Collective nouns denoting trees in the Scandinavian languages

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

University of Lodz

University of Gdansk

COLLECTIVE NOUNS DENOTING TREES IN THE SCANDINAVIAN LANGUAGES

Grazyna Habrajska,

Mikolaj Rychlo,

Krzysztof Tomasz Witczak



ANNOTATION

collective name tree scandinavian

This article discusses the collective names of trees used in the Scandinavian languages, as well as the formation process of similar collective names in Eastern and Western Germanic. It should be emphasized that the Northern Germanic languages used the suffix *-ijan for creating collective nouns which denote `a group of trees, e. g. ON. birki n. coll. `birch forest, Icel. birki `birch forest; birch, Norw. birki `birch forest, Swed. bjorke `birch forest, birch grove' (< PG. *berkijan n. coll. `a group of birches, birch forest, birch grove' -- PG. *berko f. `birch, Betula). The same suffix denoting collectivity and originating from the Proto-Indo-European language is also present as *-bje in most Slavic languages, cf. Ru. dial. березье n. coll. `birch forest, birch twigs'; OPol. brzezie n. `birch grove or forest'; Cz. bfezi n. `small birch-grove, also bfizi n. `birch twigs, birch-wood'; Slovak brezie n. `small birch-forest, birch-grove'; SC. brezje n. coll. `birch forest, Sloven. brezje n. `id.' (< PSl. *berzbje n. coll. `group of birches, birch forest, birch- grove' -- PSl. *berza f. `birch, Betula'). Further possible traces of the same suffix can be found in the Baltic languages (cf. OPrus. pannean n. `mossy fen' vs. Go. fani n. `mud, OSax. feni n. `fen') suggesting that the Proto-Indo-European collective suffix can be reconstructed as *-iiom (n. coll.). It seems probable that some northern Indo-European tribes used the derivative word *b<sup>h</sup>erh<sub>2</sub>giiom (n.) to denote `a group of birch trees, especially `a birch grove' or `a birch forest'.

Keywords: archaism, collectives, Danish, etymology, Germanic-Slavic relations, Indo-European languages, Norwegian, Old Norse, Proto-Germanic, Proto-Indo-European, Proto-Slavic, Scandinavian peoples, Swedish language, tree names, word- formation.



INTRODUCTION

Collective nouns (nomina collectiva) when defined from a descriptive point of view are denominal derivatives with a singular form (singularia tantum) demonstrating a collective meaning and function revealing the sense of `multiplicity and collectivity of what is specified in the base, e. g. ON. birki n. coll. `birch forest' ~ ON. bjprk f. `birch (a deciduous tree: Betula)'; Icel. pelli `pinewood' ~ Icel. poll f. `young pine tree'; Far. eskja n. coll. `ash grove' ~ Far. ask f. `ash tree'; Go. awepi n. `herd of sheep' ~ PG. *awiz f. `sheep, OE. imbe n. coll. `swarm of bees' ~ PG. *imbio f. `bee' (cf. MDu. imme f. `bee'); OSax. saherahi n. coll. `sedgy place' ~ PG. *sahazaz m. `sedge' (cf. OHG. sahar m. `sedge'); OHG. chindahi n. coll. `a group of children' vs. G. Kind `child'. The number of collective nouns denoting trees, animals or people found in Indo-European langauges attest this e. g. Lat. quercetum n. coll. `oak forest, oak wood' ~ Lat. quercus f. `oak tree'; Ved. gavyam and gavyam n. `cattle, herd of cows, also gavya f. `a cow-herd' ~ Ved. gauh m./f. `ox; cow'; Lith. gauja f. `flock, pack, herd, bunch, band, gang'; Latv. gauja f. `crowd, a lot of (people); multitude' (originally `a herd of cows'); Gk. Lac. ^ош f. `a band of young boys, originally *g^u-ouia f. `a herd of cows' [Kaczynska, 2019, p. 93-103].

The research in this paper examines North Germanic collectives in -i, which seem to refer to the plant world, especially trees. The lexical evidence strongly hints that at one time it was a productive formation in Nordic languages. Today, however, as evinced in modern Scandinavian languages, collective nouns have lost productivity. Despite this, it is still possible to find some items with the preserved collective meaning in Norwegian, Swedish or Danish (e. g. Norw. birki `birch forest, Swed. bjorke `birch forest, birch grove, Dan. wske `ash grove'). There are numerous examples where the old collective nouns denote a single tree (e. g. Icel. elri n. `alder tree' vs. ON. elri n. coll. `alder grove'; Icel. hesli `the common hazel, Corylus avellana L.' vs. ON. hesli n. coll. `hazel shrub'; Elfd. ayve n. `yew tree' (< PG. *twijan n. coll. `yew grove') vs. Swed. ide `yew grove' (< PG. *twipijan n. coll. `id.') -- a frequently used language process common in the singularization of old collective nouns. This phenomenon appears as early as in the Old Norse period, cf. ON. espi n. `aspen' (originally n. coll. `a group of aspen trees; aspen forest or grove') vs. Swed. dial. aspe `Espen- waldchen / aspen grove' ~ ON. psp f. `aspen, Swed. asp `id.' [de Vries, 1977, p. 106]; ON. greni n. `Tanne, Fichte / fir, spruce' (orig. n. coll. `a group of fir trees; fir forest') vs. Norw. grene `Tannenwald / fir forest' ^ ON. grpn f. `Tanne / fir', Norw. gran `id.' [de Vries, 1977, p. 187].

The aim of our paper is to compare some selected Nordic and Scan- divanian tree collectives in -i with their possible Slavic equivalents in *-bje, as well as to demonstrate the common origin of the North Germanic and Slavic collective nouns.



