Structural Types of Settlement Names Referring to the Natural Environment*

[ Abstract: In this paper I study the structural types of settlement names referring to the natural environment and highlight what kind of semantic and lexi-cal-morphological models characterize the particular name structures and when and in what proportion they appeared in sources of the Old Hungarian Era. Among the basic name structural types of settlement names referring to the natural environment, more than half of the name corpus is made up by single-component settlement names without a formant (56 %, e. g. Kökényér < Kökény-ér hydronym ‘blackthorn/brook’, Alma < alma ‘apple’, etc.), while 34 % of the names were created as single-component toponyms with formants (e. g. Erdőd < erdő ‘forest’ + -d topoformant, Somogy < som ‘dogwood’ + -gy suffix, etc.); this means that the character of the name type is clearly defined by the single-component structure. Metonymic and morphemic name formation were used throughout the early Old Hungarian Era to create settlement names. The proportion of two-component settlement names referring to the natural environment is only 10 % (e. g. Szamosfalva ‘village/next to the River Szamos’,

1. Settlement names referring to the natural environment are considered important name types in the Hungarian settlement name system, along with the two other groups of settlement names expressing specific features, namely, those referring to the human environment (e. g., based on a personal name, tribe's name, ethnonym, occupational name, etc.) and those indicating human activities (referring to residential buildings, mines, markets, etc.).These settlements names, unlike the two latter categories mentioned, are related to places and entities existing independently of human activity as well.In a semantic and lexical-morphological sense, several groups of settlement names referring to local and/or general geographical features are closely related to other name types (e. g., hydronym, oronym, forest name, name of flora and fauna), thus, the examination of them may also provide important information in this regard.This ancient mode of name-giving is specific to each language, when the nature, the rich flora and fauna, the topographic, the hydrographic configurations, etc. offer multiple opportunities for name-giving.I outlined the status of this outstanding but little studied name type in the system and expressed the need for academic research on the subject in one of my earlier publications (Kovács 2018).Recently Christian Zschieschang has highlighted the role of toponyms that are semantically associated with nature (e. g., water and swampland).Surveying the place names in Western Pololnia where multiple languages come into contact with one another, he came to the conclusion that toponyms play an important role in landscape reconstruction (Zschieschang 2018(Zschieschang /2019)).
In this paper, I study the structural types of settlement names referring to the natural environment, highlighting what kind of semantic and lexical-morphological models characterize the particular name structures and when and in what proportion they appeared in sources from the Old Hungarian Era.This is important, as so far we could only rely on partial research in this regard (for that, see Hoffmann/Rácz /Tóth 2018: 329-344).In order to address these issues, such an abundant historical onomastic corpus is needed that covers the whole Hungarian language area: I compiled this corpus myself, using various sources Éva Kovács (e. g., KMHsz. 1., HA. 1-4., Gy. 1-4., Cs. 1-5., Kocán 2017, Kenyhercz n. d., Mályusz 1922/2014, Németh 1997, 2008, Borovszky Pozsony, Somogy, Temes, Torontál, Vas and Zemplén County volumes), into a database currently consisting of 2,193 records.This corpus serves as the basis of my study.2. The typological descriptions differentiate between three larger structural types among toponyms: 1. single-component names without a formant, 2. singlecomponent names created with topoformants, and 3. the two-component toponyms formed by means of compounding.Semantically, in the particular name constituents feature-indicating, type-indicating and designating functions may be expressed (cf. Hoffmann 1993: 55).
Among the basic name structural types of settlement names referring to the natural environment, more than half of the name corpus is made up of single-component settlement names without a formant (56 %, e. g.Kökényér < Kökény-ér hydronym 'blackthorn/brook', Alma < alma 'apple', etc.), while 34 % of the names were created as single-component toponyms with formants (e. g.Erdőd < erdő 'forest' + -d topoformant, Somogy < som 'dogwood' + -gy suffix, etc.); this means that the character of the name type is clearly defined by the single-component structure.The proportion of two-component settlement names referring to the natural environment is only 10 % (e. g.Szamosfalva 'village/next to the River Szamos', Kecskéskér 'Kér settlement/abounding in goats', etc.).Similar proportions have been established by István Hoffmann, Anita Rácz and Valéria Tóth in their research on a smaller onomastic corpus (2018: 340).In the following, I will provide a detailed overview of the different structural types.
