The study provides an outline of the most important results of personal name research in Hungary. Its main objective is to assist colleagues who have no information about research projects in Hungary because to date they have hardly been dealt with in summaries published in the main world languages (English, German, and French).

The oldest forms of the place-name Leipzig, i.e. Libzi, Libiz vel sim., are now generally assumed to be Slavic, i.e. Old Sorabian derivatives of an older river-name, probably of Germanic origin. At the basis of this river-name is thought to be an enlarged root PIE *lei̯‑bh‑ ‘to flow, drip’. As the concept of root enlargement is somewhat problematic and should thus better be abandoned, it is claimed here – based on a recently published idea for the etymologization of the name of the river Elbe – that this assumed Germanic river-name is a derivative of an unenlarged root with the suffix PIE *‑bho‑. This suffix was used to form colour adjectives on the one hand and action nouns vel sim. on the other. Theoretical proto-forms of the river-name are PIE *h2lei̯H‑bho‑ or *h2liH‑bho‑ ‘making/being dirty/filthy’, PIE *lei̯H‑bho‑ or *liH‑bho‑ ‘nestling up against, winding itself’, PIE *lei̯H‑bho‑ or *liH‑bho‑ ‘pouring out’ (→ ‘flowing’?), PIE *lei̯h2‑bho‑ or *lih2‑bho‑ ‘dwindling, disappearing’, PIE *(s)lei̯H‑bho‑ or *(s)liH‑bho‑ ‘blue(ish)’, and PIE *(s)lei̯‑bho‑ ‘slippery, slimy’. A further theoretical possibility is the reconstruction as PIE *lei̯p-o‑ ‘sticky’ vel sim. (> ‘muddy’?). And finally, a reconstruction seems possible regarding the whole name not as a derivative, but as a compound with PIE *‑h2p-o‑ (the zero-grade of PIE *h2ep- ‘water’) as the second member. In this case, the same roots which form the bases of the derivatives are used as the first members of these compounds. All proposals show semantics acceptable for the formation of river-names. Thus no final decision between these proposals is possible.

To date, toponomastic surveys in the German speech area were mainly etymological. Now, a recently engineered prototype of a cartographic programme provides new possibilities for analyzing settlement names in Germany to follow morphological, phonological, and graphematical questions. This paper aims at illustrating the benefit of this programme by the example of settlement names with differing addendums. They can be written with hyphen (e. g., Groß-Zimmern), with space (Groß Grönau), or in compound spelling (Großopitz). Unexpectedly clear regional preferences for these types of spelling appeared: Settlement names with space are found in Northern Germany, whereas the compound spelling is preferentially used in the South. In Hessen and Rheinhessen, the writing with hyphen is predominant. These conventions of spelling must have developed during the last 200 years.

This article is based on a speech delivered in Vienna on the occasion of Peter Wiesinger’s 75th birthday. It deals in four chapters with the current state of research on Upper German onomastics. Against the background of Peter Wiesinger’s extensive onomastic work, the article seeks on the one hand to evaluate onomastic basic research with its linguistic and interdisciplinary evaluation, and on the other hand attempts to promote the popularisation of what the world of scholarship knows today about place names.

Research on theonyms constitutes the onomastic component within theolinguistics, the universal science dealing with the communication about the divine. It is demonstrated in detail that god (Greek theos, Latin deus, German Gott) is both a nomen appellativum (theolexeme) as well as a nomen proprium (theo-onym). With the help of a checklist it is illustrated in which linguistic fields characteristics of theonyms compared to other types of names can be observed and where further research is needed. For example, etymology can reveal the naming motive of the theonyms Zeus, Iupiter and of the theolexemes theos, deus, Slavonic bog und English god / German Gott.

