Urbanonymy in the national-cultural aspect: Philosophical approach
PDF

Keywords

the city’s onym space
the linguistic-cultural aspect of onomastics (name-study)
the value-conceptual concept of urbanonyms
national components of social linguistics

How to Cite

Radchenko, O., Ilchenko, I., & Luhova , D. (2024). Urbanonymy in the national-cultural aspect: Philosophical approach. Philosophy and Governance, (1), 28–35. https://doi.org/10.70651/3041-248X/2024.1.04

Abstract

The urbanonymic space in the world’s countries, as well as the toponymic space as a whole, is in constant development, renewal, and improvement, acquiring a new historical and cultural essence and reflecting universal and national values. Proper names of city objects appeared both recently and several hundred years ago and currently have a wide meaning for expressing the city’s cultural component. Investigating them makes it possible, in turn, to restore linguistic and folk-historical facts significantly. After all, the names of streets, alleys, avenues, boulevards, etc. have not only a special significance in the city’s geography, but also in its history, reflecting the national and cultural background of the settlement. In this regard, studying topographical names in the city is extremely relevant. In addition, the result of the research made it possible to establish that in order to create a thorough, comprehensive scientific work on the national and cultural aspects of urbanonymy, it is worth investigating separate urbanonymic spaces. They give a clear idea of the emergence, development and regularities of the functioning of the urbanonymic subsystem, which will allow determining its place in the city’s toponymic system. The purpose of the present research is to investigate the main directions and trends in studying the national issue of urbanonymy in the scientific literature, as well as to clarify linguists’ and historians’ viewpoints regarding certain practical national and cultural aspects of urbanonymy. The uniqueness of urbanonymy as the subject of the study and the purpose of the current academic work prompted the selection of the primary research method, description. It was applied to understand the theoretical fundamentals and modern guidelines for studying the city’s onym space. At different stages of the scientific work, the following methods have been applied: the etymological method for reconstructing the primary meaning of city names; the comparative-historical method to reveal the historical background of the nomination; the formant method, according to which certain word-forming tools are also used. In addition, methods of structural-semantic and component analysis were applied for inventory, systematization and classification of names, interpretation of their lexical-semantic, structural-derivative and functional-pragmatic features. According to the research results, the features of national and cultural aspects in urbanonymy were studied, and the viewpoint of scientists regarding the principles, components and place of objects of urbanonymy in the society’s social and cultural environment was clarified.

https://doi.org/10.70651/3041-248X/2024.1.04
PDF

References

Gnatiuk, O. (2018). The renaming of streets in post-revolutionary Ukraine: Regional strategies to construct a new national identity. Acta Universitatis Carolinae. Geographica. Univerzita Karlova, 53(2), 1–18. http://dx.doi.org/10.14712/23361980.2018.13

Macha, P. (2022). Urbanonyms in small settlements: terra incognita of (Czech) place name studies. Abstracts of the ICA, (5), 148. http://dx.doi.org/10.5194/ica-abs-5-148-2022

Vrbík, D., & Lábus, V. (2021). Crowdsourcing of Popular Toponyms: How to Collect and Preserve Toponyms in Spoken Use. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 10(5), 303. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi10050303

David, J., & Davidová Glogarova, J. (2021). President Václav Havel as an inspiration for Czech urbanonymy. Onomastica, (LXV), 255–269. http://dx.doi.org/10.17651/ONOMAST.65.1.15

Zenker, S., Braun, E., & Petersen, S. (2017). Branding the destination versus the place: The effects of brand complexity and identification for residents and visitors. Tourism Management, (58), 15–27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tourman.2016.10.008

Gnatiuk, O., & Melnychuk, A. (2022). Place names for sale: A place of Ukraine in the universe of toponymy commodification. Geographical review, 74(2), 141–158. https://doi.org/10.31577/geogrcas.2022.74.2.07

Zhang, H., &. Chan, B.H.-S. (2017). The shaping of a multilingual landscape by shop names: Tradition versus modernity. Language and Intercultural Communication, (17), 26–44. https://doi.org/10.1080/14708477.2017.1261674

Cooper, E.A., Spinei, M., & Varnajot, A. (2019). Countering ‘Arctification’: Dawson citys ‘Sourtoe Cocktail’. Journal of Tourism Futures, 6(1), 70–82. https://doi.org/10.1108/JTF-01-2019-0008

Marjavaara, R., Nilsson, R. O., & Müller, D. K. (2022). The Arctification of northern tourism: A longitudinal geographical analysis of firm names in Sweden. Polar Geography, (45), 119–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/1088937X.2022.2032449

Boisen, M., Terlouw, K., Groote, P., & Couwenberg, O. (2018). Reframing place promotion, place marketing, and place branding – moving beyond conceptual confusion. Cities, (80), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.08.021

Matthews, T., & Gadaloff, S. (2022). Public art for placemaking and urban renewal: Insights from three regional Australian cities. Cities, (127), 103747. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103747

Matthews, T., & Gadaloff, S. (2022). Public art for placemaking and urban renewal: Insights from three regional Australian cities. Cities, (127), 103747. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2022.103747

Bonakdar, A., & Audirac, I. (2020). City branding and the link to urban planning: theories, practices, and challenges. Journal of Planning Literature, (35), 147–160. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412219878879

Salzman, R. et al. (2018). Toward understanding creative placemaking in a socio-political context. City, Culture and Society, (13), 57–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ccs.2017.10.004

Redaelli, E. (2018). Creative placemaking and theories of art: Analysing a place-based NEA policy in Portland, OR. Cities, 72(Part B), 403–410. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2017.10.001

Wise, N., Özdemir, Ö. G., & Fillis, I. (2022). Creative entrepreneurship, urban transformation and the (Baltic) triangle model. Journal of Research in Marketing and Entrepreneurship, 24(2), 385–404. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRME-02-2021-0017

Wise, N., Đurkin Badurina, J., & Perić, M. (2021). Assessing residents’ perceptions of urban placemaking prior to hosting a major cultural event, International Journal of Event and Festival Management, 12(1), 51–69. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJEFM-04-2020-0020

Bitušíková, A. (2022). Transformations of place, memory and identity through urban place names in Banská Bystrica. Slovakia Hungarian Geographical Bulletin, 71(4), 401–417. https://doi.org/10.15201/hungeobull.71.4.6

Luigi, P., Saccoabc, S., Ghirardid, M. T., Trimarchi, M., & Sacco, P. L. et al. (2019). Two versions of heterotopia: The role of art practices in participative urban renewal processes. Cities, (89), 199–208. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2019.02.013

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Copyright (c) 2024 Olexandr Radchenko, Iryna Ilchenko, Daria Luhova