ON THE ISSUE OF THE ETYMOLOGY OF THE OIKONYMS RUTUL AND MYKHAD

Abstract

The objective of the article is to investigate the etymology of the oiconyms Rutul and Mykhad, being used to name one and the same Rutul settlement. A question of the legitimacy of differentiating toponyms into exoethnonyms (alloethnonyms) and endoethnonyms (autoethnonyms) is raised. Previously proposed attempts, as well as the errors and contradictions in researchers’ conclusions in etymologizing of the oikonyms mentioned above, are critically reviewed. Examples of the practice of interpreting endo- and exoethnonyms in the toponymy of some Dagestani languages are considered. The novelty of the study consists in the attempt, proposed for the first time in Dagestani studies, to etymologize the investigated endo- and exooiconyms as well as their appropriate endo- and exoethnonyms by using a set of purely linguistic and cultural criteria alongside with the accepted tradition in naming toponyms as well as the natural and geographical characteristics of the location of the settlement. The parallel functioning of the exoiconym Rutul and the endoiconym Mykhaid, and, accordingly, the exoethnonym Rutultsy and the endoethnonym Mykhair indicate different sources, as well as the principles of their appearance. The relevant basic principles can be divided into historical, linguistic, national cultural and geographical ones.