СТРУКТУРНЫЕ ОСОБЕННОСТИ АНТРОПОНИМОВ В АНГЛИЙСКИХ ХУДОЖЕСТВЕННЫХ ТЕКСТАХ ДЖ. ГОЛСУОРСИ

Introduction

Anthroponyms as units of language connected with the characteristics of the person have been studied from the viewpoint of various aspects (the history of separate categories of onyms, their functioning etc.).

Anthroponyms, as it is known, occupy an important place in the lexicon of any language. In spite of the fact that anthroponyms mean the names of persons, they are considered as extremely important and difficult category of names connected with the history of culture, with psychology of nations, with their traditions and customs. General and special issues of the theory of proper names and methods of onomastic studies are regarded in the works by C.J. Mill, B.Russell, K.Donnellan, H.Dorion, L.Duchesne, A.Gardiner, R.Jacob, O.Jespersen, S.Kripke, M.Picard, J.Poirier, C.Tanguay and others.

Such researchers as N.F. Alefirenko, Yu.A. Karpenko, V.A. Kuharenko, V.N. Mihajlova, A.B. Superanskaya, O.I. Fonjakova consider that “every name is an important element of the text”.

Anthroponimics (from Greek. anthropo - the person and ónyma — a name) is a section of onomastics, that studies personal names of people, their origin, changes of these names, geographical distribution and social functioning, the structure and development of anthroponomical system [3, P. 154]. The study of the structure of proper names in general and anthroponyms in particular are represented in the works of A.V. Superanskaya [1969], J.N. Hrinenko [1981], A.A. Zhivogljadova [1987], O.G. Kaverinoj [1991], etc.

Discussion      

One of the leading trends in modern onomastics is proper names research in the fiction text. The works of T.V. Bakastova, V.I. Bolotova, V.D. Bondaletova, Yu.A. Karpenko, V.A. Nikonova, G.A. Silaeva are devoted to the investigation of anthroponyms functioning in fiction texts [2, P. 330].

In fiction texts proper names are filled with the contents which involve all knowledge of communicants about the named object, distinguishing in completeness of the qualitative and quantitative information, but involving the subjective attitude to the reviewer.

It is known that anthroponyms as an element of fiction texts are one of important instrument for creating an image. At the same time onims play a significant role in formation of idea of work as a whole. According to I.B. Hodyreva's remark, "The exact choice of anthroponym in many respects defines the semantic and emotional task of the text as a whole" [4, P. 174-175.] Being an element of the fiction text, the proper names bring a contribution in folding of that set of meanings which are concluded in work. Nevertheless, it is not necessary for the author to realize this variety because ingenious work always larger is than its creator is. According to V.G. Belinsky's remark "... in the name which the real poet gives to the hero, there is a reasonable necessity, which, at the same, time is invisible for the poet" [1, P. 32].

Results

The English fiction texts (“The Forsyte Saga”, “The Apple Tree”, “The First and Last”, “A Stoic”, “The Juryman”, “The Show: A Drama in Three Acts”) by J. Galsworthy served as the material for the investigation of the structural features of anthroponyms.

According to the investigated anthroponyms we can distinguish two subgroups which engage the initial and derivational forms of personal names.

It should be noted that a lot of anthroponyms have the initial forms:

For example: 1. Behind him his cousin, the tall George, son of the fifth Forsyte, Roger, had a Quilpish look on his fleshy face, pondering one of his sardonic jests [8].

2. He wished it were vacation and Maisie back from school [7].

3. Phyllis, who had taken her brother by the ear to lead him to the door, let him go to clasp her injured self [5].

 Speaking about the derivational forms of anthroponyms in English fiction text by J. Galsworthy we can determine the derivatives of 14 anthroponyms:

Nick < Nicholas; Phil < Philip; Hol < Holly; Annet <  Annette; Tom < Thomas; Larry < Laurence; Ed < Edgar; Will < William; Tom < Tommy; Kat < Kathleen; Rosa < Rosamund; Rob < Robert; Ann < Annie; Mol < Molly.

For example: 1. Ashurst, on a rock at the edge of the beech clump, watched them, and listened to the cuckoos, till Nick, the elder and less persevering, came up and stood beside him [6].

2. Rosa was one of those precarious ladies who make uncertain incomes by writing full-bodied storyettes [5].

3. Larry, leaving his brother's house in the Adelphi, walked northwards, rapidly, slowly, rapidly again [7].

Structurally, anthroponyms are presented by one and two-componential names.

1. One-componential anthroponyms. To this group we can refer the following names:

Ann - “gracious”, Emily - “industrious”, James - “supplanter”, Susan -“lily”, Irene - “peace”, Annette -“gracious”, Imogen - “innocent”, Nicolle -“victorious”, Thomas - “twin”, Megan - “a real”, Victoria - “Victory”, Ernest - “Earnest”, Ellen - “Light”, Phyllis -“ A leaf”, Charles - “Manly” and so on.            

2. Two-componential anthroponyms. We can see the following examples:

Timothy -from time “honor, respect”+ theos “God”

Nicholas - from nike “victory” + laos “people”

We pay attention to that fact that J. Galsworthy used such foreign names as Hester, Montague, Imogen, Roger, Annette, Anthony, Nicholas, Venera, Diana, Sabina, etc. in his fiction texts. The use of borrowings is connected with fact after the invasion of Britain by other countries Old English names gradually began to lose their popularity, and they were replaced by onomastic constructions borrowed from the French, Latin languages. Such names as Richard, Robert, William, Hugo, as well as names of biblical origin – Thomas, John and Peter – began to be used in the naming system more and more. The most intensive assimilation of names with “Old French” roots took place in the ruling circles and the upper level of society.

