Acta Linguistica Lithuanica

LIV (2006), 49 – 62

Formation and etymological tendencies of the drimonyms of Marijampolė County

Dalia Sviderskienė

Institute of the Lithuanian Language

The article presents an analysis of the wood-names of the pre-war Marijampolė District in Lithuania with respect to their derivational properties and origin. The results obtained from this Southern Lithuanian area are then compared with similar data obtained from the Telšiai District in Northern Central Lithuania, and the areal differences with regard to derivational patterns are discussed.

0. INTRODUCTION

Research into Lithuanian toponymy is based primarily on studies of individual classes and subclasses within this field of science. Worth mentioning are A. Vanagas’s comprehensive analyses of the formation, origin, and semantics of river and lake names (Vanagas 1970: 428; 1981: 408; 1981a: 4–153); studies of the formation of Lithuanian mountain names (oronyms) (Vanagas 1973: 209–219); comprehensive analyses of several formation types of settlement names (oikonyms)—derivatives formed with suffixes, compounds, and composite place names (Razmukaitė 1998; 2002: 121–130; 2003: 63–80); and a study of names of bogs and marshes (helonyms) formed by a single method, suffixation (Bilkis 1998; 1999: 51–95). In addition, the formation of several toponym classes in Telšiai District (hydronyms, oikonyms, oronyms, drimonyms, agronyms, and hodonyms) has been examined from various perspectives, and the most productive place-name formation types in the area have been identified (Mickienė 2001). A separate publication provides an overview of the formation of names of roads and paths (hodonyms) in the Telšiai region (Mickienė 2002: 94–97). Among studies of more specialized toponym classes, one may mention those that have investigated only toponyms from a particular area: names of fields, plots, meadows, pastures, and other land areas (agronyms) in north-central Lithuania. The attested and extant spoken place names here have been discussed in terms of formation, structure, and semantics

49

Dalia Sviderskienė

siekiant išryškinti agronimų klasės sandaros ypatumus (Endzelytė 2004a: 80–89). Dar aptarta to paties Lietuvos arealo vandenvardžių daryba (Endzelytė 2004b: 63–77). Taip pat analizuojamos Lietuvos miškų vardyne (toliau LMV) užfiksuotų priesaginių asmenvardinių miškų vardų (drimonimų) darybos ypatybės (Mickienė 2004: 121–131).

As already mentioned, the drimonyms of Telšiai District have been surveyed from various perspectives on formation in I. Mickienė’s doctoral dissertation (Mickienė 2001: 91–109). Material for the study was collected directly during linguistic expeditions conducted in 1985–1989 and from the place-name card file held by the Onomastics Department of the LKI, which undoubtedly includes data from interwar Lithuanian questionnaires, also used by the author of this article¹.

The aim of this article is to extend and supplement the areal analysis of the onyms of another place-name class. This would be the first publication to examine the forest names of interwar Lithuania in Marijampolė County in terms of formation and origin, identify general tendencies, and compare the results of the formation study with those of research on the drimonyms of another Lithuanian area—Telšiai District². Since the etymological tendencies of drimonyms have not been described in works on Lithuanian toponymy³, the article will be limited to clarifying and describing the possible origins of drimonyms in the area under study.

A total of 101 items belonging to the place-name class under study have been recorded in Marijampolė County (about 1.3% of those documented throughout Lithuania)⁴. These are names of forests, woods, and their parts, as well as pinewoods. In this article, alongside the terms drimonyms, drimonym (Greek δρυμός ‘grove, forest’ + ὄνομα ‘name’), the Lithuanian equivalent forest name is also used in the same sense, but only in its narrow meaning. This is done traditionally, as is the case for every more or less studied class of place names

¹ Apie Lietuvos žemės vardyno anketas plačiau žr. Sviderskienė (2005: 91).

² The north-central Lithuanian area was chosen for comparison for good reason: until now, no one has studied the place-name class in question, either in individual areas or in Lithuania as a whole.

³ In the preface to LMV, A. Brukas (LMV₁ 4) provides only general data, unsupported by scientific research, on the origins of all Lithuanian forest names; the etymological tendencies of the drimonyms of Telšiai District are not surveyed in I. Mickienė’s doctoral dissertation (Mickienė 2001).

