Differential mode: manifestation in toponymics

Abstract

We consider toponyms that are related to the same appellative or ascend to the same anthroponym or to the same family anthropolexem. We prove that this kind of nomination of toponyms contradicts its main purpose – to name single objects and creates interference at the level of communication. We substantiate the opposition-based numerical and opposing ways of forming toponyms. We establish that these methods should not be considered homogeneous, since they involve various kinds of auxiliary means of individualization and differentiation. Numerical differentiation generates a differential opposition, which serves to distinguish two topolexemes and is formed by adding to each of the opposed toponyms an additional attribute in the form of ordinal numbers. In this case, its mean the creation of so-called equipollent (equivalent) opposition. Similar is noted in many toponymic systems of the world (especially in urbanonyms). The opposing way of nominating settlements is based on a binary opposition – in the structure of oikonyms, antonymic pairs such as Big – Small, Old – New are present as differentiators. Kazakh toponyms and toponyms of the Tambov region are used as illustrative material.