{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02585034013605442, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0, 'mean_word_length': 5.06043956043956, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
The possible and the impossible in the diachronous oykonymy on the example of the Kyiv region

The example of the Kyiv region’s oykonyms illustrates the difficulties faced by the linguist in the study of the names of settlements. The problems that arise in the analysis of chronicle oykonyms are illustrated by the example of Pereyaslav. In formal terms, the oykonym Pereyaslavl’ is appropriate to be considered as a possessive of *-j(ь) on the first name Pereyaslav. The first component is motivated by the verb ‘to adopt’, the second is ‘a glory’, which is productive of composite names. Chronicle form ‘Russkiy Pereyaslavl’ gave rise to a version of the name transfer of Pereyaslavl’ from Bulgaria. The designation of Russkiy ‹ Rus performed a distinctive function with respect to other oykonyms, including the Bulgarian Preslav the Great. The coherence of the names of the new city with the Bulgarian Preslav does not prove the common origin of the oykonyms. For most archaic oykonyms, one can only speak of anthroponyms, without specifying a particular person. The settlement of Mutizhir, known from the chronicles, initially disappeared and was subsequently rebuilt and renamed: Motyzhir, Motyzhyn, Borisov and again Motyzhyn. The name Mutizhyr does not pass over the XII century, and the settlement of Motyzhyn is mentioned only at the end of the XV century. The chronicle anthroponym-composite Mutizhir could not be a motivator in the new conditions of the oykonyms formation. The name Motyzhyn has changed so much in comparison with the chronicle of primary sources that it became perceived as an independent possessive formation. Oykonimikon of XVII century allows one to define an etimon-anthroponym, often without specifying its carrier. For example, the oykonym Karapyszi is a specific Slavic plural form from the nickname Karapysz which is a derivative formation with dialectic implementation of the root morpheme, the initial base *tort-. Only certain names attract the written information about its owner and founder. It is correctly to include Dytyatky in the Kyiv region to such oykonyms. Keywords: oykonym, oykonym in chronicles, word-forming model, anthroponim, appellative, etymology.