ORIGIN OF SELKUP NAMES OF BERRIES
The article describes the origin of berry terminology in Selkup. Results of full collection of selkup words belonged to the subject lexical group “berry flora”. The analysis of these linguistic units allows tracing the development process and name formation of berries in selkup language and also to single out the principle of naming units. Further data integration makes it possible to examine the semes which are the bases of naming flora lexemes according to productivity criterion. The study was carried out due to the theory of transferring linguistic world image with the help of symbols taken from collective unconsciousness and kept the meanings of world image. The method of component analysis which reconstructed the meanings of unproductive naming units was used for analyzing. This method allows explaining the meaning of berry flora words with the help of dividing lexemes into small meaningful units. Twenty three selkup berry flora words were analyzed and there were eight principles of naming units that formed such groups as berry functioning connected with its picking up and using as a food, connection of some berries with certain kinds of birds, colour characteristics of berries, mythological ideas of selkup people, curing period and berrying, taste properties of berries. Indirect way of naming berries is dominated and underlines associative thinking of selkup people.
Keywords: selkup language, berry flora, phytonyms, etymology, semantic development, principles of naming units
References:
1. Helimski E. The Language of the First Selkup Books. Szeged, 1983. 269 p.
2. Rédei Károly. Uralisches Etymologisches Wörterbuch. Band I. Uralische und finnisch-ugrische Schicht. Budapest, Akadémiai Kiadó, 1988.
3. Serebrennikov B. A. Veroyatnostnye obosnovaniya v komparativistike [Random grounds of comparative linguistics]. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1974. 352 p. (in Russian).
4. Erdélyi István. Selkupisches Wörterverzeichnis. Tas dialect. Budapest, Akadémiai Kiadó, 1969. 316 S.
5. Sateeva E. V. Osnovoobrazuyushchie suffiksy imeni sushchestvitel’nogo v sel’kupskom yazyke: dis. ... kand. filol. nauk [Thematic noun suffixes in a selkup language. Thesis candidate of philol. sci.]. Tomsk, 2006. 167 p. (in Russian).
6. Shvedova N. Yu. Russkiy yazyk: Izbrannye raboty [Russian language: Selected works]. Moscow, Yazyki slavyanskoy kultury Publ., 2002. 640 p. (in Russian).
7. Tuchkova N. A., Kuznetsova A. I., Kazakevich O. A., Kim-Maloni A. A., Glushkov S. V, Baydak A. V. Mifologiya sel’kupov: Nauchnoe izdanie [Selkup mythology: Research work]. Tomsk, Tomskiy Universitet Publ., 2004. 382 p. (in Russian).
8. Dolgikh B. O. Rodovoy i plemennoy sostav narodov Sibiri v XVII veke [Tribal and family structure of Siberians in XVII century]. Moscow, Akademiya nauk SSSR Publ., 1960. 623 p. (in Russian).
9. Dulson A. Über die räumliche Gliederung des Sölkupischen in ihrem Verhältnis zu den alten Volkstumsgruppen. Sowjetische finnisch-ugrische Sprachwissenschaft VII. Tallinn, 1971, № 1, pp. 35–43.
10. Pelikh G. I. Sel’kupy XVII veka: ocherki sotsial’no-ekonomicheskoy istorii [The Selkups in XVII century: essay of social and economic history]. Novosibirsk, Nauka Publ., 1981. 177 p. (in Russian).
11. Kyunnap A. Yu. Sklonenie i spryazhenie v samodiyskikh yazykakh (sravnitelʼno-istoricheskiy analiz pervichnykh slovoizmenitelʼnykh suffiksov): avtoref. dis. ... kand. filol. nauk [Declension and conjugation in Samoyedic languages (comparative and historical analysis of primary inflectional suffixes). Abstract of thesis candidate of philological sci.]. Tartu, 1974. 26 p. (in Russian).
12. Bekker E. G., Alitkina L. A., Bykonya V. V., Il’yashenko I. A. Morfologiya sel’kupskogo yazyka. Yuzhnye dialekty. Chast 1 [Morphology of selkup language. South dialects. Vol. 1]. Tomsk, 1995. 292 p. (in Russian).
13. Jahnhunen Juha. Samojedischer Wortschatz. Helsinki, 1977. 186 p.
14. Künnap Ago. Retsenziya na: E. A. Khelimskiy. Komparativistika, uralistika. Lektsii i stat’i. Moscow, 2000. 638 p [Referee report on: Helimski E. A. Comparative linguistics, Uralica studies. Lectures and research papers. Moscow, 2000. 638 p.]. Linguistica, Uralica. Tallinn, 2000. Bd. XXXVI. № 4. pp. 306–309.
15. Merkulova V. A. Ocherki po russkoy narodnoy nomenklature rasteniy [Essay on Russian folk plant list]. Moscow, Nauka Publ., 1967. 258 p. (in Russian).
16. Anikin A. E., Khelimskiy E. A. Samodiysko-tunguso-man’chzhurskie leksicheskie svyazi [Samoyedic and tungusic lexical connections]. Moscow, Yazyki slavyanskoy kultury Publ., 2007. 256 p. (in Russian).
17. Nenetsko-russkiy slovar’ [Nenic-russian dictionary]. Pod. red. Tereshchenko N. M. Moscow, Sovetskaya entsyklopediya Publ., 1965. 942 p. (in Russian).
18. Kuznetsova A. I., Khelimskiy E. A., Grushkina E. V. Ocherki po sel’kupskomu yazyku. Tazovskiy dialekt [Essay on selkup language. Tas dialect]. Moscow, Moskovskiy universitet Publ., 1980. 412 p. (in Russian).
19. Baydak A. V. Metafory i obraznye skhemy v sel’kupskom yazyke [Metaphors and pattern schemes in Selkup]. Tomskiy zhurnal lingvisticheskikh i antropologicheskikh issledovaniy – Tomsk Journal of Linguistics and Anthropology, 2013, no. 2 (2), pp. 9–15 (in Russian).
20. Bykonya V. V. Fragmenty dukhovnoy kul’tury sel’kupov v naimenovaniyakh mificheskikh obrazov [Fragments of spiritual selkup culture in naming units of myth characters]. Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta – TSPU Bulletin, 2006, no. 4 (55), pp. 133–140 (in Russian).
( 463.06 kB ) 
( 454.31 kB )
Issue: 4, 2015
Series of issue: Issue 4
Rubric: FINNO-UGRIC AND SAMOYED LANGUAGES
Pages: 48 — 55
Downloads: 842