Northern “Mosaic”: Territorial Identity in Toponyms of Northern Cities in Ural Federal District

This article explores the features of territorial identity as reflected in the urban toponyms of northern cities in the Ural Federal District. The aim of the study is to assess the current state of the urban onomastic corpus in terms of conveying local authenticity and to outline prospects for its development. The linguistic material consists of urbanonyms from Khanty-Mansiysk, Urai, Salekhard, and Novy Urengoy, which are introduced into academic discourse for the first time. The research employs onomasiological analysis (identifying nomination motives and nominative themes), classification, and linguistic-cultural commentary. Groups of toponyms are described that verbalize nominative themes related to the foundational concepts of territorial identity — TERRITORY and CULTURE. Among the names associated with the concept of TERRITORY, those reflecting regional natural-geographical and natural-historical features are identified. Within the toponyms linked to the concept of CULTURE, names associated with social history and socio-cultural realities are established. It is noted that the embodiment of the concept CULTURE extensively verbalizes geological and industrial themes of nomination, alongside a consistent trend towards nominative commemoration. Based on identified semantic gaps, an informational reserve for creating new urban toponyms is determined. The potential for utilizing underexplored themes in science, art, sports, and the spiritual culture of indigenous peoples of the North for urban onomastic nomination is highlighted.

1. Banini, T. (2017). Proposing a theoretical framework for local territorial identities: concepts, questions and pitfalls. Territorial Identity and Development, 2 (2): 16—23.

2. Capello, R. (2018). Interpreting and understanding territorial identity. Regional Science Policy & Practice, 11 (1): 141—159. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/rsp3.12166.

3. Chaiko, T. N. (1976). Borrowed geographical terms in Russian old — fashioned dialects along the lower reaches of the Irtysh. In: Questions of onomastics, 11: Russian onomastics and its interaction with appellative vocabulary. Sverdlovsk: Ural Publishing House. Unita. 117—128. (In Russ.).

4. Golomidova, M. V. (2022). Urban toponyms in the aspect of regional identity translation: the case of the city of Ufa. Questions of onomastics, 19 (1): 160—179. DOI: 10.15826/vopr_onom.2022.19.1.008. (In Russ.).

5. Golomidova, M. V., Dmitrieva, A. V. (2023). Urbanonyms and translation of regional identity. In: Urban toponymy: modern naming policy and practice: monograph. Yekaterinburg: Ural Publishing House.Unita. 55—102. ISBN 978-5-7996-3753-8. (In Russ.).

6. Golovneva, E. V. (2013). Regional identity as a form of collective identity and its structure. Labyrinth. Journal of Social and Humanitarian Studies, 5: 42—50. (In Russ.).

7. Golovneva, E. V. (2018). The construction of regional identity in modern culture (based on the material of the Siberian region). Author’s abstract of Doct. Diss. Yekaterinburg. 38 p. (In Russ.).

8. Kuznetsova, A. V., Petrulevich, T. A. (2021). Semiosis of toponymy in the space of urban identity. Humanities and social Sciences, 6 (89): 72—78. DOI: 10.18522/2070-1403- 2021-89-6-72-78. (In Russ.).

9. Lysova, O. Y. (2022). The inner form of the word in Russian linguistics of the XX—XXI centuries: a review of the formation and use of the term. Philological sciences. Questions of theory and practice, 15 (9): 2870—2876. DOI: https://doi.org/10.30853/ phil20220489. (In Russ.).

10. Makshantseva, N. V. (2017). The inner form of the word-representative of the concept as a translator of cultural meaning. Successes of modern science and education, 3 (1): 7—9. (In Russ.).

11. Nazukina, M. V. (2011). Structural levels of regional identity in modern Russia. Regionology, 4: 13—19. (In Russ.).

12. Podolskaya, N. V. (1988). Dictionary of Russian onomastic terminology. Moscow: Nauka. 192 p. (In Russ.).

13. Roca, Z., Roca, M. N. O. (2007). Affirmation of territorial identity: A development policy issue. Land Use Policy, 24: 434—442. DOI: 10.1016/j.landusepol.2006.05.007.

14. Sagitova, A. F. (2008). Internal form as a result of cognitive-evaluative human activity (“Flora”, “Fauna”). Author’s abstract of PhD Diss. Ufa. 24 p. (In Russ.).

15. Smirnyagin, L. V. (2007). On regional identity. In: Space and time in world politics and international relations: materials of the 4th RAMI Convention. In 10 volumes, 2: Identity and Sovereignty: new approaches to understanding concepts. Moscow: MGIMO University. 81—107. ISBN 5922802968. (In Russ.).

16. Sokolova, T. P. (2022). Commodification of the toponymy of modern Moscow in a sociolinguistic aspect. Sociolinguistics, 3 (11): 9—26. DOI: 10.37892/2713-2951-3-11-9- 26. (In Russ.).

17. Verkhovsky, I. A. (2019). “One’s own and another’s”: the regional identity of Yugra (based on the materials of sociological research). In: History, languages and culture of the Northern peoples: Materials of the All-Russian scientific and practical conference XVII Yugra Readings, dedicated to the 90th anniversary of the birth of Doctor of Philology Evdokia Ivanovna Rombandeeva. Khanty-Mansiysk, April 24, 2018. Khanty-Mansiysk: LLC “Printing world of Khanty-Mansiysk”. 264—273. (In Russ.).

18. Yartseva, V. N. (ed.). (2002). Linguistic encyclopedic dictionary. Moscow: The Great Russian Encyclopedia. 754 p. ISBN 5-85270-239-0. (In Russ.).

19. Yue Qu. (2021). Spatial image as a carrier of geocultural and linguocultural information (based on the material of the educational toponymic database “Moscow toponymy”). Questions of psycholinguistics, 1 (47): 148—159. DOI: 10.30982/2077-5911-2021-47-1- 148-159. (In Russ.).

20. Zamyatin, D. N. (2011). Identity and territory: humanitarian and geographical approaches and discourses. In: Identity as a subject of political analysis. Moscow: IMEMO RAS. 186—203. ISBN 978-5-9535-02-90-0. (In Russ.).