 (19). S. 91–94.
7. Podol’skaia N.V. Slovar’ russkoi onomasticheskoi terminologii. M.: Nauka, 1978. 200 s.
8. Prokop’eva N.N. Slovoobrazovatel’naia i semanticheskaia derivatsiia na osnove ustoichivykh iazykovykh simvolov nemetskogo iazyka: avtoref. dis. … kand. filol. nauk. Nizhnii Novgorod, 1998.
9. Solntseva N.V. Sopostavitel’nyi analiz zoonimov russkogo, frantsuzskogo i nemetskogo iazykov v etnosemanticheskom aspekte: avtoref. dis. … kand. filol. nauk. Omsk, 2004.
10. Iusifov Iu.G. Zoologicheskaia leksika azerbaidzhanskogo iazyka (na osnove ornitonimov): avtoref. dis. … kand. filol. nauk. Baku, 1985.
11. Rut M.E. Obraznaia nominatsiia v russkoi onomastike. M.: Izd-vo LKI, 2008. 192 s.