Antroponyms And Their Research Issues

Abstract

This article discusses the significance of onomastics within linguistics, specifically its sub-field of anthroponymy, and its connections with other disciplines. It also explores the research object of anthroponymy, its interdisciplinary study with fields such as history, literature, ethnography, and sociology, and its unique characteristics.

American Journal of Philological Sciences
Source type: Journals
Years of coverage from 2022
inLibrary
Google Scholar
HAC
doi
 
CC BY f
11-13
0

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.
To share
Nesibeli Baltaniyazova Tenelbaevna. (2025). Antroponyms And Their Research Issues. American Journal of Philological Sciences, 5(07), 11–13. https://doi.org/10.37547/ajps/Volume05Issue07-03
0
Citations
Crossref
Сrossref
Scopus
Scopus

Abstract

This article discusses the significance of onomastics within linguistics, specifically its sub-field of anthroponymy, and its connections with other disciplines. It also explores the research object of anthroponymy, its interdisciplinary study with fields such as history, literature, ethnography, and sociology, and its unique characteristics.


background image

American Journal Of Philological Sciences

11

https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps

VOLUME

Vol.05 Issue07 2025

PAGE NO.

11-13

DOI

10.37547/ajps/Volume05Issue07-03


Antroponyms And Their Research Issues

Nesibeli Baltaniyazova Tenelbaevna

1st-year master’s student at Karakalpak State University named after Berdaq, Uzbekistan

Received:

12 May 2025;

Accepted:

08 June 2025;

Published:

10 July 2025

Abstract:

This article discusses the significance of onomastics within linguistics, specifically its sub-field of

anthroponymy, and its connections with other disciplines. It also explores the research object of anthroponymy,
its interdisciplinary study with fields such as history, literature, ethnography, and sociology, and its unique
characteristics.

Keywords

: Anthroponym, history, linguistics, ethnography, common linguistic elements, geographical names,

tribe names, Karakalpak female names.

Introduction:

Anthroponym is a main branch of

onomastics within linguistics, comprising the collection
of proper names. Anthroponymy, as a part of
onomastics, is the branch of linguistics that studies

proper personal names. People’s names are primarily
given to distinguish a person’s status in society.

Reg

arding this, V.A. Nikonov states: “People’s names

are extremely important in and for society. They cannot
be neglected in society. Thus, the strong interest in

people’s names is understandable”. [1:33] Like other

words, anthroponyms are subject to the rules of
language; thus, they form an essential part of the
language system and are studied in conjunction with
ethnography, history, sociology, and jurisprudence.

In fact, by studying personal names, we can uncover
the language history, customs, social status, and other
mysteries of a people. The current composition of
Karakalpak personal names includes elements common
to Arabic-Persian, Turkic, and Mongolian languages, as
well as names that have entered through the Russian

language. Moreover, Karakalpak people’s names

require comprehensive study from the perspective of
their grammatical structure and semantic features. As
society changes and develops, so do science and
culture, and with them, personal names are
continuously enriched with new names appropriate to
each society. Some of these names become obsolete
and fall out of use. Personal names help unlock the
secrets of historical pages, reveal who performed

actions in past historical events, and determine

people’s status in society [2]. Consequently, by
studying people’s names, it’s possible to identify the
unique characteristics of Karakalpak people’s names

from different historical periods.

Anthroponymy is a widely researched field within
general linguistics. In the study of onomastics within
Turkic linguistics, scholars like V.V. Radlov, G.A. Levshin,
P. Melioranskiy, V.V. Bartold, N.A. Baskakov, N.A.
Aristov, G.N. Potanin, and A.M. Sherbak have made
significant

contributions.

Meanwhile,

Kazakh

onomastics, particularly the field of anthroponymy, has
been specifically researched by scholars such as T.
Januzaqov, G. Jarkeshova, V.U. Maxpirov, O.
Sultaniyayev, E. Qoyshibayev, V.N. Potapova, A.
Abdirahmanov, G. Qonqashpayev, S. Amanjolov, M.
Tinishbayev, and D. Junisov. Among their notable
works, J. Agabekova examined the ethnolinguistic
characteristics of Arabic-origin names that have
become established in the Kazakh language, while A.
Baygutova investigated the linguo-folkloristic and
gender aspects of anthroponyms in her research [3].