⁴ According to 1994 data, 7,902 forest names had been recorded in Lithuania (LMV₁ 267).

50

Marijampolės apskrities drimonimai

to name the class (see the beginning of the introduction): Lithuanian and international terms are created. This maintains the system of terminology. It also avoids listing the geographical locations to which a term is assigned (cf. Bilkis 1997: 36–37).

The international term drimonimai (Superanskaja 1973: 186), drimonimas (Podol’skaja 1978: 56–57) has become established in the toponymic terminology systems of Slavic languages. The term drimonimas could not be found in the most recent dictionaries presenting various linguistic terms, although other terms denoting units of toponymic classes are used, for example: hydronym, hodonym (Glossary of Terms 2002: 133), oronym (ibid., 143; Dubois 2001: 337).

The material published here for the first time, namely drimonims, is examined from the perspective of word formation according to the structural-grammatical classification chosen by A. Vanagas for the study of hydronym formation (Vanagas 1970: 21–27). Drimonims are divided into primary and secondary forms, the latter subdivided into derivatives (in this case, only suffixal derivatives, since no prefixal or inflectional derivatives were recorded), compounds, and composite names. In assessing drimonims from the perspective of their origin, the principal premise for understanding the origin of Lithuanian place names is kept in view: the origin of a place name is understood as the source from which the toponymic lexeme itself arose, rather than as the genetic etymology of its root (cf. Vanagas 1980; Bilkis 1998).

According to the base words from which drimonims are derived, they are classified as appellative (derived from common nouns), toponymic (derived from oikonyms, hydronyms, or other place names), and anthroponymic (derived from given names, surnames, appellative designations of persons, etc.)⁵.

The following principal sources were used to establish the base words of drimonims (common nouns, personal names, and other place names): Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language volumes (vols. 1–20, Vilnius, 1956–2002), Dictionary of Lithuanian Surnames (vols. 1–2, Vilnius, 1985–1989), Handbook of the Administrative-Territorial Division of the Lithuanian SSR (Vilnius, 1974, part 1; Vilnius, 1976, part 2; hereafter ATSŽ), A. Vanagas’s Etymological Dictionary of Lithuanian Hydronyms (Vilnius, 1981; hereafter LHEŽ), and K. Kuzavinis and B. Savukynas’s Dictionary of the Origins of Lithuanian Names (Vilnius, 1997; hereafter LVKŽ). The first two sources (LKŽ, LPŽ), in order to avoid frequent-

⁵ For a fuller discussion of these and other principal premises, the presentation of the material, evaluation criteria, and so on, see Sviderskienė (2005: 92–93). The same premises are followed in this article’s study of drimonims.

51

DALIA SVIDERSKIENĖ

quent references to them, are given in the list of source abbreviations when explaining the base words.

Common and proper words from other languages (in this area, more often Slavic and Germanic) are also used to explain the origins of drimonims in Marijampolė County. Their most frequent sources are dictionaries, lists, and the alphabetical index of historical personal names (hereafter IAK). All the sources mentioned are also included in the lists of source abbreviations and references.