TREE COLLECTIVES IN SCANDINAVIAN LANGUAGES

Within collective nouns, the Old Norse and Scandinavian derivational type in -i (< PG. *-ijan) deserves closer attention for three reasons. Firstly, the collectives in -i in the North Germanic languages create a number of nouns which refer exclusively to a group of trees (e. g. ON. elmi n. `elm forest', elri n. `alder grove'; Icel. beyki n. `beech forest, beech grove, beech'; Far. eskja, Dan. wske `ash grove'; Norw. birki `birch forest', Swed. bjorke `birch forest, birch grove'), whereas Gothic and the West Germanic languages use the same collectives to denote items referring to natural phenomena including also animals (cf. Go. fairguni n. `mountain range'; Go. fani n. `mud', OSax. feni n. `fen'; OE. imbe n. coll. `swarm of bees' and so on). Secondly, the North Germanic tree collectives seem to have exact cognates in the Slavic tree collectives in -bje [Habrajska, Witczak, 1994, p. 35], cf. OPol. brzezie n. `birch forest', Pol. brzezie n. `birch grove or forest'; Cz. brezi n. `small birch-grove', also brizi n. `birch twigs, birch-wood'; Sla. bre- zie n. `small birch-forest, birch-grove'; SC. brezje n. `birch forest', Sloven. brezje n. `id.'; Ru. березье n. `birch forest, birch twigs' (< PSl. *berzbje n. coll. `birch grove, birch forest'). Thirdly, the Proto-Germanic suffix *-ijan, attested in the North Germanic languages as ON.-i, Icel. -i, Far. -ja, Norw. -i, Swed. -e, Dan. -e, clearly represents the same origin as the suffix -bje in the Slavic languages, cf. OCS.-ije, ORu. -ije, Pol. -e or -ie, Cz. -t, Sla. -ie, SC.-je, Sloven. -je. The suffix can be reconstructed as *-iiom in Proto-European. This observation seems to suggest that the Germanic and Slavic collectives share a common heritage.

It is worth emphasizing that Proto-Slavic *-bje is “the most productive derivational affix used when forming collective nouns primarily from the names of inanimate objects, and especially from the names of trees, shrubs, berries” [Slawski, 2011, p. 61] (our own translation). Moreover, it is often claimed that the Slavic collectives in *-bje acquired productivity most notably in the lexicon related to the plant world [Bernstein, 1985, p. 362]. In Old Church Slavonic, the following collectives are attested, e. g. bylije `grass', vnbije `willow', dgbije `trees' etc. Likewise, in Old Russian texts, one can find numerous plant collectives, e. g. ORu. derevije `trees', kropivije `nettle', kustovije `bushes, shrub thickets', smokvije `fig trees'. The same development seems to be attested in North Germanic languages.

In the following two sections (3 and 4) we intend to demonstrate that the Old Norse and Scandinavian collectives in *-ijan, like the Slavic ones in *-bje, refer exclusively to plants, especially trees.



OLD NORSE LEXICAL EVIDENCE FOR TREE COLLECTIVES

There are numerous collective formations denoting trees in Old Norse, as well as the modern Scandinavian languages. Below are quoted the most plausible or probable examples.

1. ON. birki n. coll. `Birkenwald / birch forest, Icel. birki `birch forest; birch, Far. birki, Norw. birki `birch forest, (Nynorsk) birkje, byrkje, Swed. bjorke `birch forest, birch grove' < PG. *berkijan n. coll. `birch forest, birch grove' [Falk, Torp, 1910, p. 74-75, s. v. Birk; Johannesson, 1956, p. 623; de Vries, 1977, p. 37, s. v. birki; Magnusson, 1989, p. 56; Bjorvand, Lindeman, 2000, p. 77-78; Orel, 2003, p. 42]. The collective noun in question plainly derives from the Proto-Germanic dendronym *berko f. `birch' (cf. ON. bjprk f. `birch, Icel. bjork `id., Far. bj0rk `id., Norw. bj0rk `id., Swed. bjork `id.'; Du. berk c.; OE. beorc f. `id.' The English lexical material (OE. beorc f., birce f. `birch', E. birch) is worth con- siderating. OE. beorc f. `birch' derives from PG. *berko f. `birch'. The Modern English birch cannot be a reflex of OE. beorc. It evidently derives from OE. birce f. `birch, which seems to represent a singularized nomen collectivum *berkijo f. `a group of birches; birch forest or grove'.; OHG. biricha, G. Birke f. `id.' [Bjorvand, Lindeman, 2000, p. 77-78; Wessen, 2002, p. 44; Orel, 2003, p. 43; Levitskiy, 2010, p. 98; Kroonen, 2013, p. 61]) by means of the Proto-Germanic suffix *-ijan.

2. ON. eldi n. `Wald / forest' [de Vries, 1977, p. 99] < PG. *aldijan n. coll. `a group of trees, forest'. There is no obvious arboreal motivation for this appellative found in the Germanic languages. Of course, it is possible to derive the Old Norse appellative from PG. *aldaz adj. `old, cf. Lat. altus adj. `high' [Orel, 2003, p. 13; Kroonen, 2013, p. 20]. If this derivation is correct, then the voiced dental stop *d, caused by Verner's Law, suggests the original oxytone stress of the collective noun (PG. *aldijan < *alpijan n. coll.). It is worth emphasizing that ON. eldi can be related to OSwed. alda `oak with acorns / fruchttragende Eiche' (originally `old & high tree'). This observation leads us to the conclusion that the meaning of ON. eldi is nothing other than `oak-forest'.

3. ON. elmi n. `elm forest, Swed. dial. alme, alme `elm grove / dunge av almar' < PG. *almijan n. coll. `elm forest' [Falk, Torp, 1910, p. 21, s. v. Alm; Johannesson, 1956, p. 72; Wessen, 2002, p. 10]. Note that the Proto-Germanic tribes used the term *almaz (m.) for denoting `a singular elm tree, cf. ON. almr m. `elm tree, Icel. almur m., Far. almur, almur m. `id.'; Norw. (Nynorsk) alm, Dan. alm/elm, Swed. alm, OE. elm, OHG. elm(o) [de Vries, 1977, p. 7; Magnusson, 1989, p. 12; Bjorvand, Linde- man, 2000, p. 31-32; Orel, 2003, p. 83; Levitskiy, 2010, p. 65], cf. also OE. ulmtreow, OHG. elm-boum, MHG. ulm-boum, G. Ulme f. `elm' (~ Lat. ulmus f. `elm, elm tree').

