In Hungary, the standardization of geographical names — particularly official settlement names — has a history spanning more than a century. This paper provides a comprehensive overview of the core principles underlying national standardization practices for settlement names. These principles include monoreferentiality, historical authenticity, toponymic and linguistic accuracy, semantic motivation, and etymological transparency. The paper also examines how and why the relative importance of these principles has evolved over time. In addition, it discusses the impact of international standardization practices on the aims, methods, and outcomes of national efforts in Hungary. The study draws on both previous scholarship and primary sources relating to current policies and recent developments. It demonstrates that contemporary standardization practices — both in present-day Hungary and in neighboring countries with Hungarian-speaking minorities — are primarily concerned with preserving the historically developed toponymic integrity of the Hungarian linguistic area within the Carpathian Basin when defining official settlement names. In line with international trends in geographical names standardization, recent years have seen increased cooperation among experts, policymakers, municipalities, and local communities in decision-making processes. The present survey provides grounds to assume that achieving sustainable outcomes in the domain under study requires a careful balance between respect for historical traditions and adaptation to contemporary patterns of name use.
This article examines traditional village nicknames motivated by a person’s professional activity. The article draws on nicknames recorded by the Ural University Toponymic Expedition in the Arkhangelsk, Vologda, and Kostroma regions; many of these nicknames are introduced into scholarly circulation here for the first time. The meanings of the underlying appellatives and the accompanying motivational contexts are analyzed. The first part of the article highlights the main models for the formation of nicknames that indicate a person’s profession or occupation: nicknames are directly derived from names of professions, as well as from designations of products of labor, objects of influence, tools, means of transportation, places of work, and actions performed by a person during work. Furthermore, nicknames that follow figurative models of nomination, including predicative models, are widely represented. It is common for a nickname to be derived from the name of a related profession or position, for example, one with a higher status (Terapévt ‘Therapist’: “She worked as a nurse in the hospital and offered advice, so that's how she got her nickname”). The second part of the article describes the connection between individual professional nicknames and family nicknames. In modern society, nicknames motivated by a person’s professional activity primarily serve a characterizing function, which determines the diversity of their naming models. However, they retain a persistent tendency toward the formation of family names. It is shown that a person’s nickname is often derived from the name of the profession of their husband, wife, father, or other relative (“Our man worked in the forestry department, and his wife was the head of the obstetrics center, so the foresters called him Medic”). Contexts are provided demonstrating the transition from individual nicknames to family ones (the nickname Písar’ ‘Clerk’ is given “by profession — he was a clerk, his children are Pisar’áta ‘The clerk’s children’, and Pisar’ata will have more Pisar’at”).
The article is devoted to the analysis of Lithuanian mono-component personal names, which represent a relatively new phenomenon in Lithuanian anthroponymy. Mono-component anthroponyms of Lithuanian origin, usually derived from appellatives, came into use at the beginning of the 20th century and continue to be actively used in Lithuania. The article provides a semantic classification of these anthroponyms, traces the history of their functioning over a hundred years (1920–2020), and considers the pragmatics of their use, as well as current developmental trends. The names are assessed according to the following parameters: the time of first use, the peak of popularity, the total number of uses over the observation period, the frequency of female and male versions of the name (where both exist), and current relevance. Based on statistical data obtained from the website of the State Commission of the Lithuanian Language, it is concluded that the most productive periods of naming were the first decades of independence in the 20th century and the subsequent period up to 1960 (1920–1960). The 21st century has seen a resurgence of new names, driven by parents’ desire to choose an original, unique name for their child, as well as by the fact that names that were popular in the mid-20th century are now perceived as too “common” and overly widespread. A semantic classification of the derivational stems of new names makes it possible to identify the most productive types and hypothesize about the reasons for their popularity. Thus, the most productive groups comprise anthroponyms derived from plant names, names associated with the aquatic sphere, and those derived from the names of pagan gods or bearing mythological connotations. The popularity of Lithuanian “pagan” names may reflect growing national consciousness, resistance to globalization, and a desire to return to one’s roots, thereby preserving elements of the ancient Baltic religion in personal names.
This study examines cultural onomastics in the naming of Indonesian bakso eateries, focusing on naming patterns, semantic dimensions, and their sociocultural implications. Adopting a qualitative approach, the analysis is based on a corpus of 101 eatery names. The findings reveal a predominance of single-word and noun-based constructions, indicating a preference for direct and informative naming practices that emphasize product attributes (such as ingredients or portion size) or the identity of the owner. From a semantic perspective, these names exhibit multiple dimensions of meaning, most notably through the use of personal names, geographical references, and sensory associations. Striking and metaphorical names function as effective marketing devices, enhancing memorability and evoking emotional responses. Furthermore, names that express prayer and hope point to a spiritual dimension of business practices. The sociocultural significance of these naming conventions is equally pronounced. The predominance of male anthroponyms in the eatery names under study reflects enduring patriarchal norms and the historical distribution of gender roles. Toponymic elements underscore a strong sense of locality and communal identity, while the use of striking names demonstrates linguistic creativity and a cultural openness to unconventional forms of expression. Finally, the incorporation of aspirational and religious elements highlights the importance of religiosity in Indonesian society. Thus, bakso eatery names serve as rich cultural artifacts that convey identity, aspirations, and adaptive business practices aligned with core Indonesian societal values.
The surname Korelsky (Karelsky) is particularly common in settlements in the central and northwestern parts of the Arkhangelsk region (Primorsky and Kholmogory districts). Several thousand people have this surname. Traditionally, the origin of the surname is associated with the Nikolo-Korelsky Monastery, located at the mouth of the Northern Dvina. However, an analysis of the surname’s distribution points primarily to the monastic villages of the Siya Monastery of St Antonius. The surname’s most densely populated area is the lower Northern Dvina region (an area of fishing grounds, saltworks and monastery estates). It is here, according to historical sources from the 17th c., that Korelians — refugees from the Korelsky district — are recorded. The surname arose independently in various settlements of the Arkhangelsk region, beginning in the 16th c., to designate the descendants of recent settlers from the Korelsky district. Consequently, the surname did not indicate that its bearers were peasants belonging to the Nikolo-Korelsky Monastery or that they had migrated from any more western territories, as had been previously assumed. Karelians arrived in the same areas in various waves of migration, from the 13th to the late 18th c. The Korelian settlers spoke the Karelian language (specifically, Karelian Proper), as clearly demonstrated by toponyms of Karelian origin. The places from which these Karelians originated — Korelsky Uyezd and Lopsky Pogosts (Voynitsa, Reboly, Liperi) — can be identified from written sources and based on the transfer of place names. The transition to Russian was gradual (as evidenced by semi-calques) and was not completed until the first half of the 18th century. The memory of Karelian origins may have persisted until the late 19th c. in areas of compact settlement, and the phonetic features of Russian dialectal speech, influenced by the Karelian language, persisted until the early 20th c.
