REFLEXES OF THE COMMON INDO-EUROPEAN ROOT “PERSON, MAN” IN ENGLISH AND OSSETIAN LANGUAGES

	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.2023.89.50.003 REFLEXES OF THE COMMON INDO-EUROPEAN ROOT “PERSON, MAN” IN ENGLISH AND OSSETIAN LANGUAGES Gutieva, Elmira T. Izvestia SOIGSI. 2023. IIS 50 (89). Abstract: The number of reflexes of the common Indo-European root dhg’həmo-/dhg’homo- “man, man” increases with the depth of diachronic analysis of almost all languages of the Indo- European family of languages. At the earlier stages of their historical development there were more reflexes, with more general semantics, and their derivational potential was higher. Due to a complex of linguistic and extralinguistic reasons, they underwent semantic changes, reduction of lexical compatibility, weakening of connections with cognate words, loss of productivity, and transformation into separate word-forming elements. The root was part of the common Germanic lexical fund, which is recorded in written works of the North and West Germanic languages. It is worthy of special mention, that the preservation of the root in the English language was not facilitated even by the long-term influence of French, a representative of the Romance group of languages, in which the main nomination “man”, “person” are derivatives of this particular root. Borrowing of the French cognates did not take place either. The absence of the visible reflexes of the root at the modern stage does not mean its complete elimination. The root gumô in English is preserved as part of the composite “bridegroom”, the identification of which is complicated by the epenthetic consonant -r-. Similarly, in the Ossetian language, the root, having lost the ability to be used independently, could also have been preserved in the composite formations. A revision of the words nominating a person, a man, allows us to consider elements preserved in Ossetian composite formations as possible reflexes of the root: (næl)goymag, sylgoymag, fæsgoymag, udgoyma, khurgom. In addition, it seems to us, that there could have been a revitalization of this root, since at the present stage goymag has begun to be used as a gender-neutral unit in the meaning “person, personality”. Keywords:* man, person, the Ossetian language, English, etymon, composite. Download the full text For citation:: Gutieva, E.T. Reflexes of the common indo-european root “person, man” in English and Ossetian languages // Izvestiya SOIGSI. 2023. Iss. 50 (89). Pp. 58-71. (in Russian). DOI 10.46698/VNC.2023.89.50.003 + References 1. Arutyunova, N.D. Yazyk i mir cheloveka [Language and the world of the human]. Moscow, Yazyki russkoi kul’tury, 1999. 896p. 2. Ayto, J. Dictionary of Word Origins. Bloomsbury, 1999. 582 p. 3. Grigorii Tursky. Istoriya frankov [The history of the Franks]. Moscow, 1987. 474 p. 4. Stearn, W.T. The Background of Linnaeus’ Contributions to the Nomenclature and Methods of Systematic Biology // Systematic Zoology. 1959. Vol. 8. No 2. P. 4-22 5. Bosworth, J. An Anglo-Saxon Dictionary Based on the manuscript collections of the late Joseph Bosworth. Ed. T.N. Toller. Oxford, 1898. 782 p. 6. Clark-Hall, J.R. A Concise Anglo−Saxon Dictionary (2nd ed.). Cambridge University Press, 1916. 371p. 7. Steblin-Kamensky, M.I. Mir sagi. Stanovlenie literatury [The world of the saga. The formation of literature]. Leningrad, Nauka, 1984. 248 p. 8. Krupina, E.A. Slovari k drevneangliiskoi poeme “Beovul’f ”, stanovlenie i sovremennoe sostoyanie [Dictionaries for the Old English poem “Beowulf ”, formation and current state]. Thesis abstract of the candidate dissertation (in Philology). Nizhny Novgorod, 2018. 200 p. 9. Bloomfield, L. Language. Motilal Banarsidass Publ., 1994. 566 p. 10. Lavrova, N.A. Kontaminatsiya v sovremennom angliiskom yazyke [Contamination in Modern English]. Moscow, Nauka. 2012. 208 p. 11. Keen, M. Origins of the English Gentleman: Heraldry, Chivalry and Gentility in Medieval England, C. 1300 – c. 1500. Tempus, 2002. 192 p. 12. Abaev, V.I. Istoriko-etimologicheskii slovar’ osetinskogo yazyka [Historical and etymological dictionary of the Ossetian language]. Leningrad, USSR Academy of sciences, 1979. 358р. 13. Hubschman, N. Etymologie und Lautlehre der ossetischen Sprache. Strassburg. 1887. 151 p. 14. Akhvlediani, G.S. (ed.). Fonetika i morfologiya [Phonetics and Morphology]. Grammatika osetinskogo yazyka. V 2 t. [Grammar of the Ossetian language. In 2 vols]. Ordzhonikidze, North Ossetian Research Institute, 1963, vol. 1. 368 p. 15. Abaev, V.I. Istoriko-etimologicheskii slovar’ osetinskogo yazyka [Historical and etymological dictionary of the Ossetian language]. Moscow-Leningrad, Nauka, 1973, vol. I. 655 p. 16. Turner, R.A. Comparative Dictionary of Indo-Aryan Languages. London, Oxford University Press, 1962-1966. 841 p. 17. Gæbæraty, N. (ed.). Iron ævzajy æmbaryngængænæn dzyrduat [Concise Dictionary of the Ossetian language]. Moscow, Nauka, 2007. 508 p. (in Ossetian) 18. Guriev, T.A. (ed.). Iron-uyryssag-anglisag dzyrduat. Osetinsko-russko-angliiskii slovar’ [Ossetic-Russian-English dictionary]. Vladikavkaz, North Ossetian Institute for Humanitarian and Social Studies, 2013, vol. 1: A – K”. 530 p. ← Contents of issue


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