4. ON. elri n. `alder grove, Icel. elri n. `alder tree' < PG. *alizijan n. coll. `alder grove' [de Vries, 1977, p. 101; Orel, 2003, p. 15; Kroonen, 2013, p. 22]. The collective noun in question derives from PG. *aliso / *aliro f. `alder, cf. Sp. aliso m. `alder tree' (a Gothic loanword); Du. els c., OE. alor, E. alder; OHG. elira, also erila, G. Erle `alder' [Orel, 2003, p. 15; Levitskiy, 2010, p. 65; Kroonen, 2013, p. 22] and it seems to demonstrate either an initial accent (see 3.7, 3.9) or an oxytone stress (see 3.2; 3.11; 5.3).

5. ON. eski n. `Eschenwald, Eschenholz; Speer, Schachtel / ash forest, ash wood; spear, (ashen) box, as well as Icel. eski, Far. eskja, Norw. dial. 0skja, Dan. wske `Eschenwaldchen / ash grove', seem to derive from PG. *askijan n. coll. `ash forest, ash grove' [Falk, Torp, 1910, p. 34, s. v. Ask; Johannesson, 1956, p. 90-91; de Vries, 1977, p. 106, s. v. eski; Orel, 2003, p. 26], cf. also MDu. esch `ashen box, esche `ash'. Note that the Proto-Germanic term *askaz m. / *asko(n) f. `ash tree' is securely attested in most Germanic languages, cf. ON. askr m. `ash tree'; OE. cesc m. `id., E. ash; OHG. asc m. `ash'; Far. ask f. `ash, ODu. aska f., G. Esche f. `id.' [Orel, 2003, p. 26; Levitskiy, 2010, p. 79; Kroonen, 2013, p. 38].

6. ON. espi n. `aspen / Espe, OSwed. cespe- (attested in toponymy) and Swed. dial. aspe `Espenwaldchen / aspen grove' represent a collective noun *aspijan denoting originally `a group of aspen; aspen forest or grove' [Falk, Torp, 1910, p. 25, s. v. Asp; de Vries, 1977, p. 106, s. v. espi], cf. ON. psp f. `aspen, OE. wsp, E. aspen; Du. esp, OHG. aspa f. `aspen, G. Espe f. `id' (< PG. *aspo, earlier *apso f. `aspen, Populus tremula L' [Orel, 2003, p. 26; Levitskiy, 2010, p. 80; Kroonen, 2013, p. 39]).

7. ON. fyri n. `Fohrenwald / fir-forest, Norw. fyre, Swed. dial. fyre `id' (< PG. *furhijan n. coll. `fir forest'), cf. ON. fura f. `fir, OE. furh f. `id'; OHG. vor(a)ha f. `id' G. Fohre f. `fir' (< PG. *furhon f. `fir') [Orel, 2003, p. 120; Levitskiy, 2010, p. 197; Kroonen, 2013, p. 161]. The Proto-Germanic collective noun demonstrates an original barytonesis (PG. frhijan).

8. ON. greni n. `Tanne, Fichte / fir, spruce' (orig. n. coll. `a group of fir trees; fir forest'), Icel. greni `id., Norw. grene `Tannenwald / fir forest' PG. *granijan n. coll. `id' [de Vries, 1977, p. 187]. It derives from ON. grpn f. `Tanne / fir, Icel. gron f. `id', Norw. gran `id., Swed. gran, Dan. gran `id.' < PG. *grano f. `fir tree' [de Vries, 1977, p. 193].

9. ON. hesli n. `Haselstaude / hazel shrub, Icel. hesli `the common hazel, Corylus avellana L', Norw. hesle- (in the Norway toponymy); OSwed. hasle, Dan. hxssel, hasle-trx `hazel tree' < PG.*haslijan n. coll. `hazel grove' [Johannesson, 1956, p. 256; de Vries, 1977, p. 225, s. v. hesli], cf. ON. hasl m. `hazel tree, OE. hxsel m., E. hazel; MDu. hasel m. `id'; OHG. hasal m. and hasala f. `hazel tree, G. Hasel f. `id' < PG. *haslaz m. `hazel' [Orel, 2003, p. 164; Levitskiy, 2010, p. 251; Kronnen, 2013, p. 213], cf. OIr. coll m. `hazel, OW. coll `id., Lat. corulus, corylus f. `hazel tree, The Proto-Germanic *s indicates that the accent of the collective noun was originally placed in the initial position.

10. ON. ilstri n. `Lorbeerweide [= bay willow, Salixpentandra L.]'; Norw. ilster, Swed. dial. ilster, hilster `common sallow, Salix cinerea L' [de Vries, 1977, p. 285] < PG. * el(u)strijan n. coll. `willow shrubs, cf. ON. jplstr f. `bay willow, Swed. jolster, dial. jalstr, justr, alster `willow' < PG. *elustro f. `a kind of willow' [de Vries, 1977, p. 295].

11. ON. lindi n. `Lindenwald, Lindenholz / lime forest, lime wood' PG. *lindijan n. coll. `lime forest' [Pokorny, 1959, p. 677; de Vries, 1977, p. 357] represents a collective noun derived from PG. *lindo f. `lime tree, Tilia L', cf. ON. lind f. `lime tree, Far. lind f. `id', Elfd. lind f. `id'; OE. lind f. `id'; OSax. linda f. `lime tree, Du. linde c. `id'; OHG. linta f. `id', G. Linde f. `id' [Levitskiy, 2010, p. 359]. The Germanic dendronym goes back to IE. *lenta f. `a kind of tree' (< PIE. *lent-eh₂), cf. Lith. lenta f. `board, plank, Latv. lpnta f. `id' [Orel, 2003, p. 240; Kronnen, 2013, p. 338]. The Proto-Germanic voiced stop *d (< IE. *t) clearly documents the effect of Verner's law. In other words, both the basic term for `lime tree' and the related collective noun demonstrate an oxytone stress (PG. *lindijan n. coll. < *linpijan n. coll. < PIE. *lentiiom).

