PLAUSIBLE COGNATES OF THE OSSETIAN LÆG IN ENGLISH

	ISSN 2223-165X
	Izvestiya SOIGSI

Home Editorial board Publication ethics Current Information Archive Peer review guidelines Contacts Address: Pr. Mira, 10, Vladikavkaz, 362040, RNO-A, Russia E-mail: soigsi@mail.ru	DOI: 10.46698/VNC.2022.85.46.012 PLAUSIBLE COGNATES OF THE OSSETIAN LÆG IN ENGLISH Gutieva, Elmira T. Izvestia SOIGSI. 2022. IIS 46 (85). Abstract: The proof of the Indo-European character of the Ossetian læg “man, husband” is of fundamental importance for the interpretation of a number of phenomena outside of the Ossetian language itself. The word is traditionally considered a substratum loan and is usually discussed in the context of its Caucasian parallels. It seems relevant to reconsider the status of this root and explore it within the framework of the Indo-European paradigm. On the basis of semantic and phonetic consistency, it is possible to include a fairly wide range of words in the known languages into the group of its plausible cognates. Our study allows us to expand the range of the cognates by expanding the search area, with the inclusion of derivatives, archaic, reduced, or onomastic vocabulary. In the Germanic languages a large group of words, discussed as disparate facts, can be combined into a single derivational etymological nest. Modern English words lay, lag, fellow, bloke, blackleg, Jackleg do not belong to the core of the lexical-semantic group «man». On the contrary, most of them have been preserved in the bowels of a reduced vocabulary, which is distinguished by the etymological «illegibility», migration and short lifespan of its terms. The question about the nature of the coincidences of the Ossetian and English exponents suggests a number of answers – they can be homophonic random formations, or they can be signs of deep Sarmatian-Alanian ties with the Germanic tribes and other Indo-Europeans. The third answer seems to be the most probable: these lexemes are reflections of the independent development of a common root in the Indo-European languages, evidences of its archaization, whose functioning and peak of activity was during the pre-literate stage of development of the respective languages, this root have been preserved by the Ossetian language. Keywords: etymology, man, husband, borrowing, substratum, semantics, slang Download the full text + References 1. Guriev, T.A., Gutieva, E.T. (comp.). Iron-uyryssag dzyrduat [Ossetian-Russian Dictionary]. Vladikavkaz, North Ossetian Institute for Humanitarian and Social Studies, 2018, vol. 3. 720 p. (in Ossetian). 2. Abaev, V.I. Istoriko-etimologicheskii slovar’ osetinskogo yazyka [Historical and etymological dictionary of the Ossetian language]. Moscow, Vikom, 1996, vol. 2. 448 p. 3. Gutieva, E.T. Ob indoyevropeiskom kharaktere osetinskoi leksemy læg [On the Indo- European character of the Ossetian lexeme læg]. Vestnik SOGU [Bulletin of the North Ossetian State University]. 2014, no. 4. pp. 454-458. 4. Gutieva, E.T. Eksponent lag- v germanskom onomastikone [Exponent lag- in the German onomasticon]. Izvestia SOIGSI [Proceedings of the North Ossetian Institute for Humanitarian and Social Studies]. 2017, iss. 23(62), pp.78-86. 5. Beekes, R. Etymological Dictionary of Greek. Leiden-Boston, 2010, vol. 1. 930 р. 6. Zoega, B.T. A Concise Dictionary of Old Icelandic. Oxford Clarendon Press, 1910. 551 p. 7. Orel, V. A Handbook of Germanic Etymology. Brill-Leiden-Boston. 2003. 681 p. 8. Collins English Dictionary Complete and Unabridged. 13th revised ed. Great Britain, Collins, 2018. 2336 p. 9. Senkovsky, O.I. Sobranie sochinenii Senkovskogo (Barona Brambeusa) [Collected works of Senkovsky (Baron Brambeus)]. St. Petersburg, Imperial Academy of Sciences, 1858, vol. 5. 590 p. 10. Thorne, T. Dictionary оf Contemporary Slang. London, 2007. 494 p. 11. Partridge, E. A Dictionary of Slang and Unconventional English: Colloquialisms and Catch Phrases, Fossilised Jokes and Puns, General Nicknames, Vulgarisms, and Such Americanisms As Have Been Naturalised / Ed. by P. Beale. 8th ed. Routledge, 1984. 2808 р. 12. Leland Ch.G. English Gipsies and Their Language. London. 1874. 259 p. 13. Smirnova-Seslavinskaya, M.V. Problema sub”yekta rechi i mezhkul’turnoy kommunikatsii v lingvoantropologicheskom issledovanii. Chto takoye “rom” s tochki zreniya nositelya. [The problem of the subject of speech and intercultural communication in linguoanthropological research. What is “rum” from the point of view of a Romani speaker?]. [Electronic resource]. URL: http://www.intelros.ru/readroom/kulturologicheskiy-zhurnal/ ku1-2013/20976-problema 14. McArthur, T. The Oxford Companion to the English Language. Oxford, 1992. 1224 p. 15. Arnold, I.V. Leksikologiya sovremennogo Angliyskogo [Lexicology of modern English]. Moscow, Vysshaya shkola, 1986. 289 p. 16. Bloomfield, L. Language. London, Allen & Unwin. 1935. 566 p. 17. Smith, W. A Dictionary of the Bible. Grand Rapids, MI, 1884. 863 p. 18. Easton, M.G. A Dictionary of Bible Terms. Albany, USA, 1996-1997. 1262 p. ← Contents of issue


	Home \| Editorial board \| Publication ethics \| Current \| Information \| Archive \| Peer review guidelines \|
	© 2024 Известия СОИГСИ