Abstract

Article is devoted to finding out the motivational basis, reconstruction of reference connections, denotative features of an unofficial anthroponym Петръ Гоугнивыи available in the original and translated East Slavic written monuments (the Lavrenty chronicle, «Chronicle of George Amartol», «Old Slavonic Kormchaia of 14 titles» etc.). The anthroponym belongs to two people — Patriarch Peter ІІІ of Alexandria V century (Πέτρος Μογγός) and the «chronicle» Roman heresiarch ІХ century. It is assumed that Peter ІІІ got an unofficial name among the Monophysites during his lifetime. It is proved that the transition from the assessment of a person by physical disabilities to religious and ethical assessment, from the meaning ‛who has a hoarse, vague voice’ to the meaning ‛heretic’ reflected in the internal form of the unofficial proprial name Μογγός and its translation equivalent Гоугнивыи. The use of an informal anthroponym in written monuments after the thirteenth century has been traced in connection with reconstruction of denotative features of an unofficial anthroponym Петръ Гоугнивыи. A number of discussion issues were considered, including the origin of «Philosopher’s Speech», time of inclusion of the legend of Петръ Гоугнивыи in the chronicle, fact of existence of Pope ІХ century by name Петръ Гоугнивыи, ethnic roots of the heresiarch, etc. It was shown that Peter Huhnyvyy introduced into the Catholic faith a heretical teaching focused on pagan and Jewish dogmas. Denotation of second component in an unofficial name Петръ Гоугнивыи includes characteristics that appeared at rethinking the original semantics of Indo-European root *gou‑(n‑) and its continuants. Semantics of dissatisfaction, mockery, disrespect developed in East Slavic derivatives. The transition to cultural semantics has already taken place in a word-forming nest with a root ‑гоу(г)‑ at a time when the legend of Peter Huhnyvyy was included in the chronicle article * 988. The ethnocultural denotative components which are included in the content of the anthroponym Петръ Гоугнивыи, in its entirety coincide with the semantic structure of the word heretic. Combination of linguistic analysis with historical and cultural analysis, taking into account historical facts and information contained in apocryphal legends and scientific versions, gives reason to believe that the «chronicle» Peter Huhnyvyy was the real historical person.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.