1. DRIMONYMS DERIVED FROM COMMON NOUNS (APPELLATIVE LEXEMES)

1.1. Primary forms

Formed without additional derivational means and structurally identical to the underlying common noun⁶, they constitute the largest group of the onyms under discussion: Alksnynas forest, Mrj, Prn: Lithuanian alksnynas ‘alder forest, small alder grove’; Apātkai forest, Prn: *apatkai, cf. Polish opatki ‘a plant of the spurge family (Euforbia mirsinites)’ (SJP_III 34); Atžalynas forest, Ss: Lithuanian atžalynas ‘a place where many shoots grow; young forest’; Beržynas forest, 2 forests Klvr, Krsn, forest Lbv: Lithuanian beržynas ‘birch forest’; Garnializdis forest, Prn: Lithuanian garnializdis ‘stork’s nest’; Giraitė 2 forests, Mrj: Lithuanian giraitė ‘small forest’; Gõjus forest, Igl, 2 forests Klvr, forest Ldvn: Lithuanian gõjus ‘small, beautiful grove’; Juodóji 2 forests, Klvr: Lithuanian juodóji, cf. Lithuanian júodas, -à ‘coal-coloured, dark’; Kapaĩ forest, KzR: Lithuanian kapaĩ ‘a place where people are buried’; Mólkasis forest, KzR: Lithuanian mólkasis ‘clay pit’; Pagirýs forest, Lbv: Lithuanian pagirýs ‘edge of a forest’; Pastaunīñkas (also Pastaunỹkas) forest, Prn: Lithuanian pastaunīñkas ‘enclosed area for grazing livestock’; Pasóda forest, KzR: Lithuanian pasóda ‘regenerating forest’; Plýně forest, Gdl: Lithuanian plýně ‘open, flat place, plain’; Pušýnas forest, Krsn: Lithuanian pušýnas ‘pine forest’; Pusinė forest, Lbv:

⁶It should be noted that this group includes drimonyms whose derivational bases are thought to be prefixless, prefixed appellatives or structurally compound words, such as: samanýnas, užplynis, garnializdis, and others. This approach was guided by the semantic assessment of the onyms under study. In addition, attention was drawn to the tendency of suffixes functioning as diminutives (see 1.2.) to attach to prefixless appellatives, e.g.: Alksnyn-ėlis: alksnynas; Eglyn-ėlis: eglynas; Kvajn-ūkas: kvajynas, and others.

52

Marijampolės apskrities drimonimai

Lithuanian pušinis, -ė ‘belonging partly to two, held or used by two’; Raštas forest, Gᴅʟ: Lithuanian raštas ‘a boggy place overgrown with shrubs or trees, a swamp, a thin woodland’; Samanynas forest, Kʀsɴ: Lithuanian samanynas ‘a place overgrown with moss’; Saman̄ius forest, Kʟᴠʀ: Lithuanian saman̄ius ‘mossy’; Skynymas forest, Kʟᴠʀ: Lithuanian skynymas ‘a cleared or cut-over area of forest’; Skirpstȳnas forest, Lᴅᴠɴ: Lithuanian skirpstȳnas ‘elm forest’; Šilȳnas forest, Kʟᴠʀ: Lithuanian šilȳnas ‘coniferous forest, pine forest’; Telėtnikas forest, Pʀɴ: Lithuanian *telėtnikas, cf. Lithuanian telėtninkas, telėtinin̄kas ‘calf pen’; Trākas forest, Ss: Lithuanian trākas ‘slope’; Trikampis forest, KᴢR: Lithuanian trikampis ‘having three angles, triangular in shape’; Uosynas forest, Kʀsɴ: Lithuanian uosynas ‘ash forest’; Užplynis forest, KᴢR: Lithuanian užplynis ‘a place beyond a plain or bog’; Užtvaras forest, KᴢR: Lithuanian užtvaras ‘a fortification, a fortified place’; Vidōtkas forest, Pʀɴ: *vi-dotkas, cf. Polish wydatki ‘expenses’ (WSPR 1179), Belarusian выдамки ‘yield, payment’ (SBM 146); Zagāinikas forest, Iɢʟ, MʀJ, Vv: *zagāinikas, cf. Polish zagajnik ‘grove, small wood’ (WSPR 1239); Žāl̄giris forest, Vv: Lithuanian žāl̄giris ‘green forest (usually coniferous); spruce forest with deciduous trees’.

