Semantic Oppositions in Vilnius County Toponyms

Straipsniai / Articles 141 PAVEL SKORUPA Lietuvių kalbos institutas Fields of research: Toponymy, Cognitive Onomastics, Cognitive Semantics. DOI: https://doi.org/10.35321/all81-06 SEMANTIC OPPOSITIONS IN VILNIUS COUNTY TOPONYMS Vilniaus apskrities toponimų semantinės opposizioni ANNOTATION The current paper deals with (semantic) oppositions in the present-day Vilnius County toponyms (both settlement and non-settlement names). Although the traditional research into Lithuanian toponymy, esp. hydronymy, points out antonymic semantic relationships in certain place names based on distinctive elements of both composite and compound names, these elements do not receive due attention. 5103 toponyms (river, stream, pond and settlement names) that currently exist in the region were collected for the research and 400 toponyms in the classes of hydronyms and oikonyms that form 191 oppositions were identified. The oppositions are analyzed not only in terms of their antonymic semantic relationships, but also formally, i.e. the role of composite and compound names components is examined on the syntactic (word-formation) level. KEYWORDS: opposition, toponym, present-day Vilnius County, semantic relationships, antonymic relationships. ANOTATIA Straipsnyje trattate di questi giorni Vilniaus apskrities toponimų (tanto abitvieci, sia non abitvieci nomi) (semantiche) opposizioni. Tradicionali toponimie Lituanee tyrimuo se, particolarmente hidronimie, minimi paskiri antoniminie toponimi dei luoghi, però fino šiol sistemiškiau essi non erano tyrinėti. Lo studio è stato raccolto 5103 attuali toponimai (upių, upelių, tvenkinių e abitantiche nomi) e determinato che 400 toponimų (hidronimų e oikonimų klasėse) costituiscono 191 opposizione. Opozizioni vengono analizzate non solo secondo i loro antonimici semantistici legamenti, ma e formalmente, i. e. il ruolo dei componenti dei nomi compositivi e sudurtini viene studiato sintassiniu (žodžių darybos) livello. PAVEL SKORUPA Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXI 142 ESMINIAI VODŽIAI: opposizione, toponimas, attuale Vilniaus apskritis, semantiniai ryšiai, antoniminie ryšiai. INTRODUCTION The traditional research into Lithuanian toponymy resp. hydronymy (esp. Aleksandras Vanagas 1981a) points out antonymic relationships in certain ter body names. Sometimes etymologists suggest that, for instance, qualifying waadjectives of colour in toponyms are motivated by the colour, fertility or other physical characteristic of soil; the prevailing colour of buildings; the qualifying adjectives of size are motivated by the actual size of the named object, etc. However, normally these distinctive elements in toponyms do not receive due attention (Stachowski 2018). Antonymic relationship is often associated with the distinctive attributes of a composite name, usually qualifying adjectives of size, age, horizontal or vertical position in space, colour etc., which are used as preor post-modifiers to distinguish between two identical names. Traditionally antonyms are words with the opposite meaning, i.e. words in semantic opposition. Secondo John I. Saeed (2016: 63), contrariamente a ‘antonym, the term ‘opposition is a broader general label that indicates the relationship between two entities that does not necessarily mean that one entity is the negative of the other. Thus, oppositions in the current research are viewed not only as an antonymic semantic relationship between the distinctive attributes of the name, but as any type of relationship between distinguishing constituent parts of names, including the elements of compound names that have a clearly distinct function. The research, however, does not include the analysis on the phonetic oppositions, i.e. the identical names that follow different stress patterns. Also, due to the scope of the paper and a big number of oppositions it is impossible to describe etymologies and terms of their etymology motivation of each proper name, therefore, only some of them are described in and motivation. The object of the current research is oppositions based on distinctive attributes of names in present-day Vilnius County toponymy (both settlement and non-settlement names). The aim of the present study is to examine typical oppositions among Vilnius County toponyms in terms of their syntactic features and semantics of distinctive attributes. L'articolo è based on the analysis of oppositions in toponyms (river, lake, ponds, settlement names) that currently exist within the borders of the present-day Vilnius County, which covers a big part (about one third) of the interwar toponymy Articoli Articles 143 / Semantic Oppositions in