2.1.In terms of their lexical structure, the single-component denominations without a formant may be of four types as these name forms may contain  In close to three quarters of single-component settlement names without a formant a toponymic base word can be identified with certainty (in 25 % a singlecomponent, more frequently (in 46 %) a two-component toponym).Geographical common nouns (11 %) and other lexemes (18 %) referring to the natural environment are used in the formation of only a small proportion of settlement names of this type.It must be noted, however, that toponyms may "also hide among names identifiable with a common noun base word" (Hoffmann/Rácz/ Tóth 2018: 335).In the first two cases the settlement names refer to a local feature in a semantical sense, while in the latter two cases a general geographical relationship is referenced.2.  (Kenyhercz n.d.)).2.1.2.Although from a lexical perspective settlement names containing toponyms with a complex lexical structure consist of two constituents (the first indicating a feature, the second indicating a place type), as a settlement name a single semantic feature is expressed in them, i. e., that the settlement is "situated next to a certain watercourse, mountain, etc."As settlement names, these name forms should thus be considered single-component names.The natural (e.g., hydronym, oronym, forest name) antecedents of relevant settlement names do not always have data.This is partly due to the lack of records, and partly to the possibility of the given microtoponym having not actually existed.
These settlement names, however, bear the marks of transition even though they fundamentally refer to general geographical features.It can happen that a natural name is created from a given common noun (e. g. 1255: Potok, flumen, HA. 4: 49, Nógrád County), which is metonymically transformed into a settlement name (1255: Potok, villa, Gy. 4: 49, Nógrád County) and thus a local feature is expressed in the settlement name, while structurally it should be included among those containing a toponym (single-component toponym; cf.type 1).As, however, the microtoponym that could be identified as an antecedent in many cases cannot be found in records, due to a lack of data it is not an easy task to confirm which of the settlement names with a common noun base word refer to local relations and include a toponym (in many cases it is downright impossible).2.1.4.The proportion of settlement names referring to the natural environment but not created from a geographical common noun lexeme is 18 % proportion among the studied denominations.These settlement names are also characterized by a transitional status.For example, in the case of a settlement called Tölgy (e. g. 1264/1393/1466: Thulgh, villa, Csongrád County, KMHSz. 1: 282), we can decide without a doubt whether settlement-naming was motivated by an environ ment abundant in oak trees (in this case the settlement name referring to a general geographical feature) or the settlement was named after a nearby forest named Tölgy (and thus reflecting a local feature) only if we possess further information (e. g., based on the text of the charter, the estate description, or mi croname data).In the case of the settlement names considered here, the most frequent are settlement names having an identical form to the names of flora and fauna.A plant name base word appears in settlement names Árpa (1268/1347: Arpa, villa (Gy.3: 404) < árpa 'barley'), Gomba (1301: Gomba (Borovszky, Pozsony, 68) < gomba 'mushroom'), Nyír (1249: Nyvr, terra (Gy.2: 303) < nyír 'birch'), etc.; animal name lexemes are found in the following toponyms: Bika (1305: Bika, possessio (Cs.3: 418) < bika 'bull'), Sas (1348: Sas (Cs.1: 670) < sas 'eagle'), etc.Other common nouns (nouns and adjectives) referring to the na tural environment rarely play a role in name-giving, e. g.Arany (1333: Aran (Gy.3: 289) < arany 'gold'), Kő (1323: Kev (KMHsz.1: 162) < kő 'stone'), Só (1243/1344: Sow, terra (Gy.2: 87) < só 'salt'), Forró (1335: Forrow, possessio (Gy.4: 241) < forró 'hot'), Kék (1323/1333: Keek, terra (Németh 1997: 105) < kék 'blue'), etc. 2.2.The names in the second large structural type of settlement names referring to the natural environment, the single-component toponyms with formants, fall into two types of lexical subcategories.The topoformant may be attached to a geographical common noun base word or a common noun referring to the natural environment.There are, however, significant differences between the frequencies of the two types: in the great majority of single-component settlement names (86 %) the topoformant is attached to a lexeme referring to the natural environment, while the settlement names with a geographical common noun + topoformant structure make up only 14 %.The settlement names of both subcategories are characterized by a dual image, the above-mentioned transitional status, which means that in these instances it must also be considered that common nouns reflecting general geographical features could first become toponyms, natural names (hydronyms, oronyms, etc.) themselves and then these could serve as the basis of settlement names, by then already expressing a local feature.If, however, these "mediating" name forms (thus hydronyms, oronyms, etc.) cannot be verified by data, then we cannot support such a process of formation and semantic feature of the settlement names of the Kékes, Körtvélyes type either.
