UDC

[811.512.111+811.161.1]:[398.61+373.23]

DOI

10.37482/2687-1505-V477

Authors

Olga A. Dimitrieva^1* –  Cand. Sci. (Philol.), Assoc. Prof., Assoc. Prof. at the Department of Russian and Chuvash Philology and Cultural Studies
Tatyana V. Denisova² –  Cand. Sci. (Philol.), Assoc. Prof., Head of the Department of Russian and Chuvash Philology and Cultural Studies
^{1, 2}Chuvash I. Yakovlev State Pedagogical University, Cheboksary, Russia
¹e-mail: olgaal_79@mail.ru*, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2734-640X
²e-mail: tatyana.docka@yandex.ru, ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0626-5371

Abstract

The riddle is a kind of a world model and a way of representing the mentality of a people. Identifying the role of anthroponyms in the structure of a riddle is important for the interpretation of objects of the surrounding reality. Thus, while in a proverb an anthroponym is a social type, in a riddle with a proper name denoting a somatism, the described object that is located in the zone of the “alien” moves into the area of the familiar and becomes knowable. This article aimed to study anthroponyms in Russian and Chuvash riddles. The focus was on riddles constructed according to the anthroponym = somatism model. The main methods included continuous sampling (from collections of Russian and Chuvash riddles) as well as comparative (to determine typological similarities and differences in the use of names in Russian and Chuvash folklore) and linguocultural (to analyse the data of the “language of culture” obtained) methods. The novelty of the research lies in studying anthroponyms as codifiers of cultural information in a national riddle. The authors note that parts of the human body in riddles are ambivalent: they can be presented as an inanimate or as an animate (human or animal) object. It is emphasized that a person is perceived as a single entity, and body parts are conceptualized through terms of kinship. Most Chuvash riddles with an anthroponym (“Alikhman”, “Alistar”, “Altakkim”, etc.) present a figurative interpretation of hands (ala), which includes a number to indicate the quantity and a language game (the initial letters of real and fictional Chuvash names coincide with the answer). The majority of Russian examples focus on the tongue as an organ. It is concluded that in the anthroponym = somatism model, a human is viewed as a single entity, emphasis being placed on the function of a body part and on the person’s social role.

Keywords

linguoculture, national riddle, Russian riddle, Chuvash riddle, riddle about body parts, cultural code, somatism, quasi-anthroponyms

