Features of Representation of Color Names in Kazakh and English Toponyms

This article deals with the study of toponyms of Kazakh and English toponymy in the context of cognitive linguistics and the mechanism of interpretation of representation and perception of color names in toponyms and the principles of construction of these mechanisms. Toponyms are analyzed as a speech expression processed in the consciousness of the linguistic image of the world-the relationship of man and the environment. The modern stage of place names in cognitive research includes the consideration of language as one of the cognitive subsystems and onomastic vocabulary in the formulation of surrounding truths. The composition of the national toponymic picture of the world determines the motivation of the land-water names made in relation to the color names. Studying the combination of onym appellation, nominated from the attributes of the colors used in both languages. The color designation in toponyms is considered in connection with the peculiarities of geographical objects and their perception by human visual organs. Due to the fact that the external world is transmitted to different peoples in the form of specific idioethnic patterns, in place names of different ethnic groups, color symbols are recognized by new facets. The article discusses the color characteristics of the space in the names earth-water, given as a sample. Various approaches to the nature of the color components of geographical names are analyzed, and the possibility of symbolic and orientational interpretation of color is shown. The fact that the color in toponyms can serve as an orientation function, and not just as an indicator of the horizon side, also does not go unnoticed. The toponyms also present the results of research related to the nature of the object in which the symbolism of color orientation is nominated.

Features of Representation of Color Names in Kazakh and English Toponyms

This article deals with the study of toponyms of Kazakh and English toponymy in the context of cognitive linguistics and the mechanism of interpretation of representation and perception of color names in toponyms and the principles of construction of these mechanisms. Toponyms are analyzed as a speech expression processed in the consciousness of the linguistic image of the world-the relationship of man and the environment. The modern stage of place names in cognitive research includes the consideration of language as one of the cognitive subsystems and onomastic vocabulary in the formulation of surrounding truths. The composition of the national toponymic picture of the world determines the motivation of the land-water names made in relation to the color names. Studying the combination of onym appellation, nominated from the attributes of the colors used in both languages. The color designation in toponyms is considered in connection with the peculiarities of geographical objects and their perception by human visual organs. Due to the fact that the external world is transmitted to different peoples in the form of specific idioethnic patterns, in place names of different ethnic groups, color symbols are recognized by new facets. The article discusses the color characteristics of the space in the names earth-water, given as a sample. Various approaches to the nature of the color components of geographical names are analyzed, and the possibility of symbolic and orientational interpretation of color is shown. The fact that the color in toponyms can serve as an orientation function, and not just as an indicator of the horizon side, also does not go unnoticed. The toponyms also present the results of research related to the nature of the object in which the symbolism of color orientation is nominated.

___

  • 1. Meırbekov A.K., Taspolatov B.T. Etnostyń mádenı-mıfologııalyq tanymynyń negіzіn quraıtyn Qazyǵurt aımaqtyq toponımder men ańyzdardyń zamanaýı beınelerі //Iasaýı ýnıversıtetіnіń habarshysy. – 2019. – №1. – B. 219–220. [in Kazakh]
  • 2. Tіleýberdıev B.M. Qazaq onomastıkasynyń lıngvokognıtıvtіk aspektіlerі. – Almaty: Arys, 2006. – 368 b. [in Kazakh]
  • 3. Ábdіrahmanov Á. Qazaqstan toponımıkasynyń keıbіr máselelerі: fılol. ǵyl. kand. ... dıs. – Almaty, 1975. –120 b. [in Kazakh]
  • 4. Abdrahmanov S.A. Toponımıcheskaıa polıtıka kak zerkalo vozrojdenııa gosýdarstvennostı Kazahstana // Saıasat. – 1996. – №12. – B. 22. [in Russian]
  • 5. Kýıchýbaev E. Osnovnye tıpy toponımov Semırechıa: avtoref. ... kand. fılol. naýk. – Alma-Ata, 1967. – 22 b. [in Russian]
  • 6. Bekenova G.Sh. Qazaqstannyń soltústіk óńіrі gıdronımderі (semantıkalyq tıpologııa): fılol. ǵyl. kand. ... avtoref. – Almaty, 2002. – 15 b. [in Kazakh]
  • 7. Taspolatov B.T. Qazyǵurt óńіrі toponımııasynyń etnolıngvıstıkalyq sıpaty. – Almaty, 2010. – 17 b. [in Kazakh]
  • 8. Rysbergen Q. Qazaq toponımııasynyń lıngvokognıtıvtіk jáne etnomádenı negіzderі: fılol. ǵyl. kand. ... avtoref. – Almaty, 2010. – 64 b. [in Kazakh]
  • 9. Qojanuly M. Atyraý oblysynyń jer-sý attary. – Astana, 2005. – 102 b. [in Kazakh]
  • 10. Mankeeva J. Qazaq tіlіnіń zattyq mádenı leksıkasy: fılol. ǵyl. kand. ... avtoref. –Almaty, 1997. – 53 b. [in Kazakh]
  • 11. Vaısgerber I.L. Rodnoı ıazyk ı formırovanıe dýha. – M.: Knıjnyı dom «LIBROKOM», 2009. – 232 s. [in Russian]
  • 12. Mýrzaev E.M. Toponımıka ı geografııa. – M.: Naýka, 1995. – 179 s. [in Russian]
  • 13. Býdýr N.V. Povsednevnaıa jızn vıkıngov IX−XI veka. – M.: Molodaıa gvardııa, 2007. – 201 s. [in Russian]
  • 14. Sýperanskaıa A.V. Imıa cherez veka ı strany. – M.: LKI, 2007. – 192 s. [in Russian]
  • 15. Mýrzaev E.M. Geografıcheskaıa orıentatsııa ı ee otrajenıe v toponımıı // Izvestııa RAN. – Serııa geografıcheskaıa. – 1993. – №4. – S. 35–42. [in Russian]
  • 16. Bochkareva T.V. Sıstema tsvetooboznachenıı v drevneanglııskom // Naımenovanııa tsveta v ındo-evropeıskıh ıazykah: Sıstemnyı ı ıstorıcheskıı analız / Otv. red. A.P. Vasılevıch. – M.: KomKnıga, 2007. – S. 112–125. [in Russian]
  • 17. Mostepanenko E.M. Svet v prırode kak ıstochnık hýdojestvennogo tvorchestva // Hýdojestvennoe tvorchestvo. – M., 1986. – 99 s. [in Russian]
  • 18. Cambridge International Dictionary of English. – London, 1995. – 63 p. [in English]