The authors discuss the main premises of the project “The most popular surnames in Poland — past and present. E-dictionary” which has been in development since July 2014 in IJP PAN in Krakow. They also present its basic aims and functions, progress already made and they compare it with other dictionaries of surnames. The authors describe several aspects of the dictionary related to IT and computers but also those concerned with onomastics and lexicography. Additionally, they pay particular attention to the information contained in specific parts of each entry.
The aim of the article is to present the attestations of contemporary Polish surnames of Lithuanian origin which are absent from the dictionary of Lithuanian surnames (“Lietuvių pavardžių žodynas”, LPŽ), excerpted from the anthroponymic index card files that have been stored in the Lithuanian Language Institute in Vilnius and continually enlarged for several decades now. The files contain data excerpted from historical sources of the 16th to 19th centuries and consist of about 200,000 index cards (the actual number of excerpted anthroponyms is lower since some recur in various sources). Due to space limitations, generally only directly attested names have been included in the article, to the exclusion of those whose relationship with the researched name can be inferred rather than considered proven. Each listed attestation of an anthroponym (probably not in all cases an already established hereditary surname) is accompanied by information concerning its location and year (or time bracket), wherever available in the card index file. Given names or other details (e.g. the role of the person mentioned in documents, such as godmother in the data excerpted from baptismal registers) have only been included occasionally, if there was some reason to do so.
In the introduction, examples from the Croatian language are used to exemplify the anthroponymization of appellatives (e.g. appellative kovač → family name Kovač), appelativization of anthroponyms (e.g. family name Penkala → appellative penkala) and transonymization (e.g. hydronym Una → first name Una). All of the listed transitions represent evidence that there are no firm boundaries between the onymic and appellative lexicon, nor within the onymic lexicon.
The central part of the study is dedicated to the so-called pure transanthroponymization of the type first name Vinko → family name Vinko. Pure transanthroponymization results in different combinations of homonymic pairs of anthroponyms in the anthroponymic formula / anthroponymic formulae (e.g. David David; David Vinko, Vinko David; David Novak — Josip David). Given that context does not contribute to the correct understanding of the message transmitted by the anthroponymic formula in the case of first name-family name homonymy, possible consequences of this homonymy for onomastic communication are emphasised. Also listed are examples of anthroponymic formulae of the Saša Pavlić type (it is impossible to distinguish whether the person is male or female from the first name) and Ivan Vinko Boris (it is impossible to distinguish whether the person has two first names or two family names from the anthroponymic formula) which also “stifle” the onomastic information.
The author concludes that the boundaries between first names and family names are not fixed and cautions of the need to carefully select the first name of a child bearing a family name created by the pure transanthroponymization of a first name.
A longstanding folk tradition among rural Russian peasants, ulichnye familii (‘street surnames’) were used by Doukhobors colloquially ‘on the street’ of a village to distinguish among families sharing the same official surname. Similar to Quebecois dit names and Scottish sept names, ulichnye familii arose because of the low surname stock within Doukhobor society. Passed down to succeeding generations and transferred between settlements, these names became a recognized form of address among Doukhobors, helping structure kinship networks and organize social interactions among villagers. When a large contingent of Doukhobors emigrated from the Caucasus to the Canadian prairies in 1899, they continued this naming practice in their settlements well into the early 20th century. A ubiquitous part of their culture for generations, today ulichnye familii have all but disappeared among Doukhobors, as a result of their assimilation, dispersal and modernization. This article offers an analysis of the Doukhobor anthroponymic custom of ulichnye familii: the social factors leading to their adoption; the etymological processes through which these names were formed; the manner in which they were used and transmitted; and the elements contributing to their eventual decline and disuse. It also includes an inventory of extant ulichnye familii among the Doukhobors of the Caucasus and Canada, obtained through extensive fi eld interviews and archival research.
The topic of the article is a description of European urbonyms which fulfilled both political and commemorative roles in the past. The city names are presented in chronological order starting from ancient times to the 20th century. The ancient toponyms are related to the expansion of the Roman Empire, and the names of Roman emperors are used as a foundation for these toponyms. Such urbonyms created on the outskirts of the Roman Empire made reference to their new political allegiance and confirmed it. These naming practices therefore played an important role in the process of territorial expansion and the consolidation of political control. This naming model was also present in Byzantium, and became popular on the outskirts of medieval Ruthenia under the influence of the Byzantine Empire. The tradition of commemorating political rulers through toponyms stayed constant in the Eastern Slavic regions, and was continued by the Russian monarchy as well as the USSR. Such naming practices were initially used as a tool for the structural organisation of Kievan Rus’, and later to erase foreign names from these regions of Tsarist Russia. In Communist times, this tradition reaffirmed the new political reality through the use of surnames of political figures in toponyms. In the 20th century there was an increase in surnames featured in urbanonyms (the names of streets, squares, housing estates). This increase was meant to preserve the memory of remarkable individuals in society.
This article deals with a group of Polish surnames motivated by lexis from the field of salt mining. The analysed surnames are excerpted from “Słownik nazwisk współcześnie w Polsce używanych”, edited by Kazimierz Rymut, as well as from other onomastic compilations. These anthroponyms vary in terms of their origins and linguistic construction. We can distinguish from among these anthroponyms: 1) surnames motivated by impersonal nouns: solanka, solnica, sól, tołpa, żupa; 2) surnames motivated by adjectives: słony, solny; 3) surnames motivated by personal nouns: prasoł, solarz, solnik, warzyc, warzysz, żupnik. The description of particular ‛salt’ surnames, apart from their frequency, includes their geographical distribution, which only in some cases is connected with the location of old salt mines, found mainly in the Lesser Poland (Małopolska).
The subjects of my examination are samples of Silesian surnames derived from the dialectal words determining objects of an animate and inanimate nature. The names of animals were more often used as a base to create the surnames derived from nicknames (derived from appellatives). They were more expressive due to their metaphoric meaning reflecting specific features of people and their evaluations. The signification of botanic (inanimate) nouns used within names was less transparent, however they are thought to refer to an anthropomorphic view of plant behaviour, e.g. dialectal woska/osika [aspen] — trembling. The belief that specific phenomena in nature have supernatural, magic or demonic powers, as well as other difficult to grasp factors, played a very important role in the creation of nicknames and later surnames for the Silesian population. The dialectal “nature” appellatives, which were the source for surnames derived from nicknames, also show that the same dialectal lexeme can have a different meaning in different Polish regions. On the other hand, dialectal lexemes which sound identical in specific Polish regions but differ semantically determine the cultural identity of the micro-speaking country. The same phenomenon can be observed within surnames.
This paper is devoted to the surname changes performed through administrative channels in the interwar period. The research is based on the announcements of the “Official Gazette of the Republic of Poland” in 1929. The author describes main reasons for the decisions of surname changes taking into account characteristics of avoided surnames and chosen demographic tendencies, especially those connected with the age and profession of applicants. People of Jewish origin, Poles and representatives of other nationalities showed different motives for surname changes. Jews most frequently changed their surnames due to legal reasons — they wanted to legalize the unlawful use of a surname of the so-called ritual father. The changes carried out under the motive of assimilation occurred definitely less often. Non-Jewish applicants changed mainly appellative names, especially those derived from words related to animals. After comparing tendencies occurring before and after World War II one concludes that besides legal and assimilation factors which are particular to the pre-war decades (connected with the ethnic, legal and religious situation of the time), the remaining reasons for the surname changes are universal and do not distinguish the pre-war period from that of the post-war.
en
pl
