Nyelvtudományi Közlemények 109. kötet (2013)
Tanulmányok - Rácz, Anita: Ethnic groups and settlement names in Hungary 255
258 RÁcz, Anita name-formant elements, as is done in the work of of István Kniezsa and Géza Bérezi. Nonetheless the chronology they establish is the same as stated by the researchers given above. The final date for the development of this type of name is considered by all of these researchers to be no later than the 13* century. Gyula Kristó, by contrast, states that the earliest formation of place names characterized by this structural pattern can be dated back to turn of the 10th— 11th centuries, and may have occurred up until the end of the 14th century (Kristó 1976: 59, 61, see also L. Kiss 1997: 180). The examination of the chronological particuliarities of the place names which 1 collected, based on a much larger sample compared to those of previous studies, seems to confirm the arguments cited above and the analyses proposed by Gyula Kristó and Lajos Kiss. The early period is in general is poorly documented and the database contains a relatively insignificant number of names: from the 11th century just 10 citable items of data, and from the 12th century only 16 names. Naturally, this may be attributable to record-keeping practices which had not yet been fully established and, in consequence, the scant number of surviving documents, as well as the „newness” of the foundation of permanent settlements. The number of settlement names based on ethnonyms without nameformant elements is seems to jump significantly at the beginning of the 13th century, and this naming method most clearly in evidence during the second half of this century, and is also well-represented during the first half of the 14th century, but there is no question of it disappearing during the historical period following that currently under scrutiny. Metonymic name formation is present throughout, but as we move forward in time, it may be possible to state that it plays a less important part in the creation of new names. For the vast majority of name forms representing this name type (63%), the earliest name form is synonymous with any possible variant names of the settlement. In other words, on the basis of the available documentary evidence only a small proportion of structural type variations have been discerned, the names in question rather retaining their primary formations. Amongst the secondary formations the following structural type is represented in large numbers: affixed initial name element + ethnonym-based main element without name formants. For these acts of naming the vast majority are characterized by complementation through suffixation, which is explainable for onomastic systemic reasons as a common phenomenon. In my opinion the following conclusion is supported by the name data: the type of names formed by affix + ethnonym without name formant came into being with a slight chronological „phase delay” in comparison with the structure ethnonym without name formant. The former started to appear in writing when the latter forms were still in use and the chosen modes of complementation were influenced by the desire to reflect extralinguistic factors from the environment.
