Geographische Namen können als ‘verdichtete Erzählungen’ über das geographische Objekt, das sie bezeichnen, sowie über die namengebende Gemeinschaft betrachtet werden. In Richtung des Objekts gilt dies jedoch nur für deskriptive Namen, nicht für Gedenknamen wie Namen nach Personen oder Ereignissen oder für neutrale Namen wie Namen nach Blumen oder Tieren. Die Zuschreibung der Qualität ‘verdichteter Erzählungen’ beruht auf der Annahme, dass jeder Name mit Bedacht gewählt wurde und ein wesentliches oder auffallendes Merkmal eines Objekts hervorhebt. Allerdings kann dieses Merkmal heute nicht mehr so wichtig sein und ist die Bedeutung eines Namens auch nicht immer transparent, weil Namen oft aus früheren Sprachen oder älteren Schichten einer heute an einem Ort gesprochenen Sprache stammen. Für die heutige Geographie ist dieser Aspekt geographischer Namen deshalb besonders interessant, weil ihr heute vorherrschender konstruktivistischer Ansatz die menschliche Wahrnehmung der Umwelt, des geographischen Raumes und geographischer Objekte in den Mittelpunkt stellt und dafür geographische Namen eine wichtige Informationsquelle besonders über heute nicht mehr existierende Gesellschaften und ältere Schichten der Kulturlandschaft sind. Der Artikel illustriert diesen Gedanken anhand von Beispielen aus Mitteleuropa und dem adriatischen Raum.

L’être filial vit l’aban/don, bloqué dans l’avoir qui fixe le Moi, et l’échange malmène la Différence de génération et de sexe. La menace pèse sur la filiation en hyper/modernité, et la cruauté pulsionnelle d’appropriation dé/filialise le nom propre. L’infans est paradoxal et appelle la culture comme nature, il affronte la violence de celui qui donne sous couvert de gratuité, par l’acte de nomination. Dans la chose donnée, Mauss dégage un tiers, un autre, et Derrida déconstruit ce qui assimile le don à l’échange. Le don est engagement responsable et non pas sacrifice ni oblation douteuse, reçu, approuvé du legs des générations précédentes, et transmis par une mémoire trans/générationnelle. Lacan sépare le sujet du leurre du Moi, et valorise l’imaginaire retrouvé dans le rêve, reflet de ce que le sujet aurait accumulé d’angoisses et d’espérances, déguisées personnages et objets d’amour ou de haine auxquels les affects s’attachent. Ils font son symptôme, jouissance et symbole. La fiction, vérité du sujet-en-dette, identité mouvante, n’est pas reconnue tant qu’il vit le drame du narcissisme. Interpréter ce qui m’arrive, ouvre à la parole, à l’amour dans la défaite du désir et dans la distance, quand la vérité d’un par/don, redoublement du don premier, sur/vient. Le sujet retrouve le style qui préserve la promesse, qui seule, attire. Le Négatif (l’excès, la sur/prise, la mort d’autrui, l’Absent) fonde-t-il une anthropologie du don ? Le traduire en récit, est Vie : le symptôme, chair du sujet, répond à la Voix qui résonne dans le temps de l’histoire et qui le convoque : « Me voici ». / The filial being is captured by the ego’s possessiveness and left to its own devices. The Difference in generation and sex is exposed to exchange. In hyper-modern times, filiation is threatened and the drive of appropriation dis/owns the proper noun. The infans is paradoxical and naturally turns to culture for help. He faces the violence of those who donate, under cover of gratuitousness, via the act of naming. Mauss speaks of “another other” involved in giving and Derrida deconstructs the notion that assimilates donation to exchange. Giving is a responsible commitment. It is neither a sacrifice nor a suspicious oblation, but that which is received and approved from the legacy of former generations, and transmitted by Memory across the generations. Lacan separates the subject from the deceptive ego and enhances the value of dreams, reflecting accumulated fears and hopes in the guise of characters, objects of love or hate, to which the subject is attached. They are his symptom, jouissance and symbol. Fiction, the truth of the in/debted subject, an identity that is far from static, is unrecognized as long as he is trapped by narcissism. Interpreting what befalls us opens us up to the word, to love, as desire fails and distance sets in. Then and only then, for/giving, a new form of the first gift, a/rises unexpectedly, and the subject can find the style that preserves the promise which, alone, attracts. Does the Negative (excess, surprise, the other’s death, the Absent) set the cornerstone of an anthropology of giving? Trans/lating, or re/telling is Life. The Voice echoing in the temporality of history, calls the symptom, or the flesh of the subject, and it answers: “Here I am.”

The aim of this thesis is to examine and elucidate the introduction of new first names and the patterns of name giving from a social perspective based on material from baptismal registers. The region I have chosen to examine is Skellefteå and its surroundings 1791-1890. The point of departure is that the name giving may be considered a symbolic indication of the division between "us" and "them", based on constantly changing taste. During the period under examination, 1791-1890, 71 149 first names occur and 582 of which has been defined as new, i.e. first names that, as far as I know, did not exist in the area before the first example. Seen as the percentage of names occurring within different social groups the largest portion of new first names is introduced by the bourgeoisie and the smallest by the agrarian group. The new first names have been categorised as either a name choice or a name formation, with the former category containing more names than the latter. As regards categories of new names the bourgeoisie predominantly utilize name choice while for the agrarian group name formation predominates. The new pattern of name giving I have examined is the polyname system, which expands from the 18th Century onwards. The custom first grows in the name giving of girls, especially if born into the bourgeoisie. This social group also introduces the custom for the boys. When the custom of giving two names becomes too common in the region the bourgeoisie returns increasingly to one first name for the children, or to three or four names for each child. As regards the order of the new or old names, for boys the old name is generally placed first, especially among the agrarian group, if the two names are even in other respects e.g. have the same number of syllables. Once a new first name has been introduced it has to spread to survive. Of the 582 new names 422 spread and 160 do not. To examine the initial diffusion process from both a social and a geographical perspective 23 names have been chosen as representatives of different patterns of diffusion. The diffusion is described in terms of influence spreading from district to district or influence in the immediate surroundings. These two geographical aspects have been treated from a social perspective, in terms of a heterogeneous or homogenous social diffusion respectively. / digitalisering@umu