In such settlement names we may encounter several types of suffixes among the elements of both lexical subgroups.Most frequently, the relevant settlement names include the -s, -d and-i suffixes.
In connection with the above categorization, it should also be mentioned the fact that the lexemes referring to the natural environment (especially the names of animals and less frequently those of plants) appear in the Árpád Era both in their base form and with a suffix as personal names (e. g.Bárány: 1212: Baran (ÁSz.90), Csóka: 1211: Choucha (ÁSz.200), Farkas: 1138/1329: Farcas ~ Farkas (ÁSz.300), Farkasd: 1138/1329: Farcasti (ÁSz.301), Medve: 1138/1329: Medue (ÁSz.533), Rigó: 1211: Rigou (ÁSz.676)); this means that in certain cases the settlement names discussed here in reality do not refer to the natural environment but express ownership and derive from feature-indicating personal names.2.3.The third large structural type of settlement names referring to the natural environment consists of two-component settlement names.The first name constituent of two-component settlement names may include a natural name (hydronym, oronym, etc.) or a common noun referring to the natural environment (geographical common noun or other type of lexeme, e. g., plant name or animal name, etc.), while in their second name constituent there is either a geographical common noun meaning 'settlement' or a settlement name.Settlement names with such a structure, however, are rare in the early Old Hungarian Era, making up only 10 % of the name corpus examined in the current study.More than half of them (59 %) were created as a primary settlement name (i. e., with a geographical common noun second constituent) and 41 % as a secondary name (i. e., with a toponymic second constituent).The distribution of two-component settlement names reflecting natural features is presented in Figure 3.The following settlement names, however, refer to a general geographical feature, with plant name, animal name lexemes as first constituents in the names: Hegyfalu (1337: Hegfalu, Hygfalu (Cs.2: 754) 'hill/village'), Tófalu (1272: Rovfolu [Tovfolu], terra (Gy.2: 410) 'lake/village'), Farkasfalva (1334: Farkasfalua (Kocán 2017: 95) 'wolf/village'), Rigótelke: 1320: Rigotheleke, possessio (Gy.2: 85) 'thrush/village'), etc. 2.3.2.In the second constituent of secondary settlement names there is always a settlement name lexeme, while the adjunct part contains a natural name (hydronym, oronym, etc.) or a common noun referring to the natural environment.In today's settlement name system those name structures are frequent in which the location next to a place indicated in the first constituent (water, mountain, forest, etc.) is reflected, in order to end settlement name homonymy.However, in the early Old Hungarian Era, the settlement names with a differentiating first constituent referring to the location of the place and including a natural name were less frequent (only 11 % of two-component names had such a structure).In most cases such settlement names referred to a location next to a body of water (e.g.Túrpásztó: 1281: Tuparstuha, villa (Cs. 1: 671) with the semantic content of 'a settlement called Pásztó/located next to the Túr River'); less frequently they designated a settlement next to another type of place (forest or mountain), for example Erdőszádkeszi (1278/XVIII.: Erdizadkezi (KMHsz.1: 92) 'Keszi settlement/next to the microtoponym Erdő-szád'), etc.
