The Substratum (Thracian) Place Names in Romania and Bulgaria. Some Thoughts Regarding Methodology and Deontology. (original) (raw)
Related papers
Etymological Lexicon of the Indigenous (Thracian) Elements in Romanian
Etymological Lexicon of the Indigenous (Thracian) Elements in Romanian, 2006
This is a first attempt (published in 2006) to put together all the relevant certain, probable or possible elements of substratum (Thracian) origins in Romanian. There were some errors in this attempt. Most of them have been re-discussed and corrected in papers published after 2006. The most important update is our Etymological Dictionary of Romanian (Peter Lang, 2024) which includes almost all the data of the 2006 lexicon, with all the necessary corrections and additions. Nevertheless, some data in the 2006 lexcon are still useful for all those interested in the complex issues of Romanian etymology.
Sorin Paliga, Etymological Lexicon of the Indigenous (Thracian) Elements in Romanian [2006]
Editura Evenimentul, București, 2006
Argumentum Etymologicum __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ 9 Introducere / Introduction __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ 12 possible, some unclear or confuse points; of course, I cannot have the illusion that I may thus also avoid criticism! As stated above, the dictionary reflects some 25 years of research in the field of etymology. Many of the forms hereby included were previously analysed in various scientific papers, most of them in English. This is the main reason I have preserved English as the explanation language. Secondly, many foreign linguists, not necessarily with a good knowledge of Romanian, seem interested in the origin of the archaic elements of Romanian. Thirdly, the younger generation-to which it is mainly dedicated-has no major problem, I hope, in reading the dictionary, and older generations may also do it with fair dedication. As the etymological analysis of the indigenous (Thracian) elements in Romanian cannot be isolated, on the contrary, it makes sense only in a comparative context, the Addenda may hopefully be relevant. The reader will also find, therefore: a lexicon of the Pre!Slavic (Thracian, Illyrian, Romance) elements in South Slavic (Lexicon A and B); a lexicon of the archaic personal names in the same area (Lexicon C); a lexicon of archaic place!names in the Czech Republic and Slovakia (Lexicon D); a lexicon of Thracian and Phrygian god!names and other nomina sacra (Lexicon E).
The Bulgarian-Romanian language boundary: anthroponymical data
Slavia Meridionalis, 2015
The Bulgarian-Romanian language boundary: anthroponymical dataThe topic is Balkan anthroponymy. The area is the Lower Danube – the Bulgarian-Romanian language boundary. In this contact zone there is a distribution of family names, formed from urbonyms. They signal a specific regional belonging, and they show the link with the common area: the Danube river. We are referring to family names of the type: Vidinliev, Kalafatov, Beketov, Svishtovliev, Ruschukliev, Kalarashev, Tutrakanov, (meaning ‘from Vidin’, ‘from Calafat’, ‘from Bechet’, ‘from Svishtov’, ‘from Ruse’, ‘from Calarashi’, ‘from Tutrakan’). This phenomenon is widespread on both banks of the river. Bułgarsko-rumuńska granica językowa. Dane antroponimiczneArtykuł dotyczy bałkańskiej antroponimii w regionie dolnego Dunaju, stanowiącego bułgarsko-rumuńską granicę i jednocześnie strefę kontaktu. W tym regionie częste są nazwiska derywowane od nazw miejscowości. Sygnalizują one pochodzenie, wskazując jednocześnie na rodowód miejs...
Strata of ethnics, languages and settlement names in the Carpathian Basin
2010
When entering the Carpathian Basin in the 9 th century, the Hungarians found a decisively Slavic population on the territory, so toponyms were formed based on the already existing toponymic system. Hungarian toponymic research has been able to reconstruct toponyms from the period prior to the Hungarian conquest only very scarcely and ambiguously-as opposed to the names of larger rivers, which show strong continuity, going back to very early times. The toponyms of the Carpathian Basin, in connection with the formation of the settlement structures of Hungarians, can almost exclusively be documented from the period after the Hungarian conquest. However, the Carpathian Basin became a "meeting point of the peoples" in the centuries after the conquest in 896 and as such, numerous ethnics and languages could be found here: Slavic peoples and Germans settled in larger blocks, while smaller groups of Turkish people, such as Cumans and Pechenegs, and some Neo-Latin peoples (Walloons and later Rumanians) also contributed to the ethnic and linguistic diversity in the area. The layering of different peoples and languages influenced toponyms too, which also allows us to investigate language contacts of the time. This is the main concern of my paper, with special focus on the question of how these phenomena can be connected to issues of language prestige in the Middle Ages.
