Some Reflections on the Relation Between Toponymy and Geography

Some reflections on the relation between toponymy and geography Joan TORT-DONADA 1. Introduction I shall base my reflections here on two basic premises: a) that place names, or toponyms, have by definition a geographical scope and meaning (in the sense that, necessarily, they refer or have referred to a part of the physical space that surrounds us); and b) that if place names are the object of study of toponymy, and the space that surrounds is geography’s essential raison d’être, there must necessarily be a significant relationship between one discipline and the other (and, therefore, an undeniable interest for the scholar). The adoption of these two premises does not imply that place names, or toponyms, cannot be considered from other perspectives of analysis. Yet, what it does imply is that the specific starting point of our study is, explicitly, a willingness to explore our understanding of the geographical dimension of toponymy. Following on from this introduction, I shall organise this study around five main points and a concluding note. I begin with some general considerations about toponymy and geography, and a discus- sion of the affinities between the two fields. Then, I tackle a theoretical aspect that I believe should be taken into careful consideration in the analysis of place names: the relation between the toponym and place. I then deal with a problem that is very closely linked to this: the difficulty of defining the toponym (or place name). From here, I go on to examine the tools offered by geography, as a field espe- cially concerned with the study of space (and, in particular, with the study of the inhabited space), for undertaking research in toponymy; specifically, I examine three methodological principles which, I believe, allow us to examine in-depth the relation between names and the territory: the principle of transparency, that of exceptionality and finally territorial significance. Finally, in the last section – before the conclusion – I examine another theoretical aspect that offers, Onoma 45 (2010), 253-276. doi: 10.2143/ONO.45.0.2182826. © Onoma. All rights reserved. 995191_ONOMA_45_13.indd5191_ONOMA_45_13.indd 253253 229/11/129/11/12 114:524:52 254 JOAN TORT-DONADA I believe, interesting possibilities for future research: the idea of the toponym as a “geographical metaphor”. 2. Toponymy and geography. A preliminary idea 2.1. Toponymy – a discipline of convergence Toponymy, the branch of onomastics concerned with the study of toponyms, has been considered by most scholars as a discipline of convergence (or of “synthesis”), i.e., as a discipline concerned with a multiplicity and variety of knowledge and which, therefore, can be approached from many different perspectives. It could, in practice, be said that toponymy involves a considerable number of fields of understanding, but fields that do not stand in juxtaposition but which rather are interrelated. From this perspective, I believe that it genuinely responds to the profile of knowledge that Edgar Morin, in one of his recent works (Morin 2001), identifies as interdisciplinary: i.e., one which overlaps with other fields without becoming blurred; which forms relations on the basis of reciprocity, ruling out a simple hierar- chical relationship. By virtue of its interdisciplinary nature, the relationship that is established between toponymy and the rich diversity of subjects that converge in its study is not so much one of competi- tion but rather of instrumental cooperation. In general, scholars have referred to the interdisciplinary nature of toponymy in a variety of ways. Some have emphasised the subjects that find themselves most closely interrelated in the discipline, while others have stressed the importance for toponymy of adopting a given analytical approach. Jean Poirier, for example, speaks of the three main blocks of “auxiliary sciences of toponymy” which are, according to his criteria, history, geography and linguistics – and, within linguistics, dialectology and phonetics (Poirier 1965). Dauzat, by contrast, stresses above all the psychological and sociological aspects of toponymy; in particular, when pointing out that “this science [toponymy] constitutes from the outset a wonderful chapter in social psychology. By showing us how the towns and villages, land holdings and fields, rivers and mountains have, through the ages and in different contexts, been named, we obtain a better understanding of the popular spirit, its mystical and realistic tendencies, its means of expression” (Dauzat 1971, 9). Elsewhere, using arguments founded in the 995191_ONOMA_45_13.indd5191_ONOMA_45_13.indd 254254 229/11/129/11/12 114:524:52 THE RELATION BETWEEN TOPONYMY AND GEOGRAPHY 255 actual nature of the discipline, Querol defends the need for open epis- temological attitudes. Because, he argues, “toponymy studies a field that contains so much