The text is an overview of the first volume of the lexical atlas of the Russian folk dialects. It presents modern cartographic methods used in the volume and types of maps contained therein. In order to better present the volume, one exemplary map is analysed, indicating its advantages and drawbacks. In conclusion the richness of the Russian dialectal lexical material, which was precisely geographically located, is stressed. This is the biggest merit of the atlas.

The article analyzes the phonetic system of the Bulaeshty dialect of the Ukrainian language as used in the village of Bulaeshty in the Republic of Moldova. This had been established until the 15th century by the natives of Bukovyna in the Ukraine. A system of contemporary sound derivatives from a Proto-Slavic ancient phonetic system of consonants has been identified. The full or partial conservation of archaic phonetic forms has become fixed. The Bulaeshty dialect retains a number of relict forms, including phonetic archaisms which have long been lost in the Ukrainian literary language and are increasingly fixed in modern Ukrainian dialects. An record of consonant phonemes in the dialect has been compiled. There are 38 phonemes and according to the differential basis of the “place of creation” of the sound manifestations, traditionally they are classified into groups: 1) labials (/б/, /п/, /в/, /м/, /ф/); 2) front tongue (/д/, /д’/, /т/, /т’/, /з/, /з’/, /с/, /с’/, /ц/, /ц’/, /л/, /л’/, /н/, /н’/, /дз/, /дз’/, /р/, /р’/, /дж’/, /ɕ/, /ч/, /ч’/, /ж/, /ш/); 3) medium tongue (/й/); 4) back tongue /(ґ/, /ґ’/, /к/, /к’/, /х/, /х’/); 5) pharyngeal (/г/, /г’/). Тheir functional load and conditions of positional and combinatorial variation have been determined.

The article shows folk nicknames operating in geographically diverse rural communities (administratively belonging to the municipality Muszyna). As unofficial anthroponyms, existing only in the spoken form, they represent a living local language — dialect. Analysis of the collected material shows that all the most important features of the language characteristic of this part of Lesser Poland (Małopolska) dialect are performed in it. Folk nicknames, despite numerous hazards caused by civilization, are still an important factor supporting the local dialect — they operate rather vividly in the ana lysed microcommunity (almost every adult has his nickname), and are constantly being created and passed down from generation to generation.

The aim of the article is to bring closer a part of the world’s image that is characteristic for the rural community and the richness and variety of the folk culture inscribed in the proprial structures. As a result, this subject requires an integration of different research methods elaborated within the fields of onomastics and dialectology, including linguistic methods of researching a lingual image of the world. The onymic material is as follows: appellative surnames, originating from nicknames formed from dialectal lexemes, surnames motivated by nominal, dialectal hypocorisms, and finally, surnames formed from matronymic phrases (female names), which are an example of an aberrance of the patriarchal family model. Phonetic and formative phenomena should also be focused upon. These are crucial for certain social micro-communities, and are inscribed in the dialectal inflexions of anthroponyms (which function as separate surnames) and marginally in the female surnames with dialectal formants. Onyms with dialectal motivation refer to, and indirectly point, to the contemporary user, the past realities of living in the village community and the lingual and cultural background.

The subject of the article is the occurrence of dialectal features in Internet nicknames. The analysis was carried out on the basis of about 2500 nicknames that contained dialectal features. The names were obtained within the years 2012–2015. In the analysis, linguistic areas were indicated in which we may notice the influence of local dialects on that layer of the Internet anthroponymy. The influence of local dialects is visible in the fact that the Internet users reach for traditional folk names as well as name models related to the folk manner of identifying a human being, e.g. Jagatka, Jantecek, Janielka od Genowefy, Cesiek z Tuchowa. Apart from references to folk anthroponymy, the Internet nicknames reflect the influence of local dialect lexis (e.g. gzub, graślok, fusyt), phonetics (janioł, Carownica, łokrutny łoptymista), inflection (Śpisok z Łapsóf, ciupaga łod tater) and word-formation, e.g. (rzemyszek, cwaniuk).