This group is supplemented by pluralia tantum forms: Apatkos forest, KᴢR: *apatka, cf. Polish opątka ‘a plant of the spurge family (Euforbia mirsinities)’ (SJP₃ 34); Degimai forest, Gᴅʟ: Lithuanian degimas ‘a burned area (meadow, bog, forest), charred remains’; Druiskos forest, Pʀɴ: Lithuanian druska ‘a salty mineral compound’; Dzelkos forest, Gᴅʟ: *dzelka, cf. Polish dziatka ‘plot, area, piece; field’ (WSPR 174–175), Belarusian дзялка ‘strip; plot designated for sowing, meadow, or forest’ (Jaškin 1971: 59; SBM 213)⁷; Grīovos forest, KᴢR: Lithuanian griovà ‘a tree uprooted in a bog, a windthrow’; Kalnai forest, Pʀɴ: Lithuanian kalnas ‘a high elevation of land’; Kamšos forest, KᴢR: Lithuanian kamša ‘stuffing’; Karklynai forest, Lʙᴠ: Lithuanian karklynas ‘a place where willows grow; many willows’; Kryžkelės forest, Lʙᴠ: Lithuanian kryžkelė ‘a place where roads cross or intersect’; Podzelai forest, BʀB: *podzelas, cf. Polish podział ‘division, subdivision; partitioning; division, sharing; distribution’ (WSPR 715), also cf. Polish podzielić ‘to divide, distribute, allocate’ (ibid.); Šilainės forest, Kʟᴠʀ: Lithuanian šilainė ‘sandy, light soil, sandy heath soil’.

⁷ The possibility that the underlying word is related to Polish dziatki ‘garden plots, vegetable-garden plots’ (WSPR 174–175) should not be overlooked.

53

DALIA SVIDERSKIENE

1.2. Derivatives. Suffixal derivatives

Several Lithuanian (Baltic) suffixes are used to form them, serving diminutive (-ait-, -el-, -ėl-, -uk-), possessive (-in-), and collective as well as place-name (-yn-) functions:

-ait-: Plyn-aitė forest, Ss: Lithuanian plynė, plýnia ‘open, flat place, plain’;

-el-: Goj-ėlis forest, Krsn: Lithuanian gõjus ‘small, beautiful grove’; Kaln-ėliai forest, KzR: Lithuanian kálnas ‘a high elevation of land’; Šil-ėlis forest, GDL: Lithuanian šìlas ‘a forest of tall, straight conifers (usually pines) growing in sandy soils’;

-ėl-: Alksnyn-ėlis forest, Ss: Lithuanian alksnýnas ‘alder forest, small alder grove’; Eglyn-ėlis forest, Vv: Lithuanian eglýnas ‘spruce forest’;

-in-: Kakariek-inė forest Krsn: Lithuanian kakarìekas ‘rooster’; Kaỹmp-inė forest MrJ: Lithuanian kaĩmpas ‘edge, side; half’;

-yn-: Mešk-ynė forest, Vv: Lithuanian meškà ‘bear’;

-uk-: Alksnyn-ūkas forest, MrJ: Lithuanian alksnýnas ‘alder forest, small alder grove’; Kv ajyn-ūkas forest, LBV: Lithuanian kvajýnas ‘pine forest’; Lygum-ūkės forest, part of a forest, KIVR: Lithuanian lygùmà ‘a level place without hills’.

As the examples show, Lithuanian (Baltic) suffixes with a diminutive function are the most productive in this group (~77%).

1.3. Compounds

Of all the recorded compounds formed from two base words, the second elements are most often geographical nomenclatural terms balà, kálnas, raĩstas and other common nouns, such as Lithuanian girià ‘large forest’, Lithuanian kiẽmas ‘the area of land between the buildings of a homestead, a slope; an open space beside a dwelling house’, and Lithuanian kója ‘the organ with which a person or another creature walks’. According to the first element, they can be divided into (1) nouns: Aĩksn-ɑ-girė forest, KzR: Lithuanian alksnà ‘a place overgrown with alders, an alder grove’; Mešk-ā-raistis forest, IGL: Lithuanian meškà ‘bear’; Šil-a-kōjis forest, Ss: Lithuanian šìlas ‘a forest of tall, straight conifers (usually pines) growing on sandy soil’; Vilk-ā-balė forest, MrJ: Lithuanian vìlkas ‘a wolf-like predatory forest animal (Canis lupus)’; Zòmč-ia-kalnis forest, LBV – most likely related to Polish żomczyk ‘lock, latch’ (SJP_VIII 168–169); (2) adjectives: Saũs-giria forest, MrJ: Lithuanian saũsas, -à ‘without moisture, without water, not wet, dried out’; Smaĩl-a-kalnis hill, KzR: Lithuanian smaĩlas, -à ‘sharply tapering toward the end’; (3)

54

Marijampolės apskrities apskrityje

verbal: Grįst-a-balė part of a forest, Ss: Lithuanian grįsti, grindžia, grindė ‘to lay flooring for a floor, bridge, or road; to floor, pave’.

