| Description: |
The topic of this report emerged during the process of compiling a new dictionary of Latvian given names, which targets a broad public and will include names currently used in contemporary Latvia. The report is intended to examine the methodologies used in the compilation of the dictionary – specific principles of data selection and the structure of entries, covering both the macro and microstructure of the new dictionary. To date, the only existing reference for Latvian given names is Klāvs Siliņš’s Latviešu personvārdu vārdnīca (Riga, 1990), which served as the starting point and primary etymological reference for the new dictionary. This was later juxtaposed with data from given name dictionaries of various languages and onomastics studies. Although infrequent, we encounter instances where a given name to be included in the new dictionary does not appear in Siliņš’s dictionary. Of the total 1,158 dictionary entries, slightly more than 7% are such cases. The report analyzes these names, exploring the reasons for their absence. One contributing factor is the divergent foundations of the dictionaries: the new dictionary also incorporates the most popular names among various ethnic minorities in Latvia (e.g., Daniils, Kirills Nataļja). More commonly, the reason could be the borrowing or distribution of the given name after the publication of K. Siliņš’s dictionary, adapting to the Latvian grammatical system (e.g., Anabella, Dilans, Ketlīna, Maikls, Mišela, Raiens). Additionally, several given names of Latvian origin not mentioned in Siliņš’s dictionary (e.g., Ārvalda, Guntris, Magone) are also included. ; Non peer reviewed |