12. ON. tyrvi n. `Kienholz / pinewood, Icel. tyri `id.', Norw. tyri `pine- wood', Swed. tyre, tore `trockenes Holz / dry wood, brushwood' < PG. *terwijan n. coll. `pine trees' [de Vries, 1977, p. 603; Magnusson, 1989, p. 1076; Wessen, 2002, p. 487], cf. MHG. zirben m. `pine' (< PG. *terwjan-m. ) and ON. tjara f. `tar', OE. tierwe f. `tar', E. tar; Du. teer n./c. `tar' (< PG. *terwo f.) [Orel, 2003, p. 405; Kroonen, 2013, p. 514], cf. Lith. derva f. `pine-wood, tar'; MW. derw `oaks' (sg. derwen), Bret. deru, derw `oaks' (< PC. *derwos adj. `firm (as an oak)', m. `oak' [MatasoviC, 2009, p. 96].

13. ON. pelli n. `junges Kieferholz; Schiff / young pine(wood); ship'; Icel. pelli `pinewood' < PG. *palnijan n. coll. [de Vries, 1977, p. 608] seems to attest to a collective formation derived from PG. *palno f. `young pine', cf. ON. ppll f. `junger Fichtenbaum'; Icel. poll f. `id.'; Norw. toll, tall; Swed. tall, Dan. tall `id.'; LG. dial. Dale `pine / Kiefer' [de Vries, 1977, p. 631].

FURTHER SCANDINAVIAN EVIDENCE FOR TREE COLLECTIVES

The collective nouns indicating trees are not productive formations in the modern Scandinavian languages. Many of them are secondarily singularized. In other words, their original collective semantics has been lost. It is worth emphasizing that additional formations are attested in the Scandinavian linguistic area.

1. Icel. beyki n. `Buchenwald, Buchenwaldchen, Buche / beech forest, beech grove, beech' [Falk, Torp, 1910, p. 126; Johannesson, 1956, p. 597; de Vries, 1977, p. 69; Magnusson, 1989, p. 53] preserves this collective sense, though it also demonstrates a singulative meaning (`a single beech tree' [Berkov, Bodvarsson, 1962, p. 71]). It securely derives from ON. *bxki n. coll. `beech forest' (cf. the Old Norse compound bxkiskogr m. `beech forest' < NG. *bokija-skogaz m. `id.' The Old Norse compound noun bxkiskogr m. `beech forest' seems to contain the original adjective *bokijaz `of beech, beechen' and ON. skogr m. `forest / Wald'. Of course, the first part of the compound can also derive from ON. bxki `beech / бук' (< *bokijan n. coll. `a group of beech trees'), if such a noun existed in Old Norse, as some researchers believe [Zalizniak, 1965, p. 206].) < PG. *bokijan n. coll. `a group of beech trees' [Magnusson, 1989, p. 53; Orel, 2003, p. 51; Kroonen, 2013, p. 72].

2. Elfd. ayve n. `yew tree' (< PG. *iwijan n. coll. `yew grove') and Swed. ide `yew grove' (< PG. *iwipijan n. coll. `id.'). According to Kro- onen [2013, p. 271], both the Elfdalian and Swedish terms represent collective nouns derived from the basic term for `European yew, Taxus baccata L.', cf. ON. yr m. `yew', OE. iw, eow m. `yew', E. yew `id.'; OHG. iwa f. `yew', G. Eibe f. `id.' (< PG. *iwaz m. / *iwo f. `yew' [Levitskiy, 2010, p. 302]) by means of two parallel and evidently cognate suffixes: PG. *-ijan (< PIE. *-iiom) and PG. *-ip-ijan (< PIE. *-it- and PIE. *-iiom).

OTHER PROTO-GERMANIC COLLECTIVES

Collective nouns in *-ijan are also attested in East Germanic (i. e. in Gothic) and West Germanic languages. It is clearly apparent that they are not productive formations and rarely refer to the tree terminology. Generally, they seem to represent a Proto-Germanic heritage. Some of them may represent traces of a Northern Indo-European vocabulary.

1. Go. fani n. `mud', ON. fen n. `fen, bog', OE. fen n. (also m.) `marsh, mud', E. fen; OSax. feni n. `fen', MDu. veen, vene n. `bog', Du. veen n. `bog', ven n.small lake'; OHG. fenni n. `swamp', G. Fenn n. `id.' < PG. *fanijan n. `fen, swamp' [Orel, 2003, p. 92; Levitskiy, 2010, p. 165; Kroonen, 2013, p. 128]. According to Guus Kroonen, the Proto-Germanic term in question represents a collective noun “potentially identical” to OPrus. pan- nean n. `mossy fen' (as if from Proto-Baltic *paniian n. `marsh, swamp / Sumpf' [Trautmann, 1923, p. 20]). Theoretically, the Germanic and Baltic formations go back to the Northern Indo-European collective noun *poniiom or the like.

2. Go. fairguni n. `mountain range' and OE. firgen n. `mountain' seem to represent a collective noun derived from PG. *fergunijan n. coll. `the range of mountains' [Orel, 2003, p. 99; Kroonen, 2013, p. 136]. A related collective noun (of the feminine gender) is attested in OHG. Firgunnea f. `Ore Mountains' (< PG. *fergunjo f. coll.). See also a North Germanic singulative attested in ON.fjprgyn f. `Mother Earth' (< PG. *ferguni- f.).

3. OE. imbe n. `swarm of bees'; OHG. impi m. `swarm of bees', also `bee', MHG. imbe, imme m. `swarm of bees' (< PG. *imbijan n., secondarily *imbijaz m. `id.') vs. MDu. imme f. `bee' (< PG. *imbijo f.). According to Kroonen [2013: 117], “[t]he neuter OE imbe continues a collective *imbja-, but OHG impi and MDu. imme in the sense of `bee' probably represent different formations, i. e. *imbja- and *imbjo”. The West Germanic collective noun *imbijan (neuter o-stem) `swarm of bees' seems to be related to Greek epnk; (gen. sg. ёрлтбос;) f. (secondary d-stem) `gnat' [Pokorny, 1959, p. 311]. The primitive oxytone stress of the Proto- Germanic collective noun *imbijan (earlier *imfijan) documents the Proto-Indo-European archetype *h<sub>1</sub>empiiom n. coll. `swarm of insects (esp. gnats or bees). The place of accent is clearly indicated by Verner's law.