1.4. Multiword names

In Marijampolė County, there are two types: genitive and qualifying.

1.4.1. Only one genitive construction is recorded: Degėsių plynia forest, Prn. It consists of two constituents, the first of which is the genitive of the common Lithuanian word *degėsiai, cf. Lithuanian degėsis ‘residue of burning, charred wood, cinder’, describing a feature of the place; the second constituent is the common place-name Lithuanian plynia ‘an open, level place; a bog, marsh’.

1.4.2. Qualifying names (both words are in the nominative case): Ilgasis lau‘želis forest, KzR: Lithuanian ilgasis, cf. Lithuanian ilgas, -a ‘extending lengthwise, far (in space)’ and Lithuanian lau‘želis, cf. Lithuanian laužas ‘a pile of rods, brushwood, branches, and pieces of wood’; Trumpasis lau‘želis forest, KzR: Lithuanian trumpasis, cf. Lithuanian trùmpas, -a ‘small in extent or distance, near’ and Lithuanian lau‘želis, cf. Lithuanian laužas ‘a pile of rods, brushwood, branches, and pieces of wood’. As the recorded examples show, drimonims of this derivational type can form oppositional pairs, since their first constituents are antonymous (from the pronominal adjectives ilgasis, trumpasis).

In one other recorded qualifying drimony, the first constituent is the nominative of an adjective, and the second is an appellative name for a geographical feature: Rudà balà forest, Lbv: Lithuanian rùdas, -à ‘dark yellow’ and Lithuanian balà.

2. DRIMONYMS DERIVED FROM OTHER PLACE NAMES

Only a few have been recorded; all are compound genitive forms, made up of the genitives of place names indicating the object's locative association or proximity to another object, and of the topographic term miškas or the common noun Lithuanian giraitė ‘small wood’. These are: Aĭksniakiemio miškas forest, Prn: Aĭksn-ia-kiemis village, Ašmn (ATSŽ_II 8); Prūsokų giraitė forest, KzR: Prūsokai village, KzR (ATSŽ_II 249); Rūdupįo miškas forest, Prn: Rūdupis river, Prn (LHĖŽ 282).

55

Dalia Sviderskienė

3. DRIMONYMS DERIVED FROM PERSONAL NAMES AND APPELLATIVE DESIGNATIONS OF PERSONS

3.1. Primary formations

Their base word is a proper noun, i.e. an unchanged personal name or an appellative designation of a person: Bendorius forest Ss: surname Bendorius or Lithuanian bendorius ‘cooper’; Igliškis forest Šil: surname Igliškis. Pluralia tantum gender is not recorded.

3.2. Derivatives

Several suffixal derivatives have been recorded. Their formation uses the Lithuanian (Baltic) suffix -išk-, which serves exclusively a possessive function: Karal-iškė forest, Igl: surname Karalius or Lithuanian karalius ‘title of a ruler, monarch in some countries’; Kukor-iškė meadow, Brb: surname Kūkoris or Lithuanian kùkorius, -ė ‘cook’; Simanáuč-iškės forest, Lbv: personal name *Simanaúčius or the like, cf. surnames Simanáuskas, Simanávičius; Ščeščiūn-iškė (?) forest, Klvr: personal name *Ščeščiūnis or the like, cf. Polish surname Szczesć (SNP_IX 246).