While studying the structural features of settlement names referring to the natural environment, and occasionally their etymological processes, I introduced the prototypical groups of this name type, and I also tried to highlight the category with a dual semantic content or, more precisely, those that cannot be evaluated more accurately (referring to local and general geographical features).3.In the following I examine when and in what proportion the structural categories of this name type appeared in sources from the Old Hungarian Era and how their frequency changed over the centuries.
I explore the chronological features of settlement names referring to the natural environment using the method of relative chronology.The procedure is based on the following principles.The date of the creation of a toponym Éva Kovács cannot be precisely determined, as these names typically do not appear in the sources at the moment of their creation, only when recording them is considered important due to an official event (donation and legal proceeding).This means that a long time may pass between the creation and recording of a name, as the first recording of a name in a charter is completely independent of when name-giving took place.As a result, Anita Rácz argues that although the first recording of names is incidental, this could obviously affect all names in the same way, thus "the relative chronology of name types (i.e., relative to each other) is visible also based on the first occurrences in the case of a larger quantity of names."(2016b: 104).She successfully used this procedure when analyzing the relative chronological attributes of the different structural types of settlement names created from names of social groups (names of ethnic groups, tribes and occupations, 2016a) and those formed from ethnonyms (2016b).Valéria Tóth also examined toponyms with a personal name origin based on relative chronology (2017).The same procedure can be used successfully in the analysis of the name type discussed here as well.Christian Zschieschang also used a similar method when analyzing the first occurrences of the mill names west of the Oder River (2019: 154-155).
The most striking result is that there are significant differences between the structural types of these settlement names in terms of their frequency over time, as presented in Figure 4.The different structures begin to take another direction beginning in the early 13 th century.Settlement names having a name structure without a formant show a significant increase throughout the century (with this name type practically dominating the chronological character of settlement names referring to the natural environment) and the growth rate slightly decreases only in the 14 th century.Names created with formants are also present in a significant proportion in the 13 th -14 th centuries, but their productivity-frequency curve is flatter than in the previous case.Therefore, metonymic and morphemic name formation were used throughout the early Old Hungarian Era to create settlement names, while name formation with topoformants had a less significant role in name-giving than metonymic name-giving without a formant, which dominated the era.
A different pattern can be seen in the chronology of two-component name structures: there is a low number of both primary and secondary settlement names in the 13 th -14 th centuries, but there is noticeable growth in primary name forms in the second half of the 13 th century and in the 14 th century (thus later than with single-component names).
Overall, we can conclude that in the Hungarian toponymic system, not only did two-component settlement names reflecting natural features appear in sources from the early Old Hungarian Era not only in a lower number compared to single-component names, but there are also differences in the chronology of single-component and two-component denominations.

4.
Based on what has been discussed so far, it is evident that the number of settlement names referring to the natural environment increased significantly starting in the early 13 th century and that this growth continued at a steady pace practically until the end of the early Old Hungarian Era.The proportion of settlement names in the name system overall appears to be relatively constant (as opposed to other name types, for example, those created from names of social groups).Such evenness is present also in the chronology of the structural types and lexical-morphological types of settlement names referring to the natural environment.These findings indicate that, unlike in the case of other name types, the means of formation and creation of names belonging to this group were not significantly affected by linguistic trends.
Kecskéskér 'Kér settlement/abounding in goats', etc.).I could conclude that in the Hungarian toponymic system compared to single-component names, two-component settlement names reflecting natural features appeared in sources from the early Old Hungarian Era not only in a lower number but there are also differences in the chronology of single-component and two-component denominations.]

Fig. 1 :
Fig. 1: Structural Types of Settlement Names Referring to the Natural Environment in the Early Old Hungarian Era
Because only a small amount of data is available in connection with this name type until the end of the 12 th century, the data in these structural types is also scarce in these early times; however, single-component names without a formant are already dominant here (e. g.