Заметки по лексической реконструкции. І

Abstract

(uk) Дослідження присвячене проблемам реконструкції реліктових лексем, які були втрачені в апелятивному словнику,проте збереглися в ономастичному середовищі через його здатність консервувати мовну архаїку (лексичну, морфологічну). Будучи практично невичерпним ресурсом для досліджень із етимології та лінгвістичної реконструкції, ономастика (топонімія й антропонімія) постачає цінний матеріал, корисний не лише для відновлення елементів власного, питомого словника (і навіть цілих фрагментів генетичних гнізд) певної мови, ай для виділення найдавнішого лексичного прошарку, залишеного в ній іншою мовною культурою.

(en) The paper deals with problems of some relic lexemes reconstruction. These words has been lost in appellate vocabulary, but these one have been persisted in onomastic because nomina propria have a tend to keep lingual archaisms (lexical, morphologycal). Being practically inexhaustible resource for research on etymology and linguistic reconstruction, onomastic (toponymy and anthroponymy) provide valuable data, which is necessary not only for reconstruction of elements own, inherited vocabulary (even whole fragments of genetic clusters) certain language, but also for determination of the oldest lexical stratum, belonging to another lingual culture. Particularly seven lexical archaisms are reviewed. Two of them can be equally explained as Proto-Slavic words and words, belonging to Iranian lexical contribution in Slavonic toponymic: P -Sl. dial. *bъlkarь, *bъlkyrь ‘chatterer’, ‘talker’, ‘talkative’ or Middle Iranian eastern *bal-gar ‘poppling well’; P-Sl. dial. *xusta ‘bush’, ‘firewood’ or Alan. *xusk ‘dried-out (well)’. Other (five) toponyms, with a high degree of certainty, can be explained as Scythian and Sarmatian-Alanian onomastic heritage in Eastern Slavic toponymy: *rāz-afša ‘water run’, *asan[g]-pord/*san[g]-ford ‘stone river’, *jīra-gan/*jira-gan ‘living source’, ‘fast creek’, ‘flowing well’, *biš-kan ‘healing spring’, ‘healing well’, *asma-rāga-ta ‘with stone riverbed’, ‘flowing across a stone valley’ (with suffix of plural, attested in Scythian, Sarmatian and Ossetian nomina propria and appellative lexemes). The value of these reconstructed forms for historical lexicology of Iranian languages can not be overstated, because mentioned prototypes expand our notions about vocabulary of old eastern Iranian dialects. Preliminary results of linguistic investigation are evidenced with data of archeology. With archaeological point of view presence ofIranian (Sarmatian, Alanian) tribes in basins of the Don, Dnieper and Dniester rivers is associatedwith such archeological data as Saltov culture (in the Don region), burials of Sarmatian leaders in the Dniester region and left-hand side tributaries of the Dnieper river and etc.