RAS History & PhilologyРусская речь Russkaya rech

  • ISSN (Print) 0131-6117
  • ISSN (Online) 3034-5928

On Fig Names in Russian

PII
S0131611725030054-1
DOI
10.31857/S0131611725030054
Publication type
Article
Status
Published
Authors
Volume/ Edition
Volume / Issue number 3
Pages
77-89
Abstract
The paper analyses the names of Ficus carica L. in diachronic aspect in the Russian language. As many other imported plants, in the 11th - 18th cc. common fig as the whole tree and its fruit had plenty of names of various origin. The earliest records of the plant names - смокы (smoky) and смоковьница (smokovnitsa) go back to the one of the oldest dated East Slavic book Ostromir Gospels (1056-1057). These words and their cognates were highly used in written texts up to the 17th century, when many others penetrated the Russian language: вавцына (vavtsyna), винное дерево (vinnoe tree), винная ягода (vinnaia berry), еикъ (eik), олинфа (olinfa), сика (sika), фига (figa), фиговое дерево (figovoye tree). The word инжиръ (inzhir), which is common nowadays, appeared late in the 18th century only, and later replaced almost all synonyms but smokva and figa, rarely used and contextually determined. We presume that the choice of a plant name was partly caused by the tradition formed in specific genres as well as the topic of the literary works. The analysis is illustrated by citations from the PhytoLex database, which is the result of two projects: “Russian phytonyms in diachronic aspect (11th - 17th c.)” at the Institute for Linguistic Studies, Russian Academy of Sciences (completed) and “Plants and people in the Russian Empire of the 18th century: knowledge and practice distribution among social classes” at the European University at St. Petersburg (ongoing).
Keywords
этноботаника история русского языка лексические заимствования XVIII век ботаническая терминология историческая лексикология инжир Ficus carica L
Date of publication
14.09.2025
Year of publication
2025
Number of purchasers
0
Views
6

References

  1. 1. Бархударов С. Г. (гл. ред.). Словарь русского языка XI-XVII вв. Вып. 2. М.: Наука, 1975. 319 с.
  2. 2. Богатова Г. А. (гл. ред.). Словарь русского языка XI-XVII вв. Вып. 25. М.: Наука, 2000. 273 с.
  3. 3. Горбачевич К. С. (гл. ред.). Словарь современного русского литературного языка: в 20 тт. 2-е изд. Т. I-VI. Т. 2. М.: Русский язык, 1991. 960 с.
  4. 4. Горбачевич К. С., Герд К. С. (гл. ред.). Большой академический словарь русского языка. Т. 1-.
  5. 5. М.; СПб.: Наука, 2004-. Т. 2. 2005. 658 с.; Т. 4. 2007. 678 с.; Т. 26. 2019. 696 с.
  6. 6. Григорьев А. В. Русская библейская фразеология в контексте культуры. М.: МПГУ, 2019. 200 с.
  7. 7. Золтан А. Interslavica. Исследования по межславянским языковым и культурным контактам. М.: Индрик, 2014. 224 с.
  8. 8. Ушаков Д. Н. (ред.). Толковый словарь русского языка. В 4-х тт. Т. 4. М.: Гос. изд-во иностранных и национальных словарей, 1940. 1502 стлб.
  9. 9. Фасмер М. Этимологический словарь русского языка. В 4-х тт. М.: Прогресс, 1964-1973.
  10. 10. Чернышев В. И. (гл. ред.). Словарь современного русского литературного языка. Т. 1-17. М.; Л.: Изд. и 1-я тип. Изд-ва Акад. наук СССР в Л. 1948-1965. Т. 2. 1951. 1393 стлб.; Т. 5. 1956. 1918 стлб.; Т. 13. 1962. 1516 стлб.; Т. 16. 1964. 1610 стлб.
QR
Translate

Индексирование

Scopus

Scopus

Scopus

Crossref

Scopus

Higher Attestation Commission

At the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation

Scopus

Scientific Electronic Library