Romanian-Ukrainian Connections in the Anthroponymy of the NorthwesternPart of Romania
2009
The first contacts between Romance speakers and the Slavic people took place between the 7 th and the 11 th centuries both to the North and to the South of the Danube. These contacts continued through the centuries till now. This paper approaches the Romanian-Ukrainian connection from the perspective of the contemporary names given in the Northwestern part of Romania. The linguistic contact is very significant in regions like Maramureş and Bukovina. We have chosen to study the Maramureş area, as its ethnic composition is a very appropriate starting point for our research. The unity or the coherence in the field of anthroponymy in any of the pilot localities may be the result of the multiculturalism that is typical for the Central European area, a phenomenon that is fairly reflected at the linguistic and onomastic level. Several languages are used simultaneously, and people sometimes mix words so that speakers of different ethnic origins can send a message and make themselves understood in a better way. At the same time, there are common first names (
Theory and Empiricism and Slavonic Diachronic Linguistics (Brno), 2012
On the occasion of the International Congress of Slavists in Ljubljana, Aleksandar Loma, University of Belgrade, analysed Proto-Slavic as a dichotomical summum (or ‘blend- ing’) of Balto-Slavic (Proto-Slavic A) and West Iranic (Proto-Slavic B). His study, combined with recent data, as presented also in our book Linguistics and Archaeology of Early Slavs. Another View from the Lower Danube (in Romanian, wrien together with archaeologist Eugen Silviu Teodor) lead to the conclusion that what is currently labelled ‘Proto-Slavic’ must have had, in fact, three satem basic components: Balto-Slavic (stratum A, the most numerous), West Iranic (stratum B) and North racian (or North Dacian, stratum C). Germanic, Ugro- -Finnic and Romance influences may be also determined via forensic analysis (strata D, E and F). One consequence, delicately avoided during the last years, refers to the issue of the oldest Slavic borrowings in Romanian, traditionally dated as back as 6th or 7th centuries A.D. Al- ready in 1971, Gh. Mihăilă, in a study now almost forgoen, proved that oldest Slavic borrow- ings in Romanian cannot be dated earlier than 12th century. is leads to many uncomfortable aspects, as the difference of approximately 5 centuries is not exactly a minor detail, on the contrary, it affects the very understanding of the historical and ethno-cultural events of the second half of the first millennium. ere are also major implications in defining and un- derstanding the substratum elements in Romanian.
Settlement Name Strata in the Multilingual Carpathian Basin
2009
When entering the Carpathian Basin in the 9 th century, the Hungarians found a decisively Slavic population on the territory, so toponyms were formed based on the already existing toponymic system. Hungarian toponymic research has been able to reconstruct toponyms from the period prior to the Hungarian conquest only very scarcely and ambiguously-as opposed to the names of larger rivers, which show strong continuity, going back to very early times. The toponyms of the Carpathian Basin, in connection with the formation of the settlement structures of Hungarians, can almost exclusively be documented from the period after the Hungarian conquest. However, the Carpathian Basin became a "meeting point of the peoples" in the centuries after the conquest in 896 and as such, numerous nations and languages could be found here: Slavic peoples and Germans settled in larger blocks, while smaller groups of Turkish nations, such as Cumans and Besenyős, and some Romance peoples (Walloons, Romanians) also contributed to the ethnic and linguistic diversity in the area. The layering of different peoples and languages influenced toponyms too, which also allows us to investigate language contacts of the time. This is the main concern of my paper, with special focus on the question of how these phenomena can be connected to issues of language prestige in the Middle Ages.
Changes of Romanian place names during the communist era
Human Geographies: Journal of Studies and Research in Human Geography, 2007
Seventy years ago Professor Ion Conea, a famous Romanian geographer and toponymist, suggested that, when not modified by officials, place-names are like ´some condensed description of the country' (Conea 1928). In Romania there are, broadly speaking, three types of place-names: first, traditional placenames which are unchanged; second, traditional place-names which have been slightly changed so that they conform with the modern Romanian language; and third, new place-names which have been imposed by the authorities. In Romania, as in other regions of Europe, there are many settlement names (oikonymes) which fall into this third category and these form the focus of the paper. There are two periods of Romanian modern history during which place names have been changed on a wide scale. The first was in the decades following independence in 1878 and continuing up to the Second World War. The second, when the replacement of traditional place names was most widespread, was during the c...