3.3. Compounds

The first elements of these formations derive from personal names or appellative designations of persons, while the second derive from common nouns: Lithuanian dárbas ‘work done, made, performed’; Lithuanian daržas ‘plot of land beside a homestead for growing vegetables’; Lithuanian girià ‘large forest’; Lithuanian šlaitas ‘sloping area overgrown with trees and shrubs’; and the topographic term pieva ‘meadow’: Jónis-darbis field, Ss: personal name *Jonišas or the like, cf. Polish surname Jonisz (SNP_IV 381) and Lithuanian dárbas; Mìl-ia-daržis forest, Ss: surname Mìlius or the like and Lithuanian daržas; Mozūr-girė field, Ldvn: surname Mozūras or Lithuanian mozūras, -ė ‘person belonging to the Masurian group’, and Lithuanian girià; Niè-girė field, Ss: surname Ničas and Lithuanian girià; Riè-laitis (< *Riè-slaitis) forest, Prn: surname Rièius and Lithuanian šlaitas; Rùnk-a-giris forest, KzR: surnames Runkỹs, Runkus and Lithuanian girià; Žỹd-pievė forest, Prn: Lithuanian žỹdas, -ė ‘person of Jewish ethnicity’, and Lithuanian pieva.

56

Marijampolės apskrities drimonimai

3.4. Compounds

All the recorded names are genitive forms with a possessive meaning. Their first component “is the genitive of the personal name of the former owner of the place they designate” (Savukynas 1963: 238); the second component is a common noun, Lithuanian <...> ‘grove’, Lithuanian giraitė ‘small forest’, Lithuanian sodėlis, cf. Lithuanian sòdas ‘a plot of land where fruit trees and shrubs grow; the fruit trees and shrubs growing in that plot’: Brūndzų giraitė gr. Mrj: personal name Brūndza; Rūškių giraitė forest Ss: surname Rūškys; Spinderio Sodėlis forest Ss: personal name *Spinderis, cf. surname Spinderaitis.

4. DRIMONYMS OF POSSIBLY DUAL ORIGIN

4.0. In a few cases, it was impossible to determine whether a personal name or a common noun was the source of the drimonyms under study.

4.1. Derivatives with the suffix -išk-: Beržin-iškė forest KzR: surname Beržinis or similar, or Lithuanian beržinė ‘birch switch’, cf. Lithuanian beržinis, -ė ‘made of birch’; Medel-iškės forest PrN: surname Medėlis or Lithuanian medėlis ‘small, young tree; small forest’.

4.2. Compound: Bič-ia-sodis forest Vv: surname Bitė, Bitis or Lithuanian bičius ‘beekeeper’, or Lithuanian bitė, bitis ‘honey-bearing insect (Apis mellifica)’; its second component comes from the common noun Lithuanian sòdas ‘a plot of land where fruit trees and shrubs grow; the fruit trees and shrubs growing in that plot’.

5. DRIMONYMS OF UNCERTAIN ORIGIN

Only one forest name was recorded: Kaldob-inė forest LBV, whose lexeme kaldob- could not be linked to common or proper nouns in Lithuanian, Slavic, or German. It can only be conjectured that this may be an altered form of *Kalk-duob-inė, associated with Lithuanian *kalkduobė, cf. Lithuanian kalkiadùobė ‘lime pit’.

The following table summarizes the research and shows which origins predominate among forest names in Marijampolė County and which word-formation method is most common. The data are presented as numbers and percentages.

57

DALIA SVIDERSKIENĖ

Table 1. Drimonims of Marijampolė County by formation and origin

Drimonims by origin | Drimonims by formation | Primary | Derived | Ending-derived | Suffix-derived | Prefix-derived | Compounds (formed by compounding) | Multiword names | Total From common nouns | 53 | – | 13 | – | 8 | 4 | 78 (~76%) From other place names | – | – | – | – | – | 3 | 3 (~3%) From personal names and appellative designations of persons | 2 | – | 4 | – | 7 | 3 | 16 (~16%) Possibly of dual origin | – | – | 2 | – | 1 | – | 3 (~4%) Of somewhat unclear origin | – | – | 1 | – | – | – | 1 (~1%) Total | 55 (~54%) | – | 20 (~20%) | – | 16 (~16%) | 10 (~10%) | 101

The table shows that in the county in question, primary forest names of appellative origin predominate, that is, names which have not acquired derivational formants in the process of formation (or toponymization) and are not formed by other methods (compounding or juxtaposition).

