Search
| # | Search | Downloads | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | The article is about the semantic development of the German word «mal» from Old High German to Modern German. We also show the conditions of the homonymy development within the word family of this lexeme. Keywords: semantic, word family, etymology, Germanic languages, German, homonymy | 1593 | ||||
| 2 | The article deals with the development of the word family of the Indo-European root *mr- from Germanic to Modern German. We analyse the morphological and syntactical structure of the derivatives and set expressions, which belong to the word family. Much attention is given in the article to semantic development. The material is studied both synchronically and diachronically. Keywords: word family, derivative, semantics, semantic proportion, seme, Old High German, Middle High German | 1525 | ||||
| 3 | The article deals with comparative ethnolinguistic analysis of the Russian and German berries names that derive from animal names. The study bases on more than 400 dialectal names of 25 botanic genuses. The study relies on exposure and comparison of phytonyms nominational features and motivations. The analysis revealed a number of universal nominational features that are common in Russian and German. These are such features as “plant injuriousness (toxicity)”, “plant’s locus”, “eating of berries by animals”, “berries inedibility for the human”, “plant “falsity” (within phytonymic oppositions), “plant habitus and characteristics” and “household use of plant”. There was also identified one unique nominational feature “smell (taste) of plant” in German. The most frequent of zoonyms, reflecting the listed nominational features, are волк ‘wolf’, медведь ‘bear’, собака ‘dog’, ворон (а) ‘raven (crow)’ and сорока ‘magpie’ in Russian as well as Wolf ‘wolf’, Hund ‘dog’, Sau ‘swine’, Geiß ‘goat’, Schlange ‘snake’, Kröte ‘toad’ and Vogel ‘bird’ in German. In conclusion, the author describes the names of the berries that should be recognized as corrupt or reanalyzed forms and indicates the phytonyms, which nominational features require further research. Keywords: phytonym (plant name), zoonym (animal name), nominational feature, ethnolinguistics, berry, the Russian language, the German language | 1185 | ||||
| 4 | The article deals with the plant names motivated by their habitat. The study relies on regional and common names that belong to Russian and German traditional nomenclatures of plants and derive from animal names by a metonymic transfer. The author reveals common and particular bases of such transfer. First of all, the transfer may take place in both Russian and German if habitat of a plant concurs with habitat of an animal. Such correlation implies seven coincident habitats. Five of them are common in Russian and German. They are 1) woods, 2) fields and meadows, 3) waters, 4) marshes and 5) shadow places. The one habitat specific in Russian is steppe; the one specific in German is rocks and mountains. The other common bases of metonymic transfer are ‘habitat of a plant concurs with shelter of an animal, and concurs with a place animal usually prefers to stay or visit. To the specific German bases belong the following two: habitat of a plant concurs with pasture of an animal; and habitat of a plant concurs with a place for animal to breed. Another aim of the article is to show how important the ethnocultural background is for plants’ nomination. Common symbolism in Russian and German ethnocultures have such animals and birds like wolf, bear, deer, hare, snake, frog, toad, duck, swan and crane. That is the reason plants with similar habitat have similar names in both languages. Different ethnocultural meaning have elk, woodpecker, raven, crow and magpie (in Russian); as well as chamois, fox, cuckoo, stork, swine, cow, sheep and goat (in German). Keywords: nomination, habitat, metonymic transfer, plant name, animal name, ethnoculture, the traditional nomenclature of plants | 1383 | ||||