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 oposições ANNOTATION The current paper deals with (semantic) oppositions in the present-day Vilnius County toponyms (both settlement and non-settlement names). Embora 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. ANOTACIA Straipsnyje analisadas destes dias Vilniaus apskrities toponimos (tanto residvieças, tanto não residvieças nomes) (semantines) oposições. Tradicários toponimias Lituães tyrimuo se, especialmente hidronimias, minimi paskiri antoniminia localovardzes exemplos, porém até šiol sistemiškiau eles não foram tyrinėti. Investiimui foi reunidos 5103 atuais toponimai (upių, upelių, tvenkinių e assentviečių vardas) e determinou que 400 toponimų (hidronimų e oikonimų klasėse) constituem 191 oposição. Oposições analisadas não só de acordo seus antoniminos semantícios ryšius, mas e formalmente, i. i. o papel dos componentes dos nomes compostos e sudurtinos investigado sintaksiniu (žodžių darybos) nível. PAVEL SKORUPA Acta Linguistica Lithuanica LXXXI 142 ESMINIAI VOODŽIAI: oposição, toponimas, atualinė Vilniaus apskritis, semantiniai ryšiai, antoniminiai ryšiai. INTRODUCTION The traditional research into Lithuanian toponymy resp. hidronymy (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. De acordo com 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. O article is based on the analysis of oppositions in toponyms (river, lake, ponds, settlement names) that currently exist within the boundaries of the present-day Vilnius County, which covers a big part (about one third) of the interwar toponymy Artigos 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 6 municipalities, 1 municipality and 1 city municipality: Elektriniai, Šalčininkai, Širvintos, Vilnius, Vilnius, Trintsas, Vilnius, Vilnius, Vilnius 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. Lituvian kalbos instituto Vardyno sektor 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.), Būdà x Semeli Būdštàvà (Añukadvaris eldership), Dūdnai x Did Didigi, Jagellonys x Klodiniai Mac Zaldonys, Kálviai Didiai Naujodnai Kvadkai, Karkliai x upio Karkliai x Karkliai, Maji Maji Maji, Kši Maji, Kši Kvadkai x i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i 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 Artigos Articles 145 / Semantic Oppositions in Vilnius County Toponyms Janãvas, Mãžosios Kabškės x Ddžiosios Kabškės, Kostaeji Karklnai x Zemeji Karklnai, Snosios Kietãviškės x Naũjosios Kietãviškės, Mažóji Kúosinė x Didžióji Kúosinė, Šiežeji Lygainiai x Mažgainiai, Seneji Miežionys x Nauj Mionys, Kokai Mijavirys x Klokniniai Mijys, Naujá Pašis Pasionamin x Zemamin, Semojis x Vojis, Senojos Sdeni S, Pašaminė, Naũjosios Rakliškės x Snosios Rakliškės, Aukšteji Rusokai x Žemeji Senojos S, Senojos S, Sojos S, Naujos S, Naujos S, Naujos S, Naujos S, Naujos S, Naujos V, Naujos V, Naujos V, Naujos V, Naujos V, Naujos V, Naujos V, Naujos V, Naujos V, Naujos V, Naujos V, Naujos V, Naujos V, Naujos V, Naujos V, V, Vss, Vss, Vss, Vs, Vss, Vss, Vss, Vs, Vss, Vss, Vs, Vss, Vs, Vss, Vss, Vs, Vss, Vs, Vs, Vs, Vs, Vss, Vs, Vs, Vs, Vs, Vs, V, Vs, Vs, Vs, Vs, V, Vs, V, Vs, Vs, V, Vs 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, comprising 28 and 25 out of 191 oppositions respectivamente. 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 Būdàakis, Naujãlaukis II (Naujãlaukis I) x Naujãlaukis II (El D. III), mun Naujãlaukis x Naujãlaukis II (Trak. D. II), Nemenčnė x Nemenčnė, Versekà x munekà 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, Tauj Mountains II 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 xùmiškė II, Bastnai I x Bastnai II, Bùrbliškė I x Bùr Navbliškė II, Dailydūkas I x Dailydónkas II, Gimeliš I x Gemelkaiš II, Gimelža I x Merižė II II, Gimelža II II II Igalga, Kalmai, Kalmai, Kalmai, Kalmai, Kalmai, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, Kalmi, 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, 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, os Urininkai I x osininkai II x osininkai III, 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). É importante notar que numbers são usados 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). Artigos 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 Bakútis, 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 Gruzinóitis, Šigūkas