Ботанічна лексика центральноподільських говірок: структурна організація та ареалогія.

Abstract

У монографії представлено комплексний лексико-семантичний, лексико-етимологічний та лінгвогеографічний аналіз флорономенів центральноподільських говірок 94 н.пп. Вінницької обл. Змодельовано структурну організацію зафіксованих 5252 назв сільськогосподарських культур, плодових і ягідних рослин, дикорослих дерев і кущів, дикорослих трав, грибів та понять, пов’язаних із ними. Досліджено географію зафіксованих флорономенів у межах окресленого ареалу, простежено зв’язки з відповідними номінативними одиницями в інших українських діалектах, виявлено центральноподільські локалізми; уперше здійснено внутрішнє членування центральноподільського діалектного ландшафту. Для діалектологів, лексикологів, лексикографів, етимологів, усіх, хто цікавиться народним мовленням.

В монографии представлены комплексный лексико-семантический, лексико-этимологический и лингвогеографичний анализ флорономенов центральноподольских говоров 94 н.пп. Винницкой обл. Смоделирована структурная организация зафиксированных 5252 названий сельскохозяйственных культур, плодовых и ягодных растений, дикорастущих деревьев и кустарников, дикорастущих трав, грибов и понятий, связанных с ними. Исследовано географию зафиксированных флорономенов в пределах очерченного ареала, прослежены связи с соответствующими номинативных единицами в других украинских диалектах, обнаружено центральноподольские локализмы; впервые осуществлено внутреннее членение центральноподольского диалектного ландшафта. Для диалектологов, лексикологов, лексикографов, этимологов, всех, кто интересуется народной речью.