6. CONCLUSIONS

6.0. Having conducted a linguistic analysis of the drimonims of one county using questionnaires from interwar Lithuania, and having established their formative features and origin patterns, several conclusions can be drawn.

6.1. Formation patterns

6.1.1. In Marijampolė County, primary drimonims accounted for about 54% of all the onyms in this class under study, and secondary ones for about 46%; the most numerous among these are

58

Marijampolės apskrities drimonimai

suffix-derived formations, at about 20%. Compounded drimonims accounted for about 15%, and multiword names for about 11%. Ending-derived and prefix-derived formations are not characteristic of the drimonims of Marijampolė County.

6.1.2. Comparing these results with data from the working analysis of drimonims in Telšiai District (which, so far, are the only such data in Lithuanian toponymic studies), reveals regional differences in drimonim formation patterns.

6.1.2.1. In Telšiai District, a marked difference in the ratio of primary to secondary drimonims was recorded (20%: 80%). In Marijampolė County, the ratio between these formative groups is approximately balanced, with primary forms slightly predominating (54%: 46%). Thus, unlike in Telšiai District, the drimonims of the county in question more often do not acquire derivational formants in the formation process and are not formed by other methods.

6.1.2.2. The formation patterns of secondary drimonims differ considerably in the two areas compared.

6.1.2.2.1. In Marijampolė County, suffix-derived formations are the most productive (~20%); in Telšiai District, multiword drimonims predominate (~79%), the absolute majority of which are genitive constructions (~98%).

6.1.2.2.2. Compounded drimonims, which account for about one-third of secondary forms in Marijampolė County (~16%), are among the least productive types in Telšiai District (~4%), alongside ending-derived and prefix-derived formations (~1%).

6.1.2.2.3. The proportion of suffix-derived formations differs somewhat less: these account for about 20% in Marijampolė County and about 15% in Telšiai District.

6.2. Origin tendencies

By origin, most drimonims in Marijampolė County derive from appellative lexemes—about 76% of all the onyms of this class studied.

Since the article examined only the formation and origin trends of toponyms belonging to one class of land names—drimonims—broader generalizations about the reasons that determined these trends were not attempted, given the limited data and the results of their comparison. It is considered that only after studying toponyms of all other classes and their formation and origin tendencies, and identifying general trends, would it be possible to explain their causes, that is, to seek links with the social and economic characteristics of the Lithuanian region under study and the psycholinguistic traits of its inhabitants.

59

Dalia Sviderskienė

ABBREVIATIONS FOR LOCALIZATION REFERENCES

Asmn – Ašmintà (Prienai District)

Brb – Balbieriškis (Prienai District)

Gdl – Gudėliai (Marijampolė Municipality)

Igl – Igliškėliai (Marijampolė Municipality)

Klvr – Kalvarija (Marijampolė Municipality)

Krsn – Krosna (Lazdijai District)

KzR – Kazlų Rūda

Lbv – Liubãvas (Kalvarija Municipality)

Ldvn – Liudvinãvas (Marijampolė Municipality)

Mrj – Marijampolė

Prn – Prienai

Ss – Sasnavà (Marijampolė Municipality)

Šil – Šilavótas (Prienai District)

Vv – Veiveriãi (Prienai District)

OTHER ABBREVIATIONS

avd. – personal name

brus. – Belarusian

gr. – forest

lenk. – Polish

liet. – Lithuanian

mš. – forest

pan. – similarly

plg. – compare

ppr. – usually

š. – pine forest

t. – i.e.

vnt. – units

žr. – see

ABBREVIATIONS OF SOURCES

ATSŽ – Handbook of the Administrative-Territorial Division of the Lithuanian SSR 1–2, compiled by Ž. Noreika, V. Stravinskas. Vilnius: Mintis, 1974, 1976.

60

Marijampolės apskrities apskrityės drimonimai

IAK – Index of historical personal names of the Institute of the Lithuanian Language’s Onomastics Department.

LHEŽ – Etymological Dictionary of Lithuanian Hydronyms, ed. A. Vanagas. Vilnius: Mokslas, 1981.

LKŽ – Dictionary of the Lithuanian Language 1–20. Vilnius, 1956–2002.

