{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.027284681130834976, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01413543721236029, 'mean_word_length': 4.90873786407767, '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}}
A short note on place-names in Surtsey

HISTORY AND METHODS In general, place-names are seen as an important part of a nation ́s heritage and as vital sources about the past. They are often been referred to as such, for example by historians and archaeologists as they can contain information (although sometimes fragmented) about bygone landscapes, landuse patterns, settlement history and environmental change, to name a few examples. Conventional place-name research has been criticized for relying excessively on „the collection and description of data (see e.g. Alderman 2008, 198), ignoring the social processes behind them“ and even for being one of the driest specialist branches of linguistics (Levinson 2008, 256). However, recent advances in the field, especially within cultural geography, have brought to light the more problematic and political sides of place-names and naming processes. Much of this new research has focused on how government elites have manipulated placenames to strengthen national identity – sometimes undermining indigenous histories. Scholars have started to view landscapes as “documents of power”, rather than as mere reflections of culture (Alderman 2008, pp. 196-198). Thus space (seen as a socially produced phenomenon) is viewed as a medium rather than a container for action (Tilley 1998, p. 10). This relates directly to the act of naming, as „names act so as to transform the sheerly physical and geographical into something that is historically and socially experienced... . In a fundamental way names create landscapes.“ (Tilley 1998, 18-19) The aim of this project is to investigate the dynamics of place-names and how people inscribe INTRODUCTION In the summer of 2019 the author joined a field team of biologists on Surtsey with the aim of conducting a survey of place-names on the island. This was the first comprehensive survey of this kind on Surtsey.1 From the beginning, Surtsey has been the focus of nature-driven perspectives as a scientific oasis for geological, biological and ecological research, a place to study the formation of a new landmass, erosion and the colonization and progress of flora and fauna. One species has been more or less left out on purpose in this process, namely humans. The island nevertheless offers a rare opportunity to study interactions between man and nature and human aspects of colonization and place-making processes from the beginning of the island’s existence. The act of naming can be seen as an important indicator of these processes. Often the study of place-names involves interpreting old names which may have lost their original context, appearance or meaning. Surtsey offers the rare opportunity to investigate an assemblage of names from the beginning of its history: the processes by which names appeared as people set foot on the island and started to make the landscape familiar through using names can be identified, as well as the motivations behind them – and how and why some of them survive while others have already disappeared.