We can see such anthroponyms in the following extracts:

1. She took off her cloak, and Imogen, with an understanding look, did not even open the drawing-room door for her, but ran downstairs [8].

2. On it lay a piece of paper with an effigy drawn in blood, and the three names Stella Halliday, Sabina Halliday, Freda Halliday--also in blood, running towards it like the rays of a star [6].

The fiction world of the English texts is rich in characters having such occasional names, as Adela, Parfitt, Smither, Warmson, Bilson, Prosper Profond, Jago, Enid, Coles, Crow, Donkin, Scriven, Livinska etc. Some of these names characterize the hero’s social status. For example, Adela means “noble”, Prosper means ‘fortunate, successful”. The social status of the character allows us to refer to it to derivative versions of the anthroponym in various social spheres.

We can see them in the following examples: 1. Pleasant the touch of her lips on his forehead, the sound of her clear voice, the sight of her slim movements, the feeling that she did him credit-clean-run stock, she and that young scamp Jock-better than the holy woman, his daughter Adela, would produce if anyone were ever fool enough to marry her, or that pragmatical fellow, his son Ernest.

2. Livinska—I just call myself [7].

3. But Crow & Donkin, not Scriven & Coles, were old Heythorp's solicitors [5].

We should note that there are not any examples of using patronymic names in fiction texts by J. Galsworthy, which can be explained by the historical development of English anthroponymic system.

We can see the realization of surnames in simple structures in English fiction texts. We have revealed such surnames as Forsyte, Dartie, Mont, Bosinney, Profond, Darrant, Anthony, Foggart, Pillin, Bosengate, Garton, Heythorp, Ashurst  and so on.

For example: 1. At the head of it, in the Chairman's seat, sits John Anthony, an old man.

2. Mid-theatre-hour, and the ‘Great Parasite’— as Sir James Foggart called it — was lying inert, and bright [10].

3. "My dear fellow," Garton was saying, "pity's only an effect of self- consciousness; it's a disease of the last five thousand years. The world was happier without." [6].

4. Two faces looked at her from round the door; she heard Bob Pillin's smothered chuckle; her mother's rich and feathery laugh.

5. And old Heythorp, digesting his osyters, snuffed the scent of the hyacinths, and thought of the St. Germain, his favourite soup [5].

As a result of the consideration the "internal" structures of proper names in the novel are used as the basic resource in disclosing of the author's plan, we manage to open «multi-layer» and multi-dimensionality of author's anthroponyms game of "clashing" senses. They help to open the basic idea of the novel consisting in necessity for the person in the conscious choice between good and bad.

We have divided anthroponyms into two groups: central and peripheral.

We can refer the names of main characters of English fiction texts to the central group, for example: Jolyon, Ann, James, Emily, Roger, Soames, June, Holly, Stella, Keith, Laurence, Slvanus, Henry, John and others.

In English fiction texts we come across the following examples: 1. In the centre of the room, under the chandelier, as became a host, stood the he ad of the family, old Jolyon himself [8].

2. This was the idea of Stella Ashurst, whose character contained a streak of sentiment [6].

3. But that was what Keith Darrant liked, after his day's work-the hard early morning study of his "cases," the fret and strain of the day in court [7].

4. And, lonely, in his chairman's seat at the top end old Sylvanus Heythorp sat, with closed eyes, still and heavy as an image [5].

5. Mr. Henry Bosengate, of the London Stock Exchange, seated himself in his car that morning during the Great War with a sense of injury [9].

6. At the head of it, in the Chairman's seat, sits John Anthony, an old man [10].

We can refer the names of the minor and incidental heroes to the peripheral group. The meanings of their names develop from some sphere of the interconnected general and united meanings which degree of expressiveness depends on the peculiarities of dictionary registration of every plot structure in which they are used and on the adequacy of degree of readers’ awareness. Thus, the group of anthroponyms of minor and incidental characters we have divided into two subgroups:

- Names with open semantics: Hester, Timothy, Philip, Montague and so on.

For example: 1. Philip Bosinney was known to be a young man without fortune, but Forsyte girls had become engaged to such before, and had actually married them.

2. "But where," he asked, "was Timothy? Hadn't he come with them?"

3. When his son-in-law Montague Dartie had that financial crisis, due to speculation in Oil Shares, James made himself ill worrying over it; the knell of all prosperity seemed to have sounded [8].

- Names with closed semantics: Parfitt, Smither, Warmson, Bilson, Prosper, Profond, Asches, Livinska, Megan, Guardy, Grow, Donkin, Coles, Lewis and so on.

For example: 1. "And what's your name?" - "Megan David." [6].

2. It is hard, Guardy; I worked my brain silly over that story [5].

3. I won't stand by and let poor Annie Roberts suffer like this!

4. Madge Thomas , daughter of Henry Thomas [10].

Conclusion

So, the names with open semantics don't demand additional interpretation since their meanings are obvious from the text. Unlike them, the symbolics of names with closed semantics "is more veiled". Here their interpretation depends on knowledge of history, myths, creativity of J. Galsworthy, and also the English language.