References

1. Fomin E.V. Chuvashskie antroponimy mariyskogo proiskhozhdeniya [Chuvash Anthroponyms of Mari Origin]. Vestnik Chuvashskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta im. I.Ya. Yakovleva, 2019, no. 5, pp. 95–100. https://doi.org/10.26293/chgpu.2019.105.5.015
2. Fomin E.V., Ivanova A.M. Chuvashskiy antroponimikon XVIII veka: inaya kul’turnaya real’nost’ [Chuvash Anthroponyms of the 18th Century: A Different Cultural Reality]. Cheboksary, 2020. 140 p.
3. Taratina E.G., Avdeeva A.I. Zhenskie antroponimy v dorevolyutsionnoy Chuvashii [Female Anthroponyms in Chuvashia Before the Revolution]. Vestnik Omskogo gosudarstvennogo pedagogicheskogo universiteta. Gumanitarnye issledovaniya, 2015, no. 3, pp. 59–61.
4. Tsiv’yan T.V. Dom v fol’klornoy modeli mira (na materiale balkanskikh zagadok) [The Concept of Home in the Folklore World Model (as Reflected in the Riddles of the Balkan Peoples)]. Mal’ts A. (ed.). Semiotika kul’tury: Trudy po znakovym sistemam X [Semiotics of Culture: Sign Systems Studies X]. Tartu, 1978, pp. 65–85.
5. Kovshova M.L. Teoreticheskie i leksikograficheskie aspekty issledovaniya antroponimov v sostave zagadok, poslovits i idiom [Theoretical and Lexicographical Aspects of Anthroponyms’ Studies in Riddles, Proverbs and Idioms]. Mir russkogo slova, 2021, no. 1, pp. 5–12. https://doi.org/10.24412/1811-1629-2021-1-5-12
6. Bochina T.G. S imenem Ivan, bez imeni – bolvan (o kontraste imen sobstvennykh v russkoy paremike) [With a Name – Ivan, Without a Name – a Blockhead (on Contrast of Proper Names in Russian Paroemias)]. Names and Phraseology. Skopјe, 2018, pp. 75–84 (in Russ.).
7. Romanov N.R. O chuvashskikh zagadkakh [On Chuvash Riddles]. Uchenye zapiski ChNII, 1962, no. 21, pp. 142–154.
8. Rodionov V.G. Chuvashskiy stikh: Problemy stanovleniya i razvitiya [Chuvash Verse: Problems of Formation and Development]. Cheboksary, 1992. 224 p.
9. Kalinina E.E. Tsvetovaya leksika v chuvashskikh zagadkakh [Color Vocabulary in Chuvash Riddles]. Russ. Linguist. Bull., 2021, no. 4, pp. 141–144.
10. Stepanova O.S. Sopostavitel’nyy analiz angliyskikh i chuvashskikh zagadok s chislitel’nym “chetyre” (lingvokul’turologicheskiy aspekt) [Comparative Analysis of English and Chuvash Riddles with the Numeral Four (Linguocultural Aspect)]. Yunost’ Bol’shoy Volgi [The Youth of the Great Volga]. Cheboksary, 2019, pp. 190–191.
11. Denisova T.V., Dimitrieva O.A. Anthroponyms and Somatisms in Russian and Chuvash Riddles: Intersections of Cultural Codes. Philol. Theory Pract., 2025, vol. 18, no. 6, pp. 2570–2576 (in Russ.). https://doi.org/10.30853/phil20250360
12. Bochina T.G. Chislovoy i tsvetovoy kod kak komponent tuvinskikh zagadok o cheloveke [Numerical and Color Code as an Element of Tuvan Riddles About Man]. New Res. Tuva, 2023, no. 3, pp. 6–20 (in Russ.). https://doi.org/10.25178/nit.2023.3.1
13. Kovshova M.L. Lingvokul’turologicheskiy analiz idiom, zagadok, poslovits i pogovorok: Antroponimicheskiy kod kul’tury [Linguocultural Analysis of Idioms, Riddles, Proverbs and Sayings: Anthroponymic Code of Culture]. Moscow, 2024. 400 p.
14. Orlova O.S. Evfemizmy i zagadki o rozhdenii i smerti v russkoy i angloyazychnoy kul’turakh: printsip nepryamoy nominatsii. Kognitivno-kul’turologicheskoe issledovanie [Euphemisms and Riddles About Birth and Death in Russian and English-Speaking Cultures: The Principle of Indirect Naming. A Cognitive Cultural Research]. Moscow, 2022. 240 p.
15. Fayzullina N.I. Lingvokognitivnaya model’ narodnoy zagadki: obrazno-strukturnyy aspekt (na materiale russkogo, tatarskogo i angliyskogo yazykov) [Linguocognitive Model of the Folk Riddle: A Figurative and Structural Aspect (Based on Russian, Tatar and English): Diss.]. Kazan, 2020. 339 p.
16. Nikolaeva T.M. Ot zvuka k tekstu [From Sound to Text]. Moscow, 2000. 680 p.
17. Abdrashitova M.O. Miromodeliruyushchaya funktsiya zhanra zagadki v fol’klornom diskurse [World-Modelling Function of the Genre of Riddle in Folklore Discourse: Diss.]. Tomsk, 2012. 182 p.
18. Dimitrieva O.A. Cultural Code in Scientific and Journalistic Dimension. Sci. Dialogue, 2025, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 9–30 (in Russ.). https://doi.org/10.24224/2227-1295-2025-14-1-9-30
19. Frolova O.E. Zhivoe i nezhivoe v zhanre zagadki [The Animate and the Inanimate in the Riddle Genre]. Russkaya rech’, 2013, no. 6, pp. 82–89.