There are also collective nouns in the Eastern and Western Germanic languages, demonstrating a complex suffix *-ip-ijan [Krahe, Meid, 1967, p. 149], as well as a secondary suffix *-ah-ijan, attested only in the West Germanic languages [Krahe, Meid, 1967, p. 194], e. g.

4. Go. awepi n. `flock od sheep', OE. eowde, eowede n. `id.', OHG. ouwiti, ewiti n. `id,' < PG. *awipijan or *awidijan n. `flock od sheep' n. coll. -- PG. *awiz f. `ewe' < PIE. *h<sub>3</sub>etuis m. / f. `sheep' [Lehmann, 1986, p. 52; Orel, 2003, p. 31; Levitskiy, 2010, p. 84; Kroonen, 2013, p. 45]. The Proto-Germanic collective noun in *-ijan seems to contain an additional suffix *-ip- (see additionally 4.2) It is worth emphasizing that Guus Kroonen compares the Germanic terms in question with Lith. avide f. `sheepfold', deriving them finally from the Proto-Indo- European archetype *h<sub>3</sub>eui-d<sup>h</sup>h<sub>1</sub>-ipm n. coll. `flock of sheep' [Kroonen, 2013, p. 45]..

5. OFris. kedde n. `herd'; MDu. cudde n./f. `herd', Du. kudde c. `id.'; OHG. kutti n. `herd', G. Bav. kutt n./f. `flock of birds' < PG. *kudijan n. coll. and *kudijo f. coll. `herd, flock (of cows)' -- PIE. *g^uh₃eus m./f. `ox, cow' [Kroonen, 2013, p. 308-309]. The West Germanic languages demonstrate the collective noun of neuter gender, as well as that of feminine gender.

6. OHG. chindahi n. coll. `Kinderschar / a group of children' (as if from PG. *kind-ah-ijan n. coll. `id.') -- OHG. chind n. `child', G. Kind n. `id.' (< PG. *kinpan / *kindan n. `child') [Orel, 2003, p. 212; Kroonen, 2013, p. 288]. The collective noun in question contains the complex suffix *-ah-ijan [Krahe, Meid, 1967, p. 194].

7. OHG. steinahi n. coll. `stony ground / steiniges Gelande' (as if from PG. *stain-ah-ijan n. coll.) -- OHG. stein m. `stone' (< PG. *stain- az m. `stone'). Claims that that the Old High German collective derives, in fact, from the Proto-Germanic adjective *stainahaz `stony' (cf. Go. stainahs adj. `id.' Note that OE. stxnp adj. `stony' and OHG. steinagadj. `id.' derive from PG. *stai- nagaz adj. `stony' [Makaev, 1966, p. 40; Orel, 2003, p. 369], which represents an alternative variant of Go. stainahs (< PG. *stainahaz adj. `stony') [Guhman, 1958, p. 205], caused by an accentual difference (Verner's law). The double reflex of PG. *-h- in OHG. steinahi n. coll. `stony ground' and OHG. steinag adj. `stony' is noteworthy.) by means of the simple suffix *-ijan [Kra- he, Meid, 1967, p. 194; Lehmann, 1986, p. 321; Matasovic, 2014, p. 40.] should not be dismissed. Of course, we agree that the adjectives in *-aha- suppose a principal source for creating the West Germanic collective nouns in -ahi.

It is worth noting that a number of collective nouns in -ahi, attested in West Germanic, refer to plants, including trees:

8. OHG. aganahi n. coll. `Spreu / chaffs' <- OHG. agana f. `chaff' (< PG. *agano f. `chaff, awn' < *ahano f.) [Krahe, Meid, 1967, p. 194].

9. OHG. eihhahi n. coll. `Eichengeholz / oak-wood' (as if from WG. *aik-ah-ijan n. coll.) -- OHG. eih f. (i-stem) `oak' (< PG. *aiks f. `oak') [Krahe, Meid, 1967, p. 194].

10. OHG. ascahi n. coll. `Eschengeholz / ash-wood' (< WG. *ask- ah-ijan n. coll.) -- OHG. asc m. `ash' < PG. *askaz m. `ash tree' [Krahe, Meid, 1967, p. 194; Matasovic, 2014, p. 40].

11. OHG. boumahi n. coll. `Baumreichen Ort / a place full of trees' (as if from WG. *bag<sup>u</sup>m-ah-ijan n. coll.) -- OHG. boum, G. Baum m. `tree' (< PG. *bag^umaz m. `beam, tree') [Krahe, Meid, 1967, p. 194].

12. OHG. rorahi n. coll. `Rohricht / field of reeds, rushes' (as if from WG. *rauz-ah-ijan n. coll.) -- OHG. ror n. `reed (stalk)' (< PG. *rauzan n. `id.') [Krahe, Meid, 1967, p. 194], cf. Go. raus n. `reed' (< PG. *rausan) [Orel, 2003, p. 299; Kroonen, 2013, p. 407].

13. OSax. saherahi n. coll. `sedgy place' -- PG. *sahazaz m. `sedge', cf. OHG. sahar m. `sedge', MHG. saher m. `id.' [Kroonen, 2013, p. 421].

14. OHG. wttahi n. coll. `Weidicht / willow thickets' (as if from WG. *wtp-ah-ijan n. coll.) -- OHG. wtda f. `willow', G. Weide f. `id.' [Krahe, Meid, 1967, p. 194].