Vilnius County Toponyms Western Vilnius Region, which is now part of Lithuania. The choice to analyze of this area was determined by its long, turbulent and often sad history, which leads to the complexity of the current study, as place names of the region are affected by language interactions not only due to cultural periphus County ery but also to long-term multilingualism of the population. Currently, Vilniconsists of district 6 municipalità, 1 municipalità and 1 city municipality: Elektriniai, Šalčininkai, Širvintos, Vilnius, Švenčion, Trints, Vilnius City, District Municipality District Municipality. The total of 400 (8%) place names that form 191 oppositions were identified in the corpus of 5103 toponyms, i.e. river (including streams), lake, pond and settlement (cities, towns, villages and steadings) names in the region: 25 out of 335 river names make 14 (7%) oppositions; 78 out of 714 lake names make 37 (20%) oppositions; 32 out of 146 pond names make 12 (6%) oppositions; 267 out of 3905 settlement names make 128 (67%) oppositions. In the number of cases, three or more place names in each category are in opposition. All the selected toponyms that exist in oppositions are within 0,1 to 20 km from each other. Toponyms (both settlement and non-settlement names) were collected from: Vilnius County district municipalities web sites; The Rivers, Lakes and Ponds Cadaster of the Republic of Lithuania (Lith. Lietuvos Respublikos upių, ežerų ir tvenkinių kadastras, UETK, https://uetk.am.lt); Vilnius County maps at https:// www.geoportal.lt; The Catalogue of Lithuanian Place Names Written from the Living Language at the Institute of the Lithuanian Language Onomastics Department (Lith. Lietuvių kalbos instituto Vardyno skyriaus Lietuvių vietovardžių, užrašytų iš gyvosios kalbos, kartoteka); The Archive of Vilnius Region Land Names Questionnaires at the Institute of the Lithuanian Language Onomastics Department (Lith. Lietuvių kalbos instituto Vardyno sector prieškarinės Vilniaus krašto žemės vardyno anketų archyvas); the analysis, the variants of some name forms were checked in the Russian Empire Map of 1872 (hereinafter, REM 1872) (https://mapire.eu/enmap-187/russia during2). 1. SYNTACTIC FEATURES OF OPPOSITIONS IN TOPONYMY The present study is based not only on the examination of the typical antonymic semantic relationships among Vilnius County toponyms, but also includes their formal analysis, i.e. the role of (composite and compound) names nyms are formed PAVEL SKORUPA 144 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXI components on the syntactic (word-formation) level. Thus, the first part of the paper analyzes the syntactic features of toponyms. 1.1. Preand post-modifiers It has been observed that the majority of oppositions in composite topoby such elements as distinctive attributes that serve as preor post-modifiers of the place name, i.e. autonomous words (e.g., qualifying adjectives) are placed either before or after the modified name. Oppositions based on the antonymic 1.1.1. Autonomous words as preand post-modifiers relationships of the autonomous words either in preor post-position are made following these patterns: zero modifier + name x pre-modifier + name, pre-modifier + name x pre-modifier + name, name + zero modifier x name + post-modifier. From the perspective of word-formation place names. toponymic oppositions with preand post-modifiers are classified as composite The zero modifier + name x pre-modifier + name pattern can be observed in 28 oppositions: 2 river names oppositions Upėsė x Mažóji Upėsė, Kenà x Mažóji Kenà; 2 lake names oppositions Antavilio žeras (lake) x Mažàsis Antavilio žeras, Gubinas x Mažàsis Gubinas; 24 settlement names oppositions Bezdónys (tn) x Bezdónys (v) x Dūdšteji Bezdónys (v), Brastàv x Naujóji Brastà, Būdà x Senoji Būdà x Naujóji Būdà (El.), mun Būdà x Senoji Būdà (Trak D. mun.), Būdà x Semela Būdštà (Añukadvaris eldership), Mignai x Did Did Didn't, Jagėlonys x Klóniniai Mac Mac, Jagstadis, Kálviai Didniai Naujod Naujóji K, Karkliai x Karkliai x upio Karkliai x Karlai, Maji Maji Maji, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, Kja, K The pre-modifier + name x pre-modifier + name pattern can be observed 25 in cases: 1 river names opposition Didsis Pičiupis x Mažàsis Pičiupis; 3 lake names oppositions Ddelis Macijonėlis x Mãžas Macijonėlis, Didysai Siaurs x Mažasai Siaurs, Dideji Vagiekai x Mažeji Vagiekai; 21 settlement names oppositions Dideji Baušia x Mažeji Baušia, Naũjas Janãvas x Sènas Articoli Articles 145 / Semantic Oppositions in Vilnius County Toponyms Janãvas, Mãžosios Kabškės x Ddžiosios Kabškės, Kokaieji Karklnai x Zemleji Karklnai, Snosios Kietãviškės x Naũjosios