information that there could well be an infinite number of ways of recovering it; and none of them should rule out the others; in this way, the door is left open to possibilities that from various points of view nobody might ever have thought of proposing” (Querol 1995, 65). I shall complete this initial reflection with the arguments pre- sented by Henri Dorion in support of the interdisciplinary nature of toponymy; arguments that at their heart adopt the need to insert toponymic research within the general coordinates of space and time (Dorion 1984, 103): “Let us first recall that toponymy, in common with many of the human sciences, is inscribed within the dual dimensions of space (the toponymic function) and time (the toponymic memory). Toponymy has, therefore, an essential relation with geography (place names being its basic vocabulary) and with history (to the extent that the names are witnesses over time to a given man-place relationship). The place name is a linguistic sign and, as such, is of interest in semiology; it is the expression of the perception of a behaviour that involves psychology, above all social psychology. Finally, the morphological and semantic analysis of the name, both its origin and subsequent evolu- tion, are the concern of linguistics and psycholinguistics, while the synthetic and synoptic analysis of large sets of names is the job of sociolinguistics and this can lead to actual sociological studies.” 2.2. Geography, the science of the inhabited space If toponymy, as a discipline of convergence, is difficult to character- ize, the problem is exacerbated even further when we turn to geography. Not just because it too can be described as a discipline of convergence, but at the same time because, throughout its long existence – some authors (Vilà 1981) attribute geography with twenty-five cen- turies of history, it has undergone major changes in the way it has been understood, practised and explained. Monkhouse (1978, 13) expresses this idea very clearly: “The concept and scope of geography have undergone considerable change, and it is highly unlikely that any definition (of geography) 995191_ONOMA_45_13.indd5191_ONOMA_45_13.indd 255255 229/11/129/11/12 114:524:52 256 JOAN TORT-DONADA would satisfy everyone. Most are agreed that it comprises the study of the earth’s surface both in its areal differentiation and as the home of Man.” No one, today, can doubt that the difficulty of integrating the study of “physical phenomena” and “human (or cultural) phenomena” within one discipline has been geography’s greatest struggle throughout its history - a situation which, on the one hand, endows the geographical point of view with its undoubted originality; but which, by contrast, constitutes the basis of its weaknesses and insecurities in the face of other sciences. However, this difficulty, which some see as an insur- mountable obstacle, has been fully taken on board by others, who see it, as an interesting challenge of complexity to be tackled in the future (Morin 2001, 34-35). Within this line of thinking, considering geography as a “science of the inhabited space”, or in the words of Morin (2001, 35) as a “science of the Earth and of Man”, seems to offer a perspective that is rich in possibilities and creative stimuli – among other things, for tackling from this angle a concept such as the place name, which forms part of the physical, or spatial, dimension as well as the human or cultural one. Given that geography is a discipline concerned with the descrip- tion and study of places on earth, it should surprise no one that his- torically it has been interpreted as a basic attempt to “giver order” to things: in other words, capable of conceiving clearly, logically and in an organised manner the elements that make up the world, so as to be able to furnish coherent and satisfactory explanations. That is, in short, the sense that has been given to geography both by classical authors, such as Strabo (Roig 1980), as well as by a series of 19th century authors, including Humboldt and Ritter, who were responsible for the conceptual construction of modern geography (Ortega 1987; Capel 1981). Towards the end of the century, another key author, the French scholar Paul Vidal de la Blache, insisted on the same idea: order (in the sense of “essential logic”) as the foundation of the geographical discipline. According to Vidal, this is the only way for geography to overcome the simple state of being an enumerative knowledge to become a science in the full sense of the concept: “It will allow us to consider as indisputable, in principle, that geography has to be treated in education as a science and not as a simple nomenclature (…). If the subject is to be understood as 995191_ONOMA_45_13.indd5191_ONOMA_45_13.indd 256256 229/11/129/11/12 114:524:52 THE RELATION BETWEEN TOPONYMY AND GEOGRAPHY 257 a nomenclature (…), the best method will be that of rote learning.

Load more