It is obvious that the West Germanic collectives in -ahi (e. g. OHG. ascahi n. `ash-wood' < PG. *askahijan n. coll. `a group of ash trees'; see 5.10) indicate a related and complex formation which seems to be secondary when comparing North Germanic tree collectives in -i (e. g. ON. eski n. `ash forest, ash-wood; spear, box', Icel. eski `ash forest, ash grove', Far. eskja, Norw. dial. 0skja, Dan. wske `ash grove' < PG. *askijan n. coll. `a group of ash trees; ash forest, ash grove', see 3.5). Both collective nouns are parallel and not identical from the morphological point of view. They attest to the so-called “derivational doublets” as in PSl. *berzovbje and *berzbje n. coll. `a group of birch trees' (see 6.1 and fn. 5), *bukovbje and *bucbje n. coll. `a group of beech trees' (see 7.1).



COGNATE TREE COLLECTIVES IN THE SLAVIC LANGUAGES

The North Germanic tree collectives in -i (< PG. *-ijan) should not be treated as a native innovation for two reasons. Firstly, the East and West Germanic languages demonstrate obvious traces of collectives ending with *-ijan (see 5.1--5.3 and additionally 5.4-5.14). Secondly, it is possible to quote numerous Proto-Slavic tree collectives in *-bje, as well as North Germanic ones in *-ijan, which seem to indicate an identical form of derivation and the same or similar meaning. It is highly probable that certain Slavo-Germanic pairs represent an Indo-European heritage. The following points discuss these Slavic collectives and their North Germanic equivalents:

1. OPol. brzezie n. `birch forest, Pol. dial. brzezie n. `birch grove or forest'; Cz. brezi n. `small birch-grove, also brizi n. `birch twigs, birch- wood'; Sla. brezie n. `small birch-forest, birch-grove'; SC. brezje n. `birch forest, Sloven. brezje n. `id.'; Ru. березье n. `birch forest, birch twigs' (< PSl. *berzbje n. coll. `birch grove, birch forest' [Habrajska, Witczak, 1994, p. 35; Habrajska, 1995, p. 122-123]) There is a derivational doublet in the Slavic languages: SC. brezovlje n. coll. `small birch-forest / lasek brzozowy' [Francic, 1961, s. 48]; Sloven. brezovje n. `birch grove'; Cz. brezovi n. `small birch-grove, also brizovi n. `birch twigs'; Ru. dial. березовьё n. coll. `birch trees' (< PSl. *berz-ov-bje n. coll. `a group of birch trees; birch forest, birch grove') [Trubachev, 1974, p. 207; Slawski, 1974, p. 213]. It is evident that the collective noun in question derives from the adjective *berzovb `of birch, e. g. OCz. brezovy `of birch', Pol. brzozowy adj. `id.' [Trubachev, 1974, p. 205-206; Slawski, 1974, p. 211-212].. The Proto-Slavic tree collective seems to designate an exact cognate and equivalent of PG. *berki- jan n. coll. `birch forest, birch grove' (3.1). The Nordic and Slavic forms regularly derive from PIE. *b<sup>h</sup>erh<sub>2</sub>giiom n. coll. `birch grove, birch forest, originally `a group of birch trees'. It should be emphasized that some Slavists have reconstructed the adjective *berzbjb [Trubachev, 1974, p. 208] or *berzъ `birch-colored, with white spots, stripes, cf. Cz. brizi adj. `of birch' [Slawski, 1974, p. 212].

2. OPol. drzewie n. coll. `growing trees, arbores' [Habrajska, 1995, p. 139], also `wood, lignum'; OCz. drievie, drevie n. `growing trees, forest; (fire)wood, a certain amount of wood, Cz. dfivi n. `(fire)wood, a certain amount of wood, dial. `growing trees, forest'; Sla. drievie, dial. drevie n. `drwa'; Sloven. drevje n. `trees'; SC. dr'ijevlje, drevlje n. `growing trees; wood' [Francic, 1961, p. 38]; CS. дртвик n. `trees, wood / arbores; lig- na'; MBulg. дртвїе n. coll. `(growing) trees'; ORu. деревик n. `trees'; Ru. dial. дервьё n. `growing trees' also `large, thick tree'; BRu. dial. дзерёвье n. `wi^ksza ilosc drzew'; OUkr. деревье n. `trees / arbores' < PSl. <sup>6</sup> It is worth emphasizing that the Baltic names for `aspen' (OPrus. abse f. `id', Latv. apse f. `id.', Lith. apuse f. `id.'), as well as Arm. op`i, gen. pl. op'eac (a-stem) `white poplar, Populus alba L.' [Witczak, 1991, p. 65-75], regularly derive from a similar archetype opsii_a f. `aspen' (< PIE. *h3eps-iieh₂ f. `id.'). However, it is impossible to check whether the archetype in question originally represented an old collective noun in *-iia or not.dervbje n. coll. `growing trees; wood' [Trubachev, 1977, p. 213; Slawski, 1979, p. 59-60]. In our opinion, the Proto-Slavic collective *dervbje cannot be separated from PG. *terwijan n. coll. `(pine) wood' < IE. *deruiiom n. coll. `a group of (pine) trees' (see 3.12).

3. OPol. olsze n. coll. `alder grove' [Rykiel-Kempf, 1985, p. 21; Habrajska, 1995, p. 192]; OCz. olsie n., Cz. olst n. `alder grove' Sla. olsie n. `id.'; Ru. dial. олёшье n. `alder grove' алёшье n. `alder tree'; BRu. алёшша n. `alder grove'; Sloven. olsje n. `alder grove'; SC. josje n. coll., also jelasje, jelsje n. coll. `alder grove, alder forest' < PSl. *olbsbje / *jelbsbje n. coll. `a group of alder trees' cf. Pol. olsza f. `alder, Alnus L'; Ru. ольха f. `id'; SC. dial. jOlsa f. `id' [Habrajska, Witczak, 1994, p. 34; Trubachev, 2005, p. 83]. The Proto-Slavic collective noun ^іьщє seems to be identical to PG. *alizijan n. coll. `alder grove' (see 3.4) from the point of view of the semantics and Indo-European word-formation.