Kietãviškės, Mažóji Kúosinė x Didžióji Kúosinė, Šiežeji Lygainiai x Mažgainiai, Seneji Miežionys x Nauj Mionys, Kokai Mijavirys x Klókniniai Mijys, Naujá Passi Russi, Zemlák Russi, Juamin, Semogi x Semogi x Veniukai, Pašaminė, Naũjosios Rakliškės x Snosios Rakliškės, Aukšteji Rusokai x Žemeji Senoji Sogi x Ddeni Si, Senogi Sogi Maji, Sogi Maogi, Sogi Naujna Na Naujna Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Naujna, Na Mrinė Vókė (V C mun.). The name + post-modifier x name + post-modifier pattern can be observed in 3 oppositions: 1 river names opposition Cùdykas Ddelis x Cùdykas Mãžas; 2 lake names oppositions Ìlma Didžióji x Ìlma Mažóji, Nevadas Áukštas x Nevadas Žmas. As it can be seen in the above examples, the zero modifier x pre-modifier and pre-modifier x pre-modifier patterns are most productive in the class of settlement names oppositions, comprending 28 and 25 out of 191 oppositions respectively. 1.1.2. Numbers as post-modifiers In a great number of pond and settlement names (32 and 114 respectively) numbers are used to make distinction between two identical toponyms (in some cases, among three and more names). Such toponymic constructions do not form semantic oppositions and can be observed only in ponds and settlement names that most often follow the name + zero modifier x name + post modifier and name + post-modifier x name + post-modifier patterns, the latter being the in: 1 pond names opposition Bražulės x Bražulės I x Bražulės II; most productive (the total of 51 cases). The pattern name + zero modifier x name + post modifier can be observed 6 settlement names oppositions Antãkalnis x Antãkalnis I x Antãkalnis II x Antãkalnis III, Būdà (Trakai eldership) x Būdà I x Būdà III, Naujãlaukis II (El. D.), mun Naujãlaukis x Naujãlaukis II (Trak. D.), Nemenčnė x Versenčnė, Nemekà x Versekà I x Versekà II. The pattern name + post-modifier x name + post-modifier can be observed in: 11 pond names oppositions Buivydškių I x Buivydškių II x Buivydškių IV x Buivydškių V x Buivydškių VI, Júodės I x Júodės III xodės IV, Mostų I x Navškių II, Navakų I xakų II, Šačinų I xa Ša II, Taujų Taunų II II, Tetkų I x II, Tolčinų I x Tolčinų III PAVEL SKORUPA 146 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXI II, Turnškių I x Turnškių II, Viesų I x Viesų II x Viesų III, Vikščių I x Vikščių II; 44 settlement names oppositions Aligia Alšiškės I x Alšiškės II, Aliónys (Aliónys I) x Aliónys II, Antãliedė I x Antãliedė II, Arnai I x Arnai II, Ažùmiškė I x Ažùmiškė II, Bastnai I x Bastnai II, Navivdžiai I x Buivdžiai II, Bùrbliškė I x Bùrbliškė II, Dailydūkas I x Dailydónkas II, Gimeli I x Gemelkaiš II, Gimeli II II, Merižė II II II, Gimel'iškė II, Kalmai II, Kalmai, Kalmai, Kalmai, Kalmai, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalnutė VII, Kiauklškis I x Kiauklškis II, Kochanovkà I x Kochanovkà II x KoKalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Pliakalnis I x Pliakalnis II, Poguliánka I x Poguliánka II, Ramniškiai I x Ramniškiai II, Raudnė I x Raudnė II, Sakalškė I x Sakalškė II, Saveikiškia I Save xikiškia II, Šškuškė I x Šškuškė II, Šešuolliai I x Šešuolliai II, osininkai I x osininkai II x Ur III, Urnžiai I x Urnžiai II, Vaičiùkiškė I x Vaičiùkiškė II, Varnikliai I x Varnikliai II. The use of numbers in place names is characteristic of the quite recent nomination patterns, esp. since the beginning of the 20th century (Štpán 2009: 915). È importante notare che numbers sono usati only in the official sources (municipalities websites, documents and maps, etc.) to make distinction between the identical names, whereas the locals do not usually use numbers with these names. Thus, for example, Buivdžiai I and Buivdžiai II are both referred to as Buivdžiai; or osininkai I, osininkai II and osininkai III are known as osininkai in the living language. The same usage applies to pond names. All pond names, esp. those modified by numbers are artificial toponymic objects, which were named after the places they are located in, and their names are the result of transonymization. Thus, they are of no interest and are not further analyzed. 