The monograph «The Botanical Vocabulary of Central Podillia Dialects: Structural-semantic Organization and Arealogy» deals with the composition, structural organization and the peculiarities of nomination and geographic characteristic of the Central Podillia botanical lexis. The lexis under investigation (5252 nomens without counting phonetic and accentual variants) was collected due to a special programme by the author in expeditionary way in 94 settlements of Vinnytsia region, that is in Central Podillia dialects of the south-west dialect of the Ukrainian language. In Ukrainian studies, there is a tendency to create a separate branch of nomenclature ethnobotany, folk names of plants, within which the purpose is to identify, register, systematize and analyze folk florоnomens, their scientific identification with the corresponding taxons, to ostend their etymology, to complete special botanical dictionaries. This was made possible by the collection and analysis of folk names of plants in different regions of Ukraine, but the Central Podillia botanical lexis have been analysed for the first time. Moreover, the Podillia dialects were influenced by Slavic and non-Slavic languages, while retaining traces of foreign-language influences and at the same time distinguished by regional features that have not yet been analyzed in detail. The botanical vocabulary of the Central Podillian dialects, which is the subject of our research, has repeatedly attracted the attention of researchers. From the II half of the XIX century folk names of plants, in particular, Podillian, intensively have been collected and compiled special dictionaries by O. Rogovich, S. Makovetsky, M. Annenkov, N. Osadcha-Yanata. These works contain a great number of dialect names of plants, but their localization is given sporadically; later research monographes by A. Shamota, Y. Zakrevskaya, L. Symonenko, I. Sabadosh contain floranomens, including the Podillian botanical lexis, as empirical material for general theoretical studies. The cartographic characteristic of Podillian botanical vocabulary is reproduced only on the maps of the “Atlas of the Ukrainian 625 626 Language” and the “Atlas of the Botanical Vocabulary of the Ukrainian Language” by I. Sabadosh. It is established that the Botanical Vocabulary of Central Podillian dialects is a complex system of elements combined by interlanguage and extramarital links; it is a hierarchical formation with 6 lexical-semantic groups (LSG): nomens of the agricultural plants and notions correlated with them; nomens of the fruit and berry plants ~; nomens of wild herbs ~; nomens of mushrooms ~; nomens of growing wild trees and shrubs ~; nomens of decorative flowers ~. The defined lexico-semantic groups divide into smaller lexico-semantic paradigms: the general names of plants, the names of genus and species of plants, the names of sorts and kinds of plants, names of morphological parts of plants, names of area sown to agricultural plants, names of stages of their growing. Floranomens of each lexico-semantic paradigms (LSP) are connected among themselves as well as with the representatives of other lexico-semantic paradigms realizing semantic, motivation, derivation relationships between words and in this way systematic character of the botanical lexis is provided. A specific feature of the nomination of plants and the objects associated with them is the use of different types of nominative units. The most productive is the lexical nomination. Cases of propositive and discursive nomination are mostly fixed in the LSPs of the names of the areas on which the plants grow, the names of the stages of plant ontogenesis. The lexical nomination is made using mostly single-word affixed and semantic derivatives, composites, or compound names created using the attributive phrase model. The Central Podillian dialects floronomens demonstrative formal and semantic variation. Formal variation at all structural levels (mainly phonetic) is observed in non-ancient floronomens and used for designation peripheral floral objects and structurally multifaceted. Semantic variations are presented floronomens, reaching the Indo-European or Slavic stages of language development. The genesis of the analyzed floronomens are heterogeneous. Their compound is formed by units resulting from word formation, reinterpretation of words and borrowing from other languages. 626 The word formation of the Central Podillian dialects floronomens is mainly effected by the suffix method, the -к, -(н)ик, -ец’, -иц’, -ин / -k, - (n)yk, -ets, -yts, -yn suffixes are productive. Differences in affix sets for different LSG botanical vocabulary have been observed. Composites are active, mainly as a result of the univerbization of attributive phrases. The reinterpretation of words predetermines the occurrence of secondary floronomens, which mainly function in the LSPs of generic / species plant names; the source of semantic derivation are: names of known plants, zoonyms, somatic lexis, names of people, household lexis, names of clothing and apparels, names of dishes, names of nationalities, chronological lexis, names of natural phenomena, a combination of different names. Borrowing of floronomens into the Central Podillian dialects was made through contacts with Polish, Romanian, Russian, Turkic languages. The introduction of plant names from other languages (Latin, Dutch, German) was mainly through the mediation of the Polish language. The largest number of borrowed plant names is presented in LSG “Names of Fruits and Berries”: 51,9% of the fixed generic / species names of the plants are borrowed, 50% of them are polonisms or words borrowed through the Polish language. Three ways of introducing floronomens were observed: 1) substitution: the borrowed names displace the Ukrainian ones, 2) adstitution: parallel coexistence of nouns, 3) coexistence of Ukrainian and borrowed floronomens with redistribution of their semantic features. According to motivation, the Central Podillian dialects floronomens are divided into non-motivated, which have lost associative links with the concepts of other spheres, and motivated ones. Non-motivated plants’ names are widely represented in the LSG “Nomens of the agricultural plants and notions correlated with them”, “Nomens of fruit and berry plants ~”, “Nomens of growing wild trees and shrubs ~” , mainly in LSP generic / species and common plant names. Motivated floronomens are observed mainly among generic / species names of mushrooms, wild herbs and decorative flowers. Motivated dialect plants’ names demonstrate the functioning of the hierarchy of motives of floronomination. The revealed dominant motives are the same to the common Ukrainian botanical 627 628 nomenclature: external features, similarity of a plant or its part to another plant or its part, similarity of a plant or its part to an animal, parts of the human’s or animals’ body, associative relations with everyday objects, localization characteristics, temporal features, taste properties, growth features, character of using, plant odorative properties. Despite the richness and diversity of Podillian flora, not every floral object has its own folk name. Only those plants that are most frequently contacted by people in their daily life activity were nominated: out of 419 species of plants presented at the dialect program only 71,6% were verbalized. Instead, the nomination of the field of growth and achievement of agricultural plants is very detailed. Areal relevant florоnomens of Vinnytsia region divide the studied space into three dialect macrozones: the North, South-Western and South-Eastern. Within the South-Western macrozone three micro-zones have been outlined: Central-Western, Southern and Transnistrian. The core of the Central Podllian dialects are formed by the Central-Western and Southern microzones. An analysis of the correspondences of the Central Podillian florоnomens in the speeches of three Ukrainian dialects have revealed that the Central Podillian florоnomens have the largest number of lexical parallels to the dialects of the South-Western dialects of the Ukrainian language.