4. Ru. dial. осьё n. `aspen forest, aspen grove / осиновый лес, осинник', also `a single aspen tree' and `aspen-wood; aspen twigs' < PSl. *opstye n. coll. `aspen forest, aspen grove' [Trubachev, 2005, p. 98]. The Proto-Slavic lexeme is also attested in Czech and Polish place names, cf. Cz. Viisi, Ost, Vosi; Pol. Osie, Zaosie [Borek, 1988, p. 90; Bankowski, 2000, p. 434]. The basic term *opsa is reflected in HSorb. wosa f. `aspen, Populus tremula L', LSorb. wosa f. `id'; Pol. dial. osa f. `aspen, Populus tremula L'; BRu. аса f. `aspen' [Trubachev, 2005, p. 93], as well as many derivatives, e. g. *opsica f. `aspen', *opsicina f. `id', *opsika f. `id' and *op- sina f. `id' [Trubachev, 2005, p. 93-96]. It resembles PG. *aspo f. `aspen' not only semantically, but also phonologically, though a metathesis of consonants (*Ps > *sp) should be considered for the Proto-Germanic language [Levitskiy, 2010, p. 80]. It seems highly probable that PG. *aspijan n. coll. `aspen forest, aspen grove' (see 3.6) represents an exact (though metathesized) cognate of PSl. ^opstfe n. coll. `id'⁶.

5. PSl. ^ьШцє n. coll. `elm grove': onomastic reflexes of this word are seldom identified in Polish toponymy: Ilmie [Bankowski, 1972, p. 282; 2000, p. 540]. Polab. jelmuve (jelmUvs) n. `elm (grove)' points to the derivational doublet *jbl(b)movbje. It derives from OPol. ilem, Pol. ilm m., takze ilma f. `elm, Ulmus', Polab. jelms f. `elm tree' < PSl. *jbl(b) mъ m. / *jbl(b)ma f. `id.', cf. Cz. jilm m. `elm, Ulmus', also jilma f. `id.', [Trubachev, 1981, p. 222]. The North Germanic collective noun *almi- jan n. `a group of elm trees' (see 3.3) represents an alternative formation demonstrating a full degree of the root or an apophonic o-vocalism.

6. OCz. lUtie n. `young lime tree; twigs'; Ru. лутьё n. `young lime trees to be stripped of their bark', dial. `young lime grove / молодый липняк'; Ukr. луття n. `young lime trees; twigs of a willow' [Vasmer, 1986, p. 536] < PSl. *lptbje n. coll. `young lime grove' [Trubachev, 1990, p. 162; Habrajska, Witczak, 1994, p. 35-36]. The Proto-Slavic collective is undoutedly related to PG. *lindijan n. coll. `lime forest' (see 3.11), though it demonstrates a zero-grade or apophonic o-vocalism of the root.

It can be concluded that there are four exact cognates among the Slavic and North Germanic tree collectives (see 6.1-6.4). On the basis of lexical data, we can confidently reconstruct the following Indo- European archetypes: PIE. *b^herh₂giiom n. coll. `a group of birch trees'; PIE. *deru,iiom n. coll. `a group of (pine-)trees'; PIE. *h₂elisiiom n. coll. `a group of alder trees'; PIE. *h<sub>3</sub>epsiiom n. coll. `a group of aspen trees'. Two further equivalents seem to be possible (see 6.5-6.6), though they demonstrate some peculiar features e. g. a semantic divergence or an apophonical variant (NG. *almijan n. coll. `a group of elm trees' vs. PSl. *jblmbje n. coll. `id.') or both (NG. *lindijan n. coll. `lime forest' vs. PSl. *lptbje n. coll. `young lime grove').

PARALLEL TREE COLLECTIVES IN SLAVIC AND GERMANIC

There are numerous tree collectives demonstrating parallel formations discenable in the North Germanic and Slavic languages. The following section reviews three selected examples.

1. OPol. bucze n. coll. `beech forest' [Borek, 1988, p. 88; Habrajska, 1995, p. 123], Pol. dial. bucze `id.'; Cz. buct, bouct n. `beech trees; young beech forest'; Sla. bUcie `beech grove'; SC. dial. bucje n. `beech forest; beech pulp'; Bulg. dial. bUce `beech grove'; Ukr. dial. бучя n. coll. `beech trees; beech-wood' < PSl. *bucbje n. coll. `beech grove, beech forest' [Slawski, 1974, p. 433; Habrajska, Witczak, 1994, p. 37]. The derivational doublet *bukovbje (cf. OPol. bukowie n. coll. `beech forest; beech nuts'; Cz. bukovt `beeches, beech forest'; SC. bukovlje n. `beeches'; Sloven. Ьйк- ovje n. `beech forest') is also attested in the West and South Slavic languages [Slawski, 1974, p. 444; Habrajska, 1995, p. 124]. Both collective nouns were created on the basis of PSl. Ъикъ m. / *buky f. `beech, Fagus («- PG. *bok- `id.') though it should be noted that Icel. beyki n. `beech forest, beech grove, beech tree' (< PG. *bokijan n. coll. `beech forest') may only represent a parallel formation (see 4.1).

2. SC. jasenje n. coll. `ash forest, ash grove' [Francic, 1961, p. 37]; Sloven. jesenje n. `ash forest'; Cz. jasant, dial. jasent n. `a group of ash trees' (< PSl. *jasenbje n. coll. `a group of ash trees, ash forest, ash grove') [Trubacev, 1974, p. 80]. The collective noun in question derives from PSl. *asenъ m. or *asenb f. `ash, Fraxinus', cf. SC. jasen m. `ash'; Sloven. jasen, jesen m. `common ash, Fraxinus excelsior L.'; Cz. jasan, dial. jasen, jasen m. `ash'. The Proto-Germanic term *askaz m `ash, Fraxinus' is etymologically related to the Proto-Slavic dendronym as well as Lat. ornus f. `the wild montain-ash' (< OLat. *osenos), Lith. wsis f. `ash', OIr. uinnius f. `ash tree', MIr. onn f. coll. `ash trees' (< PC. *osna) and so on [Pokorny, 1959, p. 782; Matasovic 2009, p. 300-301]. Theoretically, NG. *askijan n. coll. n. `a group of ash trees, ash forest, ash grove' (cf. 3.5), WG. *aska- hijan n. coll. `id.' (cf. 5.10) and the Proto-Slavic collective *jasenbje `id', should be treated as three parallel derivations.