In Uzbek linguistics, scholars like G.F. Sattarov, T.
Januzaqov, R. Qongurov, J. Muxtorov, E. Begmatov, D.
Abdurahmonov, E. Qilichev, and A. Xudaynazarov have
researched anthroponyms. E. Begmatov defended his

candidate’s

dissertation

on

“Uzbek

Language

Anthroponymy” in 1965. I. Xudoynazarov defended his
candidate’s dissertation on “The Significance of


background image

American Journal Of Philological Sciences

12

https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps

American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN

2771-2273)

Anthroponyms in the Lexical Stock of the Language and

Their Semantic Features” in 1998

. In 2000, N. Husanov

defended his doctoral dissertation on “Lexico

-Semantic

Features of Anthroponyms in the Language of 15th-

Century Written Monuments”.

In Karakalpak linguistics, which has assimilated the
linguistic experiences of other peoples, attention has
also begun to focus on the study of this field. Scholar
N.A. Baskakov was among the first to emphasize the
crucial importance of studying Karakalpak toponymy
and onomastics. In the first volume of his work

“Karakalpak Language”, he provided a list of

Karakalpak

people’s names. These were the initial scholarly

observations and collected materials on Karakalpak
anthroponymy. In his article, N.A. Baskakov

demonstrated that the “flower” component is used in

three different variants within Karakalpak female
names and revealed the semantic pathways of their
formation [4:138-142].

Historian and ethnographer L.S. Tolstova, in her article
[5:67-71], provides a brief overview of Karakalpak
anthroponyms and, based on linguistic and historical
ethnographic materials, substantiates the formation of
personal names related to geographical names
(Shimbay,

Moynaqbay,

Tortkulbay,

Nokisbay,

Daryabay, Tenizbay, etc.) and those related to tribes
and national names (Qiyatbay, Qipshaqbay, Mangitbay,
Turkmenbay, Qazaqbay, etc.). In another article, she
mentions that the name Samiram, belonging to the
group of ancient Eastern anthroponyms, is preserved in
Karakalpak folklore. According to the scholar, Samiram
is the original form of the name Shammurat (or
Sammuramat), the male king of Assyria who lived in the
9th century BC, and is also related to the name
Shamiram known to the ancient Armenian people.
Through personal names, the author unravels the
historical connections between peoples, drawing
particular attention to the similarity of the Samiram
legend among these peoples.

Certain issues related to Karakalpak people’s names

have also been researched by local scholars. For

instance, D.S. Nasirov’s article, co

-authored with L.S.

Tolstova, discusses the history of Karakalpak peop

le’s

names and surnames, as well as the unique usage of

kinship terms within people’s names. This article also

broadly presents the semantic classification of
Karakalpak personal names and their historical
development stages [6:152-156].

J. Shamshetov highlighted the usage of Arabic-origin
strata within Karakalpak personal names, their
structural peculiarities, and their phonetic distinctions
[7:77-82]. O. Yusupov, on the other hand, uncovered

the etymology of the anthroponyms Alpamıs, Baybori,

Ashim, and the ethnonym Qonirat, providing historical
descriptions with several credible pieces of evidence

[8]. Q. Qoshanov, in his work “Issues of Interrelation
between Russian and Karakalpak Languages” (Nukus,

1991), demonstrated the circumstances of Russian
personal names entering the Karakalpak language and
their usage peculiarities. In addition, the author paid
special attention to the issues of writing Karakalpak
personal names.

The first dictionary of Karakalpak personal names,

titled “Personal Names”, was publ

ished by O.

Bekbawlov in 1973. The second dictionary, “Karakalpak
Names” was published in 1994 by O. Dospanov, M.

Qalenderov, E. Dospanova, and G. Qalenderov. These
dictionaries primarily focus on the spelling of personal
names and issues related to choosing names.

