RELIGIOUS ANTHROPONYMS IN RUSSIAN AND UZBEK NAMING SYSTEMS
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.17605/Keywords:
Religious anthroponyms, Russian anthroponymy, Uzbek anthroponymy, onomastics, linguistic identity, Islamization, Christianization, personal names, cultural memory.Abstract
This article examines religious anthroponyms in Russian and Uzbek as a historically layered segment of the personal naming system where confession, cultural memory, and language contact converge. The study is based on a contrastive qualitative analysis of Russian Orthodox, biblical, saint based, and dual medieval names, together with Uzbek Islamic, theophoric, calendrical, and honorific personal names. The material shows that Russian naming developed through the long interaction of pre Christian Slavic and canonical Christian forms, whereas Uzbek naming preserved a more visibly productive system of Islamic and older theonymic elements. The comparison reveals asymmetry in transparency. In Russian, the religious source is often canonically inherited but semantically opaque in present usage, while in Uzbek the religious marker frequently remains morphologically salient through components such as alloh, din, islom, xudo, and tangri. The article argues that religious anthroponyms in the two traditions perform not only identificatory but also mnemonic, symbolic, and status marking functions, and that their comparative study clarifies how naming systems encode conversion, adaptation, and continuity.
References
1.Arboleda-Guirao I. J. Religious connotations in Spanish and English forenames: A contrastive study //Religions. – 2020. – Т. 11. – №. 12. – С. 674.
2.Budennaya E. V. et al. Name Variation in Old Russian: Main Cases and Possible Interpretations //Slověne= Словѣне. International Journal of Slavic Studies. – 2024. – Т. 12. – №. 2. – С. 19-46.
3.Gʻoyibov U. A. The Linguocultural Peculiarities of Anthroponyms in the Phraseological Layer of English and Uzbek Languages. Current Approaches and New Research in Modern Sciences, 2024.
4.Güzelderen B., Yeşildal Ü. Y., Düzgün F. Factors Influencing the Choice of a Child’s Name and Its Relationship with the Religiosity of Interfaith Marriages: Orthodox (Slavic) and Muslim (Turkish) //Religions. – 2023. – Т. 14. – №. 11. – С. 1424.
5.Hogg R.M., Blake N.F., Romaine S., Lass R. The Cambridge history of the English language. – Cambridge University Press, 1992. – Т. 1.
6.Koziyeva I. Research of anthroponymy of the Uzbek language //E3S Web of Conferences. – EDP Sciences, 2024. – Т. 538. – С. 05019.7.Litvina A., Uspenskij F. Russo-Polovtsian Dynastic Contacts as Reflected in Genealogy and Onomastics //The Silk Road. – 2014. – Т. 12. – С. 65-75.
8.Matthews E. (ed.). Old and new worlds in Greek onomastics. – Liverpool University Press, 2007.
9. Melibayeva S. A. The Influence of Islam on Uzbek Anthroponymy //Central Asian Journal of Literature, Philosophy and Culture. – 2026. – Т. 7. – №. 1. – С. 194-198.
10. Obojska M. What’s in a name? Identity, indexicality and name-change in an immigrant context //European Journal of Applied Linguistics. – 2020. – Т. 8. – №. 2. – С. 333-353.
11. Sobirovich S. A. Robust Uzbek Asr AND Tts for Dialectal AND Noisy Settings //American Journal of Research in Humanities and Social Sciences. – 2025. – Т. 40. – С. 1-4.