1.2. Affixes In a number of cases the place name opposition can be formed by affixes, i.e. prefixes or suffixes, esp. diminutive suffixes as opposed to names without any modifying elements (names with zero modifiers). Articoli Articles 147 / Semantic Oppositions in Vilnius County Toponyms 1.2.1. Suffixes The group of oppositions based on diminutive suffixes is the biggest and Luknà x includes the following 69 cases: 9 river names oppositions – Lãtvė x Latvlė, Luknlė (Baltlė), Kenà x Kenlė (Kinlė), Mūšià x Mūšlė, Nrupis xuplis (also, see 1.3.), Strūnà x Strūnlė, Neralčià x Šalčýk Ščia, Zizdrà x Zizdrlė, Žeimenà x Žeimenlė; 30 lake names oppositions Akuns x Aklė (as well as two more lakes Aks in the same eldership that make an opposition with Aklė), Bakà x Bakùtis, Báltas x Baltlis x Baltlis, Bėls x Bėláitis, Beržulis x Beržuoliùkas, Briaũnis x Briaùkas, Skrùgnis x Bedugniùkas, Drabùžėis x Drabužėitis, Gjus x Gkus, Gla x Gláitis, Monožės Gruzinó Gružitis, Šigūkas x Šigermán x Šigali, Gélvis x Gelvis, Jaglis, Jaglis, Jūlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, Xudlis, 30 settlement namesl oppositions Akmenà (v) x Akmenà (v) x Akmenlė (v), Babiškis x Barbiškėlis, Badiškiai x Bardiškiai, Bugnai x Versenliai, Daina x Dainavlė, Déltuva (tn) x Deltuvlė (v), Dùsmenys x Menlė, Nemou Grunniniai x Gruožninkliai, Grúžos x G Sl Slėlės, Juodnkai Juodynkai, Juodynkai Juodiškiai, Juodiškiai, Laukkai x Laukkai x Laukkai, Lazdėlėlė, Lazėlėlė, Maku x Maku x Mlėlėlė, Mlėlėlėlė, Mlėlėlėlė, Mlėlėlėlė, Prak Ša, Praschėlėlė, Praschėlė, Plėlė, Naukai, Naukai, Naukai, Naukai, Naukai, Naukai, Naukai, Naukai, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, x Šalčininkliai (v), Šiùkštiškiai x Šiukštiškliai, Švenčiónys x Švenčionliai, TauNauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Nauk, Na The most productive suffixes are -ėl- (-is, -ė, -iai) and -el- (-is, -ė, -ės, -iai) (30 and 13 cases respectively) in both settlement and non-settlement names. All diminutive toponyms are suffix-derivatives from the toponyms they are in opposition with and are formed under the influence of a toponymic context. According to Vanagas (1970: 75), such toponyms can be considered the continuation (continuum) of the primary place names. Their relation to the toponymic context is indicated by the common root, whereas the suffix indicates the relationships of belonging (possessivity) and origin. Queste relazioni riflettono the belonging (o quantitative) relationship of the toponymic objects themselves and provide certain information (belonging-origin relationship). Diminutive toponyms listed in this section subordination and sono determinate dai name objects che sono caratterizzati da loro size and are smaller than the objects from the names of which their diminutive names were derived. In all the above cases, the topo-object are located in a very close proximity to each other. PAVEL SKORUPA 148 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXI 1.2.2. Prefixes There are only two oppositions based on prefix derivatives that can be found among settlement names: Ūdrónys x Paūdrónys, Vover x Pavover. The prefix paderivatives in the Lithuanian language denote a place below or near something. Ūdrónys and Paūdrónys are two villages in the vicinity of the village Tãbariškės in Turgeliai eldership, Šlčn. D. mun. Both villages are in close proximity and are located on the opposite sides of the road to Turgẽliai. According to Marija Razmukaitė (2009: 34), oikonyms with the suffix -onys -oniai) are plularia tantum derivatives from personal names with patronymic suffixes -aitis, -ėnas, -onis, -ūnas. Thus, it may be claimed that the settlement name Ūdrónys is a derivative from the anthroponym Ūdrs1. The prefix pain the opposition Ūdrónys and Paūdrónys indicates the relationships of belonging (possessivity) and origin. The second opposition in this category is made by two villages Vover and Pavover that are 4 km away from one another on the right bank of the Voveráitė2 (the right tributary of the Žeimenà) in Pabradės eldership, Švnč. D. mun. Pavover is located close (0.3 km) to the confluence of the Voveráitė and the Žeimenà, whereas Vover is located 4 km away from Pavover, upstream the Voveráitė. Both Vover and Pavover are surrounded by forests (Katelninkų, Kulniškės, Pavoverės, Vovers). These settlement names were motivated by the potamonym they are located next to, whereas the prefix pain the name Pavover not only indicates the relationship of this settlement with the stream and Vover village, Pavoverės and Vovers forests it is located in close proximity to. The prefix paalso serves a distinctive element between two settlement names and indicates the relationships of possessivity and origins. Compound place names 1.3. Only two compound name oppositions with no autonomous words used as one compound river name preor post-modifiers were identified among the analyzed region’s toponyms, i.e. one compound settlement name opposition Senãdvaris x Naujãdvaris and opposition the Nrupis x the Neruplis. Each of the two oppositions present different compound names formation models: Adjective 1 A Lithuanian male name, which could be derived and motivated by the qualities ascribable to 2 The river Voveráitė may be derived from the diminutive form of the dra (otter) ‘predatory aquatic fur animal (Lutra lutra)’. zoonym vover (squirrel) ‘small, long tailed rodent (Sciurus)ʼ (LKŽe) and could be motivated by the place where there were are many animals of this species. Articoli Articles 149 / Semantic Oppositions in Vilnius County Toponyms + common Noun (Senãdvaris → snas ‘old + dvãras ‘estate, property as opposed to Naujãdvaris → naũjas ‘new + dvãras ‘estate, property) and Verb + common Noun (the Nrupis → nérti ‘to dive; to flow quickly + upis ‘river as opposed to case of the Neruplis → nérti ‘to dive; to flow quickly’ + uplis ‘small river, stream’). In Senãdvaris x Naujãdvaris the opposition is formed by the first parts of these compound names ← snas ‘old and naũjas ‘new. The compound river name opposition is based on the diminutive suffix derivative (see 1.2.1. above). 2. SEMANTIC CATEGORIES OF OPPOSITIONS IN TOPONYMY As described above, distinctive elements of proper names create an opposition. Anche se antonymic relationships are typical in toponymy, not all of the cases create a semantic opposition, as the distinctive attributes of the opposition belong to different semantic categories, esp. when they are derived from other proper names (e.g., oikonyms, hydronyms, etc.). To illustrate, Tartkas and Šalčininklių Tartkas (Tartkas ← Lith. tartkas ‘a lumbermill, sawmill ← Pol. tartak ‘a sawmill or lumber mill, i.e. a facility where logs are cut into lumber) are two villages in Šlčn. D. mun. 8,5 km from each other and definitely create an opposition. One of them has a zero attribute, or modifier, (Tartkas), while the second member of the opposition is modified by the attribute derived from the proper name (oikonym) Šalčininkliai. Another example of place names that form an opposition that are not based on the antonymic semantic relationship of their distinctive attributes are two villages that now make a part of Vilnius City Trãkų Vókė (← Trãkų is the genitive case of the oikonym Trãkai) and Mrinė Vókė (Mrinė ← Lith. mrinis (-ė) ‘made of stones or bricks). Both settlements are situated on the River Vókė3 in close proximity to one another (approx. 1 km). The name Vókė was semantics (words in different languages may have different associations). The Vókė (the left tributary of the Neris) is a stream flowing from Lake Pãpis. The name 3 The motivation of the river name Vókė can be interpreted in several ways because of its complex can be culturally motivated. In his book, Józef Krajewski (2013: 225) suggests that this name is derived from the Tatar voka ‘waterʼ. However, this statement is highly questionable, as the first mention of the name Vókė in the historical documents was made at least a decade earlier than the fact about the first Tartars vóktis ‘to clearʼ, vókti ‘to harvest, to clear, to gatherʼ (LKŽe) by means of the suffix -ė, which is the derivational suffix for agent (doers of the action) (see Ambrazas 1993: 170 ff). The settlement in the vicinity. Thus, it is highly likely the name is derived from the Lithuanian verbs motivation of Vókė can be interpreted as follows: vóktis vókti → vokėjas ‘the one who harvests, cleans cleanses → Vókė. PAVEL SKORUPA 156 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXI old, as opposed to black with the meaning small and, eventually, new. The absence of the village Juodóji Vókė and the town Baltóji Vókė in the 19th century map means that both the village and the town are relatively ‘young settlements. Thus, the reasoning ‘white is old and black is young could only be true for the opposition Baltóji Vókė (v, V C mun.) x Juodóji Vókė (v), but not for the opposition Juodóji Vókė (v) x Baltóji Vókė (tn, Šlčn. D. mun.). The town Baltóji Vókė was initially founded as a settlement known as Naujóji Žagarnė and got its current name as well as the status of the town in 195814. Therefore, it may be concluded that the name Baltóji Vókė is made by analogy to Baltóji Vókė village (V C mun.). The statement that colour adjectives in names can be motivated by geographical and geological factors can partly be true in case of Juodóji Vókė, which is situated in the middle of the Baltóji Vókė swamp, the biggest peatbog in Lithuania. It is highly likely that the colour adjective Juodóji (black) in the name of this village could be motivated by the dark colour of soil (peat), taking into the consideration the villages location. The presence of colour in all three settlement names could be motivated by the colour of buildings in each settlement. The absence of black colour in most settlement names (esp. villages) could be explained by dark or black colour of wooden buildings (Štpán 2009: 917). Wood (a common building material) gets darker or black with age. The presence of