x Šigūgnis, Gélvis x Gelvis, Šūlis, Jaglis, Jaglis, Xudlis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, Xudnis, 30 settlement namesl oppositions Akmenà (v) x Akmenà (v) x Akmenlė (v), Babiškis x Barbišklis, Badiškiai x Bardiškliai, Bugnai x Versenliai, Daina x Dainavlė, Déltuva (tn) x Deltuvlė (v), Dùsmenys x Menliai, Nemúvn Gróžniniai x Gruožninkliai, Grúžos x G Sl Slėlės, Juodnkai Juodynkai, Juodynkai Juodiškiai, Juodiškiai x Šodiškiai, Laukkai x Laukkai x Laukkai, Lazyniai x Lazyniai, X dinliai, Maku x Maku x Maku x Mliai, X liai, X liai, X liai, X liai, X liai, X l iai, X iai, X l iai, X iai, X l iai, X iai, X l iai, X l iai, X iai, X iai, X l iai, X iai, X iai, X l iai, X iai, X iai, X iai, X l iai, X iai, X iai, X iai, X iai, X iai, X iai, Xia, X iai, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, Xia, The most productive x Šalčininkliai (v), Šiùkštiškiai x Šiukštiškliai, Švenčiónys x Švenčionliai, Tausuffixes 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. Essas relações refletem the belonging (ou quantitative) subordination and são determinadas por the name objects que são caracterizadas por seu 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 relationship of the toponymic objects themselves and provide certain information (belonging-origin relationship). Diminutive toponyms listed in this section 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. Artigos 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. Embora 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 Cultural 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. CONCLUSIONS 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. O uso de numbers in place names é característico de 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 (em alguns casos, 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. Embora 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 focas 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. Considerando que 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). ABREVIATIONS 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 milžinai viviam: Padavimai sobre cidades, ežerus, montões, pedras. Vilnius: Vaga. Krajewski Józef 2013: Wilno i okolice: przewodnik. Piastów: Oficyna Wydawnicza Rewasz. Kultūras vertybių registras web site at: https://kvr.kpd.lt#/ Lipovec Aleksandr 2019: Birželio 3-oji […] nacių destruído Lituânia Pirčiupių aldeia e assassinados 119 anos habitantes 1944 ano dia da tragédia [interaktyvus]. Priega na internet: httpssputniknews.lt/columnists (20190604/9212111/Pirciupiu-kaimo-tragedija-lietuvos-gyventojai-nese-geles-prie-Pirciupiu-Motinos-paminklo.html. Lisauskas Vytautas 2009: Trakai: imagens do passado. Vilnius: Darlis. Straipsniai / Articles 159 Semantic Oppositions in Vilnius County Toponyms LKŽe Lietuvių kalbos žodynas 120, 19412002, variante eletrônico, 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 primeiro. Państwo. Kaunas: Kraštotvarka. Malinauskas Vidmantas, Kriaučiūnas Jonas 2005: Trakų krašto naturaltos e cultura heredas. Vilnius: Daigai. Mišeikis Jonas 2001: Senieji Trakai história de verpetuose. Trakai: Trakų sp. ML-I nossa Lituânia, T. 1, 1964. Pirčiupis. Bostonas: Enciclopedias Lituãs editora. Razmukaitė Marija 2009: Sobre alguns preesaginius oikonimus da Lituânia Ocidental. Cultura da língua 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: Supepranjska Aleksandra. Terminológico 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: Lituânia TSR hidronimų daryba. Vilnius: Mintis. Vanagas Aleksandras 1981: Lituvians hidronimų etimologinis vārdynas. Vilnius: Mintis. Vanagas Aleksandras 1981a: Lituvians hidronimų semantika. Lituvians kalbotyros questões 21, 4153. Vanagas Aleksandras 1996: Lituânia cidades de nomes. Vilnius: Mokslo e 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. Os Velhos Trakai. Vilnius: Sêxlo e Enciclopedijas Instituto de Publicação [interactivo]. acessível na 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 enciklopedijas instituto de publicação. Vilniaus apskrities toponimų semantinės oposições SANTRAUKA Este objeto de estudo é semantísticas oposições Vilniaus apskrities toponimikoje. Entrep 5103 toponimos foi determinado 191 oposição: 14 (7 % dos nomes de rios de oposições; 37 (20 %) dų oposição. Oposições selecionadas tendo em conta a distância entre