In den Namenkundlichen Informationen 99/100 stellen Harald Bichlmeier und Andreas Opfermann – nach harscher Kritik an den Deutungen des Flussnamens Unstrut von Jürgen Udolph und Albrecht Greule – einen eigenen Vorschlag zur Etymologie des Namens vor. Sie greifen auf die traditionelle Segmentierung Un-strut zurück, fassen auch -strut im traditionellen Sinne auf (bieten allerdings auch zwei abweichende Erklärungsmöglichkeiten an). Der Unterschied zur klassischen Deutung des Flussnamens besteht vor allem in der Erklärung des Vorderglieds un-. Sie schlagen vor, un- als „das schwundstufige Allomorph von uridg. *(h1)en ‘in’“ aufzufassen. So bestehe „nun die Möglichkeit, urgerm. *un-strōdV- als sog. entheos-Kompositum zu interpretieren.“ Als die wahrscheinlichste Deutung für Unstrut schlagen sie vor: ‘Sumpfgebiet an sich habend’ bzw. ‘[der Fluss,] in/an dem [= an dessen Ufer] Sumpfgebiet/Gebüsch ist’ (Bichlmeier / Opfermann 2011: 179). Die von Bichlmeier / Opfermann angenommene Bildungsweise mag, vom Indogermanischen her gesehen, formal möglich sein. Ob allerdings das Germanische, dem sie den Flussnamen zuordnen, die Möglichkeit zur Bildung sogenannter entheos-Komposita überhaupt (noch) hatte, scheint doch sehr fraglich zu sein. Die Verfasser führen mit ae. umbor ‘Kind’ ein singuläres Beispiel an, um eine solche grammatische Erscheinung im Germanischen nachzuweisen. Eindeutig ist das Beispiel meines Erachtens keineswegs.

The article deals with some selected compound surnames, the roots of which consist of -eis(en) ‘iron’. It provides a revealing insight into their morphology and etymology. The names in question are characteristically distributed in certain regions of Saxony and Bavaria. By metaphorically designating blacksmiths (occasionally even miners or peasants) they turn out to be obsolete dialect words or technical terms for various wrought-iron objects.

Mit beeindruckender Regelmäßigkeit – bei Vorhaben dieser Art heute durchaus nicht der Normalfall – sorgen die Herausgeber des „Deutschen Familiennamenatlas“ (DFA) für die konsequente Realisierung ihres onomastischen Großprojekts und – nicht weniger bedeutsam – die Erweiterung ihres Mitarbeiterstabs durch systematische Förderung, Qualifizierung und Einbeziehung junger Wissenschaftler. Der im Abstand von einem Jahr nach den beiden Grammatik-Bänden (Graphematik und Phonologie der Familiennamen: Vokalismus, Konsonantismus) erschienene dritte Band des DFA ist der Morphologie der Familiennamen gewidmet, mithin einer Thematik, wie sie in dieser Gründlichkeit, Differenziertheit und Vielschichtigkeit bisher noch nie behandelt worden ist.

In this article the Nienburg fragment from about 1180 is under linguistic scrutiny. The three eastern provinciae of the Nienburg Monastery situated in the historical eastern Lusatia are differentiated with help of linguistic methods according to particular paragraphs of the document. Special attention is given to some toponyms which could not have been attributed to definite places yet. It is presented a proposal to associate the place names to still existing geographical objects. Furthermore some geographical names are discussed and interpreted in a new way in contrast to former explanations. Thus characteristic feature of the Nienburg fragment becomes obvious: The Latin written document has preserved the Slavonic proper names in a graphic variant very closely to their original forms without reduction or any other influence of the German language on it.

The article gives a review about perceptional processes of proper names and its results after decades of exploration in the field of Sorbian-German contacts in everyday speech in the Middle ages. The toponymic material belongs to the region between the rivers Saale and Elbe in the West and the rivers Queis, Bober, Oder in the East of the considered regions. Phenomena recognized of systematical evidence are described in detail, i. e. phonematical, graphematical, morphematical, lexical, and semantical facts are performed. Phases of onymic integration, transsumption and transposition are exemplified. The process of integration is illustrated by variants of onyms as well as by processes of adaptation. Special attention is mentioned to the borrowing events of German place names in Sorbian language since the Middle ages.