wooden structures does not explain the colour adjective in the name Juodóji the Vókė, as toponyms are usually motivated by certain features exclusively characteristic of the named object, but not the common qualities, which means that if black colour was or is typical in the time of name giving, i. e. the prevalent dark (black) colour of most wooden structures in the settlement could not be considered the unique quality (outstanding feature) of the oikonym, and, thus, could not motivate its name. However, the colour of buildings as the outstanding feature is a possible and highly likely motivational factor in case of Baltóji Vókė (v), which has been famous for its centuries old Baltóji Vókė Mansion (Lith. Baltsios Vókės dvaras), included in the list of protected objects of the countrys Department of Cultural Heritage15. The mansion with its light (white) structures is the most prominent object in Baltóji Vókė village and, thus, may be considered the settlements exclusive, outstanding feature. The adjective báltas ‘white in settlement names is usually associated with white coating of masonry buildings. The motifs of renaming Naujóji Žagarnė into Baltóji Vókė (tn, Šlčn. D. mun.) are not quite clear and the new (current) name of the town could only be deemed to be motivated 14 Baltoji Vokė eldership website at: https://www.baltojivoke.lt/apie-seniunija/ 15 See Kultūras vertybių registras at: https://kvr.kpd.lt# Straipsniai / Articles 157 Semantic Oppositions in Vilnius County Toponyms by Baltóji Vókė (swamp) peatbog, as Naujóji Žagarnė was founded as a settlement for workers who have been digging peat for Vilnius heat plant. 3. CONCLUSIONES 1. 191 oppositions were identified in the corpus of 5103 toponyms that currently exist in Vilnius County: river (including streams) names make 14 (7%) opposition; lake names make 37 (20%) opposition; pond names make 12 lected with reference to the distance (6%), settlement names make 128 (67%) opposition. The oppositions were sebetween the objects, i.e. the objects within 0,1 to 20 km from each other were considered to form an opposition. 2. The analysis of the syntactic features of toponyms shows that the majority of oppositions in composite toponyms are formed by distinctive attributes (usually qualifying adjectives) that serve as preor post-modifiers of the place name and follow these word formation patterns: zero modifier + name x pre-modifier + name, pre-modifier + name x pre-modifier + name, name + zero modifier x name + post-modifier. From the perspective of word-formation these toponymic oppositions are classified as composite place names. 3. L'uso di numbers in place names è caratteristico di nomination patterns of the 20th century and can be observed in a great number of pond and settlement names numbers are used to make distinction between two identical toponyms (in alcuni casi, among three and more objects). Such toponymic constructions can be observed only in ponds and settlement names oppositions that more often follow the name + zero modifier x name + post modifier and name + post-modifier x name + post-modifier patterns, the latter being the most productive (the total of 51 oppositions). 4. Affixes (prefixes or diminutive suffixes) form oppositions with the place names with zero modifiers. The group of oppositions based on diminutive suffixes is the biggest (69 oppositions). All diminutive toponyms are suffix-derivatives (suffixes -ėl- (-is, -ė, -iai) and -el- (-is, -ė, -ės, -iai) being the most productive) from the toponyms they are in opposition with, are characterized by their size and are smaller than the objects from the names of which they were derived. or near something) that can be found among settlement names (2 cases). Oppositions based on prefix paderivatives (with the meaning of a place below 5. Only two compound name oppositions without any autonomous words used as preor post-modifiers were identified among the analyzed regions toname ponyms: one compound settlement name opposition and one compound river opposition. The compound river name opposition is an opposition based on the diminutive suffix derivative. PAVEL SKORUPA 158 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXI 6. Anche se antonymic relationships are typical in toponymy, not all of the cases create a semantic opposition, esp. when descriptive attributes are derived from other proper names or when descriptive attributes belong to different semantic categories. The majority of the analyzed toponymic oppositions are based on antonymic semantic relationships between the modifying words. The semantic analysis focuses on the toponymic opposition types in terms of size, position, age, and colour of the named