Actual and potential indicator Anthroponyms in the Russian language

Аннотация

The article considers the division of anthroponymy into two systems: actual and potential names. Their differences are obvious in their semantics, functional features, in their attitude to language and speech, in belonging to an active vocabulary, and in other parameters. Potential anthroponymy is a relatively stable system. The fact that potential personal names are preserved in the language determines the continuity of anthroponymy in the historical aspect. The actual anthroponymy is not stable. It is characterized by constant development and the appearance of new items. The ambiguous nature of anthroponymy requires a more detailed study of the specifics. Names can be formed from the appellative vocabulary both naturally and artificially, including being translatable. Various types of language contacts, the expansion of the information space lead to the fact that in the anthroponymic systems of many peoples, foreign-language names appear that are not semanticized from the point of view of the native language. They can undergo phonetic and morphological adaptation in the recipient language, and if these names have completely passed all the stages of adaptation, then they can be perceived by the ethno-linguistic consciousness as facts of the native language.Anthroponyms as an example of the interaction of cultures are invaluable for the history of the people. Neighboring cultures enriched each other's anthroponymicons: the Vietnamese dominated China for a millennium (from the I to IX centuries), while they adopted the peculiarities of Chinese naming practice.Kazakhs transformed their proper name by fully borrowing grammatical features of the Russian anthroponym. In turn, in the history of Russian anthroponymy, it was observed the widespread use of the Turkic namesake in the XIII-XVI centuries. The study of anthroponyms allows us to trace the main stages of the historical development of a particular people