The article deals with 8 etymologies of dialectal lexemes (along with their variant forms and derivatives) in three dialects of Croatian: drlo and drlog ‘mess, old things scattered’, krtog ‘lair; mess’, madvina (medvina) ‘lair, den’, mlađ / mlaj ‘silt’, sporak / sporǝk ‘hill, slope’, tušek ‘empty grain; undeveloped corn cob’, zavet i zavetje ‘sheltered place’, žužnja ‘leather shoelace; string; ribbon; belt’.

The main purpose of this article is to present how geographical names (microtoponyms) acquire slang names. The site of inquiry is the area of Wręczyca Wielka, which contains the names of different physiographic objects, e. g. fields, meadows, forests, paths. The data was collected from 2011 to 2015 during the informal utterances of the oldest and middle generations of the inhabitants of the area. The analysis also contains the justifications for the microtoponyms. The linguistic material was collected in the area near Kłobuck in the north of the Silesian Province. The first part of this article is devoted to the main transformation of the Polish rural areas after 1945. The latter parts of the text present e.g. the fact that microtoponyms sustain phonetic slang features which do not exist in contemporary slang, and the fact that geographical names are one of the elements of folk culture, as well as the link between the former and contemporary folk image.

The aim of this paper is to provide a brief introduction to the life and tales of Abdelaziz El-Aroui1 (1898–1971), a well-known Tunisian storyteller. He was above all a journalist and a playwright. He was also an active member of the literary group Taht Essour. His tales were transmitted by Tunisian radio and later by TV. Their popularity spread to neighboring countries, especially Algeria and Libya. This popularity derives from his practice of drawing upon traditional sayings, stories and proverbs and from his intention to associate his work with the Tunisian dialect and to penetrate the depth of the human soul.

The article informs about the content of the publication on the Macedonian dialects used in Albania, in the Golo Brdo region.

The text discusses words occurring in the Polish-East Slavic borderlands and prevalent in eastern Polish dialects. Differntiation between old references and loans in this area is not always easy. The material presented here is very diverse. In the case of certain words, identifying them as East Slavic loans with an indisputable source is possible, while in the case of others it is difficult to identify the direct source of the loan. Among the words recorded in the East Slavic borderlands we can find those whose range in Polish dialects seems to indicate the possibility of Ruthenian influence; however, their Polish phonetic form implies their native origin and one should speak about an old reference in this respect. We also encounter Pan-Slavic words, where a doubt arises as to whether they are loans or old references in Polish in the East Slavic area and Eastern Poland.

In this article, the author analyzes the terms for ‘woodpecker’ in the dialects of the Slavic languages, using the materials of the General Slavic Linguistic Atlas (OLA). The analysis contains two parts: the fi rst refers to the geographical distribution of the terms for ‘woodpecker’ in the Slavic-speaking area according to the stations covered by the OLA – about 850 settlements in the Slavic-speaking territory; the second part includes etymological and semantic analysis of the individual terms. From the analysis, it can be concluded that there is a great lexical diversity of these terms in the dialects of the Slavic languages, although the term dětьlъ is dominant in the Slavic-speaking area. Lexical diversity largely depended on the surrounding. Other factors, such as the contacts with other linguistic populations, infl uenced too. Recognizing the origin of the individual terms, we can establish that the forms are most often processed by onomatopoeia. But apart from the audacious perception, the motives for naming the woodpecker arose from the visual perception – the color of the feather, as well as the abilities characteristic of this kind of bird.

The article deals with the question of linguistic interference among Slavic languages at the example of Choroszczynka, a bilingual village in Biała Podlaska County, Lublin Voivodeship. The presentation of two complete questionnaires for the Slavic Linguistic Atlas (OLA), Polish and Ukrainian, not only makes it possible to capture grammatical and lexical peculiarities of both sets assigned to individual dialects, but also reveals carelessness of the fi eldworkers who collected the data. This, in turn, contributed to such an interpretation of dialectal data presented in OLA maps which does not refl ect linguistic reality.