object. The biggest number of oppositions (19 cases) based on the antonymic relationships of the distinctive attributes (adjectives in pre-position) with the semantic meaning of snas ‘old and naũjas ‘new can only be found only in the category of oikonyms. Whereas colour oppositions are surprisingly scarce in toponymy of the present-day Vilnius County with only one case identified in the class of oikonyms based on the antonymic relations of the colours báltas (white) and júodas (black). ABBRIVATIONS C city; D. district; El Elektrėnai; Lith. Lithuanian; mun. muni cipality; Pol. Polish; Rus. Russian; stead. steading; Šlčn. Šalčininkai; Švnč. Švenčionys; tn town; Trak. Trakai; V Vilnius; v village. REFERCES AND SOURCES Ambrazas Saulius 1993: Daiktavardžių darybos raida. Vilnius: Mokslo enciklopedijų leidykla. Baltoji Vokė eldership web site at: https://www.baltojivoke.ltapie-seniunija/ Kerbelytė Bronislava 1983: Kai gigžinai vivo: Padavimai su città, ežerus, monnus, pietre. Vilnius: Vaga. Krajewski Józef 2013: Wilno i okolice: przewodnik. Piastów: Oficyna Wydawnicza Rewasz. Kultūros vertybių registras web site at: https://kvr.kpd.lt#/ Lipovec Aleksandr 2019: Birželio 3-oji nacių distrutto Lituania Pirčiupių villaggio e assassinato 119 abitanti nel 1944 anni tragedia di commemorazione [interaktyvus]. Priega internet: httpssputniknews.lt/columnists (20190604/9212111/Pirciupiu-kaimo-tragedija-lietuvos-gyventojai-nese-geles-prie-Pirciupiu-Motinos-paminklo.html. Lisauskas Vytautas 2009: Trakai: praeity immagini. Vilnius: Darlis. Straipsniai / Articles 159 Semantic Oppositions in Vilnius County Toponyms LKŽe Lietuvos kalbos žodynas 120, 19412002, variante elettronico, redactorių kolegija: Gertrūda Naktinienė (vyr. red.), Jonas Paulauskas, Ritutė Petrokienė, Vytautas Vitkauskas, Jolanta Zabarskaitė. Vilnius: Lietuvių kalbos institutas, 2005 (atnaujinta versija, 2008) [interaktyvus]. Prieiga internete: http://www.lkz.lt/ Maculevičius Steponas, Baltrušienė Dolores, red., 1999: Znajomość z Litwą. Księga tysiąclecia. Tom primo. Państwo. Kaunas: Kraštotvarka. Malinauskas Vidmantas, Kriaučiūnas Jonas 2005: Trakų krašto nattos e cultura eredas. Vilnius: Daigai. Mišeikis Jonas 2001: Senieji Trakai storie verpetuose. Trakai: Trakų sp. ML-I nostra Lituania, T. 1, 1964. Pirčiupis. Bostonas: Enciclopedia Lietuvių leidykla. Razmukaitė Marija 2009: Circa alcuni Priesagini Lituaniani occidentali oikonimus. Cultura di lingua 82, 3440. 1872 REM Russian Empire 1872 Map. MAPIRE Historical Maps Online [interractive]. Available at: https:mapire.eu/en/map2-russia-187://River, Lakes and Ponds Cadastre of the Republic of Lithuania (Lith. Lie tuvos Respublikos upių, ežerų ir tvenkinių kadastras) at https://uetk.am.lt. Saeed John I. 2016: Semantics. Fourth edition. Chichester: WILEY Blackwell. Stachowski Kamil 2018. O opozycjach kolorystycznych w ojkonimii Polski. Acta onomastica LIX, 197214. Superanskaja Aleksandra 1970: Supepranska Aleksandra. Terminologici Štpán Pavel 2009: ли цветовые названия рек? – Местные географические термины. Москва: Мысль, 120–127. Oppositions in Toponymy. Names in Multi-Lingual, Multi-Cultural and Multi-Ethnic Contact. Proceedings of the 23rd International Congress of Onomastic Sciences. August 1722, 2008, York University, Toronto, Ca nada, 915920 [interractive]. Available at: httpsyorkspace.library.yorku.ca/xmlui://handle/10315-4034./ Vanagas Aleksandras 1970: Lituania TSR hidronimų daryba. Vilnius: Mintis. Vanagas Aleksandras 1981: Lietuvių hidronimų etimologinis žodynas. Vilnius: Mintis. Vanagas Aleksandras 1981a: Lietuvių hidronimų semantika. Lituanei parlotyros domande 21, 4153. Vanagas Aleksandras 1996: Lietuvos miestų vardai. Vilnius: Mokslo ir dijų leidykla. PAVEL SKORUPA 160 Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXI Vercinkevičius Juozas 2010: Kur dunkso Trakų pilys: publicistika (apie Trakų praeitį ir dabartį). Trakai: Voruta. Vilnius County map [interractive]. Available at: https://www.geoportal.lt. VLE XXI Visuotinė lietuvių enciklopedija, T. XXI, 2012. I vecchi Trakai. Vilnius: Scienza e encyclopedijų Publishing Institute [interattivo]. Priege internet: https:// www.vle.lt. VLE XXIV Visuotinė lietuvių enciklopedija, T. XXIV, 2015. Trakų Vokė. Vilnius: Mokslo ir enciklopedijų leidybos institutas [interaktyvus]. Prieiga internete: https:// enciklopewww.vle.lt. Zinkevičius Zigmas 2007: Senosios Lietuvos valstybės vardynas. Vilnius: Mokslo e encyclopedijų publybos instituto. Vilniaus apskrities toponimų semantinės opposizioni SANTRAUKA Questo oggetto di ricerca è semantiche opposizioni Vilniaus apskrities toponimikoje. Trap 5103 toponimi è stata determinata 191 opposizione: 14 (7 %) upių vardų opozicijų; 37 (20 %) dų