LMV – Register of Lithuanian Forest Names 1. Kaunas: Lithuanian Foresters’ Union, 1994.

LPŽ – Dictionary of Lithuanian Surnames 1–2, ed. A. Vanagas. Vilnius: Mokslas.

SBM – Слоўнік беларускай мовы. Мінск: Выдавецтва „Беларуская Савецкая Энцыклапедыя“ імя Петруся Броўкі, 1987.

SJP – Jan Karłowicz, Adam Kryński, Władysław Niedźwiedzki, Dictionary of the Polish Language 1–8. Warsaw: published at the expense of subscribers, 1900–1927.

SNP – Dictionary of Surnames Currently Used in Poland 1–10, published by K. Rymut. Kraków: Polish Academy of Sciences, Institute of the Polish Language, 1992–1994.

WSPR – Great Polish-Russian Dictionary. Warsaw-Moscow: Wiedza Powszechna, Sovetskaja enciklopedija, 1967.

LITERATŪRA

BILKIS, L. 1998: Lietuvių priesaginės darybos helonimai. Daktaro disertacija, Vilnius.

BILKIS, L. 1997: Lietuvių helonimai: termino teikimas, sąvoka, vieta toponiminėje sistemoje. Lituanistica 1 (29), 35–57.

BILKIS, L. 1999: Lietuvių priesaginiai deminutyviniai helonimai. Acta Linguistica Lithuanica 41, 51–95.

DUBOIS, J. 2001: Dictionnaire de linguistique. Paris: Larousse.

ENDZELYTĖ, R. 2004a: Šiaurės vidurio Lietuvos agronimai. Vārds un tā pētīšanas aspekti. Rakstu krājums, 8, 80–89.

ENDZELYTĖ, R. 2004b: Šiaurės vidurio Lietuvos vandenvardžių daryba. Lituanistica 4 (60), 63–77.

Glossary of terms, 2002: Glossary of Terms for the Standardization of Geographical Names. New York: United Nations Publication.

61

DALIA SVIDERSKIENE

JAŠKIN, I. J. 1971: Беларускія геаграфічныя назвы. Мінск: Навука і тэхніка.

MICKIENĖ, I. 2001: Telšių rajono toponimų daryba. Daktaro disertacija, Kaunas.

MICKIENĖ, I. 2002: Hodonimų, užrašytų Telšių krašte, darybos apžvalga. Žmogus kalbos erdvėje, 2002, 94–97.

MICKIENĖ, I. 2004: Dėl Lietuvos asmenvardinės kilmės drimonimų darybos. Baltu filoloģija 13 (1), 121–131.

PODOL’SKAJA, N. V. 1978: Словарь русской ономастической терминологии. Москва: Наука.

RAZMUKAITĖ, M. 1998: Lietuvos priesaginiai oikonimai: Daktaro disertacija, Vilnius.

RAZMUKAITĖ, M. 2002: Lietuvos sudurtinių oikonimų darybos bruožai. Acta Linguistica Lithuanica, 44, 121–130.

RAZMUKAITĖ, M. 2003: Sudėtiniai Lietuvos oikonimai. Baltu filoloģija 12 (2), 63–80.

SAVUKYNAS, B. 1963: Kilmininkiniai lietuvių vietovardžiai. Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai 6, 235–246.

SUPERANSKAJA, A. V. 1973: Общая теория имени собственного. Москва: Наука.

VANAGAS, A. 1970: Lietuvos TSR hidronimų daryba. Vilnius: Mintis.

VANAGAS, A. 1973: Структурно-словообразовательный анализ названий гор Литвы. Lietuvos TSR mokslų akademijos darbai. A ser. 3 (44), 209–219.

VANAGAS, A. 1980: K. Būga – lietuvių onomastikos pradininkas. Lietuvių kalbotyros klausimai 20, 7–35.

VANAGAS, A. 1981: Lietuvių hidronimų etimologinis žodynas. Vilnius: Mokslas.

Dalia Sviderskienė

Lietuvių kalbos institutas

P. Vileišio g. 5, LT-10308 Vilnius

[email protected]

62