Karakalpak proper names have been extensively
researched by O. Sayimbetov. In his monograph,

“Proper personal names in the Karakalpak language”,

he comprehensively explored the history of the
formation of Karakalpak personal names, their strata
by origin, historical-ethnographic characteristics, and
types based on semantics.

The place of anthroponyms in linguistics holds
immense importance. Currently, in the research stage,
due to changes in Karakalpak society and socio-political
events, the naming of certain personal names has
become less frequent, while conversely, new names
have begun to emerge as a result of societal changes.
Such situations arise from historical, cultural changes,
the exchange and renewal of customs and traditions, or
other influencing factors. Anthroponyms are significant
for several fields because they encapsulate the changes
in any society, and phenomena resulting from moral,
national, and psychological consciousness. This is
because the naming customs and principles of any
people reflect their national mentality, social
psychology, or the integrative state of their language
with other languages. This, in turn, ensures the
continuous study and research of anthroponyms in
linguistics and determines their relevance.

REFERENCES

Никонов В.А. Методы антропонимики // Личные
имена в прошлом, настоящем, будущем. –

Москва:

Наука. 1970. –

С. 33.

Сайымбетов О. Қарақалпақ тилиндеги меншикли
адам атлары. –

Нөкис: Қарақалпақстан. 2000.

Дүйсебекова

Ж.М.

Қазақ

және

түрик

антропонимлер жүйеси: мотивацыялық аспект.
Хабаршы // Вестник «Филология ғылымдары»
сериясы 3 (49). –

Алматы, 2014. –

Б. 91.

Баскаков Н.А. Элемент «гүл» роза, cветок в составе


background image

American Journal Of Philological Sciences

13

https://theusajournals.com/index.php/ajps

American Journal Of Philological Sciences (ISSN

2771-2273)

каракалпакских женских имен // Ономастика
Средней Азии. –

Москва, 1978. –

С. 138

-142.

Толстова

Л.С.

Древневосточные

антропонимические ассоциации в каракалпакском
историческом фольклоре // Ономастика Востока. –

Москва, 1980. –

С. 67

-71.

Насыров Д.С., Толстова Л.С. Каракалпаки // Системы
личных имен у народов мира. –

Москва, 1986. –

С.

152-156.

Шамшетов

Ж.

Қарақалпақ

тилиндеги

араб

антропонимлеринен.

Нɵкис.

ӨзРИА

ҚБ

хабаршысы, №1. 1974. –

Б. 77

-82.

Юсупов. О. Алпамыс дәстанындағы антропонимлер
ҳәм етнонимлер ҳаққында жаңа ой пикирлер. –

Нɵкис. ӨзРИА ҚБ хабаршысы. 1985, 1

-

сан.

Б. 56

-63.

References

Никонов В.А. Методы антропонимики // Личные имена в прошлом, настоящем, будущем. – Москва: Наука. 1970. – С. 33.

Сайымбетов О. Қарақалпақ тилиндеги меншикли адам атлары. – Нөкис: Қарақалпақстан. 2000.

Дүйсебекова Ж.М. Қазақ және түрик антропонимлер жүйеси: мотивацыялық аспект. Хабаршы // Вестник «Филология ғылымдары» сериясы 3 (49). – Алматы, 2014. – Б. 91.

Баскаков Н.А. Элемент «гүл» роза, cветок в составе каракалпакских женских имен // Ономастика Средней Азии. – Москва, 1978. – С. 138-142.

Толстова Л.С. Древневосточные антропонимические ассоциации в каракалпакском историческом фольклоре // Ономастика Востока. – Москва, 1980. – С. 67-71.

Насыров Д.С., Толстова Л.С. Каракалпаки // Системы личных имен у народов мира. – Москва, 1986. – С. 152-156.

Шамшетов Ж. Қарақалпақ тилиндеги араб антропонимлеринен. – Нɵкис. ӨзРИА ҚБ хабаршысы, №1. 1974. – Б. 77-82.

Юсупов. О. Алпамыс дәстанындағы антропонимлер ҳәм етнонимлер ҳаққында жаңа ой пикирлер. – Нɵкис. ӨзРИА ҚБ хабаршысы. 1985, 1-сан. – Б. 56-63.