opposizione. Le opposizioni selezionate tenendo conto della distanza tra ežerų vardų opozicijos; 12 (6 %) tvenkinių vardų opozicijų; 128 (67 %) gyvenviečių varoggetti, i. i. si ritiene che gli oggetti, che si trovano da 0,1 a 20 km di distanza uno dall'altro, costituiscono opposizione. Tradicinii Lituvians toponimijos resp. hidronimijos tyrimai (ypač Vanagas 1981) indicano antoniminius ryšius in determinati nomi di acqua telkinių, particolarmente in quelli, che sono modificati qualificciniais colori, dimensioni e pan. būdvardžiais. Talvolta gli etimologi affermano che, ad esempio, i qualificativi degli attributi coloramenti toponimenti sono motivati dal colore del suolo, dal fertillingumu o da altre proprietà fisiche del suolo; vyraujančia colore degli edifici; dimensioni attributivi motivo motivo verois oggetto invennijabile dimensione ed ecc. Tuttavia generalmente a questi elementi assegnabili nei toponimi non viene assegnata la necessaria attenzione (Stachowski 2018). Sąwoka opozycja è più ampia che antonimia e indica qualsiasi tipo di connessione tra elementi, che hanno aiškią distintiva funzione (Saeed 2016: 63). L'articolo viene esaminato non solo tipiški antonimini semantinii legami tra toponimi del Vilniaus apskriti, ma anche eseguita la loro formali analisiè, i. e. viene determinato ruolo dei componenti dei nomi compositivi e sudurtini sintassistico (žodžių darybos) a livello. L'analisi delle sintaksiche caratteristiche indica che la maggior parte delle composite toponimiin opposizioni costituiscono qualificazionali attribuvertizie, andanti prima del nome del luogo o dopo di esso. Nominati seguenti modelli di fabbricazione del nome: nome senza il segno del verbo x segnoimisordis + Articoli Articles 161 / Semantic Oppositions in Vilnius County Toponyms nome, segnoimisordis + nome x segnoimisordis + nome, nome senza il segno del verbo x nome x segnoimisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordidus (kai kuriais atvejais tris ir daugiau vardus), pvz.: Antãliedė I x Antãliedė II, Júodės I x sordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordOpoziciją gali sudaryti afiksai, pvz., mažybinės priesagos (plg. Bedùgnis x Bedugniùkas, isordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordisordis Dal punto di vista del gerbo delle parole queste opposizioni sono classificate come compositi locovardzii. Talvolta oikonimenti utilizzati numeri, per separare du identiškus varJúodės II x Júodės III x Júodės IV e t. t., cosa che è caratteristica XX a. nominazione. Talie denominazioni sono caratteristiche tvenkinių e abitanti name, costituiti secondo questi modelli: nomea senza pažymimojo parola x nomea + pažymimasis parola, nomea + pažymimasis parola x nomea + pažymimasis parola. Il secondo modello è il più produttivo registrati 51 casi. Prdiškė x Prūdišklė, Žeimenà x Žeimenlė, t. t.) o priešdėliai (Ūdrónys x Paūdrónys, Vover x Pavover). Il gruppo deminutyvinių opozicijų è il più grande (69 casi). Tutti deminutyviniai toponimai sono preesaghi dei vedini (priesagos -ėlir -elyra produtviausios) da toponimi, con cui essi costituiscono opposizioni, e sono minori per gli oggetti, da cui sono provenne i loro nomi. Kontradėlių vedinių opozicijas (con significato locale) costituiscono nomi di insediamenti (2 casi). Trap analizzati toponimi di circondità sono stati rilevati solo due sudurtini nomi opposizioni: Senãdvaris x Naujãdvaris (opzizione costituisce primi sandai) e Nrupis x Neruplis (opzizione costituisce minorybinė preesaga). Antoniminici legami sono caratteristici toponimica, tuttavia non in tutti i casi si crea semantica opposizione, specialmente quando segnalimiei parole (dazvolta qualificcinie attribuverzii) sono altri nomi vediniai o appartengono a dissentili categorie semantiche (plg. Tartkas x Šalčinink Tartliųkas, Trãkų Vókė x Mrinė Vókė). La gran parte analizzate opposizioni sono basate sulle relazioni semantiche antonimini delle parole pažymimenti. Nell'analisi semantica principalmente attenzione viene posta ai tipi di opposizioni toponimiche, tenendo in considerazione l'oggetto innominijabile dimensione, padėtì, agžių e colore. La maggior parte delle opposizioni (19 casi), basate su qualitativi attributivi sn e naũjas antoniminici legami, costituiscono oikonimai (p.g.: Dideji Baušia x Mažeji Baušia, Naũjas Janãvas x Sènas Janãvas, Mãžosios Kabškės x Ddžiosios Kabškės, t. t.). Mažiausią semantinių opozicijų grupę costituisce colore opposizione (bálta x júoda) oikonimų klasėje: Baltóji Vókė (k, V m. sav.) x Juodóji Vókė (k, V m. sav.) x Baltóji Vókė (m., Šlčn. r. sav.). Įteikta 2019 m. novembre 11 d. PAVEL SKORUPA Lietuvių kalbos institutas Petro Vileišio g. 5, LT-10308 Vilnius, Lituania pavel.skor[email protected]