ETYMOLOGICAL ASPECTS OF PHYTOTOPONYMS IN ENGLISH AND KAZAKH LANGUAGES

2023

Closed access Metadata (CSL-JSON)
DOI 10.47526/2023-2/2664-0686.16
Data confidence 70 medium
How this score is calculated

It is built from checkable properties of the record itself: whether the article has a DOI, how many independent sources confirmed its data, whether the required fields are filled in, and how recent the latest confirmation is. Disagreement between sources and a missing identifier lower it. A value of 80 or above means the record was published without further checking; 60 to 79 means it is published at reduced confidence, with a manual check advisable. A record verified by an editor by hand is never pushed below 90 by a recalculation. This scores our data about the article, not the article itself.

Abstract

The significance of place-naming is one of the most essential components of any nation's history. Phytotoponyms, or toponyms named after plant names, represent people's economic and cultural activities, as well as the national-linguistic community's value system and worldview. The purpose of the article was to investigate and compare the etymological aspects of English and Kazakh phytotoponyms. For the study 63 phytotoponyms from the United Kingdom and 57 phytotoponyms from Kazakhstan were chosen through selective sample. To do so, an etymological method was utilized to define the structure of words, their origin, and meaning, as well as a comparative method to compare the phytotoponyms of the two languages. The research used primary sources by employing a questionnaire to choose and obtain insight into Kazakh place-name meanings and locations of origin, as well as secondary materials from etymological books and dictionaries of toponyms. To check the authenticity of the Kazakh toponyms' origins, 98 volunteers (83 females, 15 men) from various areas of Kazakhstan were recruited by purposeful sampling. The differences were found in 1) history and origin, 2) word structure, and 3) deceptive names of English language, which did not correlate with the meaning of the toponyms, while the similarities were found in 1) word-formation, 2) descriptive names, the meanings of which can be understood from the first glance, and 3) motivational similarity in the names of toponyms.