objetos, i. i. ežerų vardų opozicijos; 12 (6 %) tvenkinių vardų opozicijų; 128 (67 %) gyvenviečių varconsidera-se que objetos, estando entre 0,1 a 20 km de distância um do outro, constituem oposição. Tradiciniai lietuvių toponimijos resp. hidronimijos tyrimai (ypač Vanagas 1981) indicam antoniminius ryšius em certos nomes de água telkinių, particularmente naqueles, que são modificados qualiciniais cores, tamanho e pan. būdvardžiais. Às vezes os etimólogos afirmam que, por exemplo, os atributos qualificativos de cor nos toponimos são motivados pela cor do solo, produtividade ou outras propriedades físicas do solo; vyraujančia cor dos edifícios; tamanho atribúveis motivam verdadeirois tamanho do objecto introduziável e etc. No entanto, geralmente a esses elementos distinguíveis em topônimos não se atribui a devida atenção (Stachowski 2018). Sąvoka oposição é mais ampla que antonimia e indica qualquer um relacionamento entre elementos, que têm aiškią distinção em função (Saeed 2016: 63). O artigo trata não só típicas antoniminas semantíneas relações entre toponimos do condado de Vilnia, mas também efectuada sua formali análise, i. i. determina-se rolro de componentes de nomes compostos e sudurtinos no sintaksístico (žodžių darybos) nível. Análisis das características sintaksicas mostra que a maior parte das oposições compostos de toponímos constituem qualificacinhos atribvrsias, indoantes antes nome da localidade ou depois dele. Nominam-se os seguintes modelos de fazenda de nome: nome sem o sinalado x sinalimós + nome, sinalimós + nome Artigos Articles 161 / Semantic Oppositions in Vilnius County Toponyms x sinalimós + nome, nome sem o sinalimós x nome x sinalimós + sinalimós (plg. Kenà x Mażóji Kenà; Mãžosios Kabškės x Ddžiosios Kabškės; Cùdykas Ddelis x Cùdykas Mã; Ìlma Didžižas x Ìlma Mažóji e t. t.). Do ponto de vista de palavras doiras essas oposições são classificadas como compostos locais. Por vezes oikonismos usados números, para separar du identiškus varJúodês II x Júodês III x Júodês IV e t. t., o que é característica XX a. nominação. Tais denominações característicos dus (kai kuriais atvejais tris ir daugiau vardus), pvz.: Antãliedė I x Antãliedė II, Júodės I x tvenkinių e assentamentos nomes, compostos segundo os seguintes modelos: nomea sem pažymimojo palavra x nomeas + pažymimasis palavra, nomea + pažymimasis palavra x nomeas + pažymimasis palavra. O segundo modelo é o mais produtivo capturados 51 casos. Prdiškė x Prūdišklė, Žeimenà x Žeimenlė, t. t.) ou priešdėliai (Ūdrónys x Paūdrónys, Vover x Pavover). O Opoziciją gali sudaryti afiksai, pvz., mažybinės priesagos (plg. Bedùgnis x Bedugniùkas, grupo deminutyvinių opozicijų é o maior (69 casos). Todos deminutyvinhos toponimai são preesagų vediniai (priesagos -ėlir -elyra produktiviausios) de toponimais, com os quais eles formam oposições, e são menores do que objetos, dos quais estão originadas seus nomes. Antesdėlių vedinių opozicijas (com significado de lugar) formam nomes de assentamentos (2 casos). Entrep analisadas os toponímicos dos distritos foram detectadas apenas duas sudurtinos nomes oposições: Senãdvaris x Naujãdvaris (opozição constitui primeiros sandai) e Nrupis x Neruplis (opozição constitui mažybinė priesaga). As relações Antoniminas são características da toponimia, porém não em todos os casos é criada semantinė opozicija, especialmente quando marcimieji palavras (dezormente qualificciniai būdvardžiai) são outros nomes vediniai ou pertencem a distintas categorias semanticas (plg. Tartkas x Šalčinink Tartliųkas, Trãkų Vókė x Mrinė Vókė). A grande parte analisadas oposições são baseadas em palavras pažymimųjas antoniminiais semantinais ligações. Na análise semantônica, principalmente atenção é dada a tipos de oposições toponimárias, tendo em conta o tamanho, padėtį, amžių e cor do objeto invocatório. A maioria das oposições (19 casos), baseadas em qualitativos atributos sn e naũjas antoniminas ligações, constituem oikonimai (pg.: Dideji Baušia x Mažeji Baušia, Naũjas Janãvas x Sènas Janãvas, Mãžosios Kabškės x Ddžiosios Kabškės, t. t.). Maxima minusia de oposições semantinas grupoé constituída de cores oposição (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. novembro 11 d. PAVEL SKORUPA Lietuvių kalbos institutas Petro Vileišio g. 5, LT-10308 Vilnius, Lituânia pavel.skor[email protected]