3. SC. jelje n. coll. `fir forest, fir branches' (as if from PSl. *edlbje n. coll. `a group of fir trees; fir forest') derives from SC. jela, j'ela f. `fir tree, Abies' (< PSl. *edla f. `id.'), cf. OPol. jedta, Pol. jodia f. `fir tree', Po- lab. jadld f. `id.', LSorb. jedia f. `Abies alba Mill.', HSorb. jidla f. fir tree'. Undoubtedly, the North Germanic collective *granijan n. `a group of fir trees; fir forest' (3.8) derives from a completely different nominal root. It appears to be a parallel and irrelated formation. However, we cannot exclude an alternative possibility that PSl. *edla f. `fir tree' is related not only to OPrus. addle f. `fir tree', Lith. egle f. `id.', Latv. egle f. `id.', OIr. aidlen f. `Abies', Corn. etlen f. `ash tree', Bret. aedlen f. `fir tree', Alb. hale f. Austrian pine, black pine, Pinus nigra L' but also (if we accept a simple metathesis of consonants) to OSwed. alda f. `oak with acorns' (see 3.2). If the suggested comparison is correct, then PSl. *edlbje n. and NG. *al- dijan n. `forest' (3.2) could easily be treated as two cognate collectives. Note that the metathesis of a consonant cluster is attested in the different pair of collectives denoting `a group of aspen trees' (see 6.4).

There are numerous tree collectives in *-bje in Slavic languages demonstrating the same semantics as the Scandinavian collective nouns in *-ijan, e. g.

4. PSl. *Шсце n. coll. `a group of hazel trees' or PSl. *oresbje n. coll. `id.' [Habrajska, Witczak, 1994, p. 37] vs. NG. *haslijan n. coll. `id.' (3.9);

5. PSl. *lozbje n. coll. `a group of willows' or PSl. *orkytbje n. coll. `id.' or PSl. *vbrbbje n. coll. `id.' [Habrajska, Witczak, 1994, p. 38] vs. NG. *ilustrijan n. coll. `id.' (3.10) or WG. *wtpahijan n. coll. `id.' (5.14).

6. PSl. *lipbje n. coll. `a group of lime trees' vs. NG. *lindijan n. coll. `id.' (3.11).

7. PSl. *tisbje n. coll. `a group of yew trees' vs. NG. *twijan or *twipi- jan n. coll. `id.' (4.2).

All the parallel formations (7.1-7.7) seem to prove the ancient productivity of the tree collectives in *-iiom in both the Slavic and North Germanic languages.

INDO-EUROPEAN DERIVATION

The two preceding sections of this paper have endeavoured to demonstrate that the Northern Germanic neuter collectives in *-iian and the Slavic ones in *-bje, denoting a group of trees, represent a common formation which should be treated as a Late Indo-European heritage (see especially 6.1-6.4). The collective suffix can be reconstructed as IE. *-iiom. The derivation of the Germano-Slavic collectives may easily be explained from the point of view of the Indo-European word-formation. Previous research has suggested four phases of derivation [Slawski 1974, p. 86; 2011, p. 61]:

1. a specific plant name;

2. a denominal adjective in *-iio- derived from the plant name;

3. an abstract formation in *-iiom;

4. a singular collective name in *-iiom.

There is little existing lexical evidence attesting the third phase (8.3) of this suggested development in Slavic languages. Most etymologists reconstruct numerous Proto-Slavic collective nouns (8.4); however, they are unable to distinguish convincing traces of abstract nouns derived from trees (8.3) Note that Cz. brizi n. `birch twigs, birch-wood' can hardly represents a nomen abstractum. Moreover, Cz. brizovi n. `birch twigs' demonstrates a concrete meaning.

Most Slavists agree that both Czech forms derive from the collective nouns *berzbje and *berzovbje, respectively.. Moreover, it is extremely difficult to include

Slavic forms in this class of nouns when comparing the abstract and perceived sense of noun (e. g. `wood of a specific tree; branches or twigs of the same tree; an item made of the wood'). The perceived (concrete) sense in question seems to be secondary in comparison to the basic collective meaning (`a group of specific trees'). This is why the third phase (8.3) is sometimes treated as secondary or even rejected by researchers [Habrajska, Witczak, 1994, p. 32-33].

Table 1

The derivation of collectives in *-bje in the Slavic languages

Lp.	8.1	8.2	8.3	8.4
	a specific plant name	a denominal adjective derived from the plant name	an abstract formation in *-ii om	a singular collective name in *-iiom
birch in Slavic (Czech examples are used)	OCz. brieza f. `birch,, Cz. briza f. `id.' (< PSl. *berza f. `birch, Betula')	(1) Cz. brizi adj. `of birch' (< PSl. *berzbjb adj.) (2) OCz. brezovy `of birch' (< PSl. *berzovъ adj. `of birch')	no obvious traces are registered (see fn. 7) no traces (see fn. 7)	(1) Cz. brezi n. `small birch- grove', (< PSl. *berzbje n. coll.) (2) Cz. brezovi n. `small birch- grove' (< PSl. *berzovbje n. coll.)

Source: our own work

The North Germanic lexical material included and explained in Table 2 demonstrates no abstract noun derived from appellatives for `ash tree' In our opinion, the meanings `ash-wood', `spear made of ash tree' and `(ashen) box', which are attested for ON. eski, cannot derive from an abstract noun. Furthermore, OHG. ascahi n. `ash-wood' evidently represents a collective noun and not an abstract one., `beech' ON. glbtzki n. `beer cask made of beech-wood' (< PG. *alup-bdkijan n.) cannot be interpreted as a compound derived from an abstract noun. or `birch'. It may be observed that much research treats the Germanic formations in *-ahijan, *-ijan or *-ipijan, which demonstrate the concrete meaning `wood of a specific tree' (vel sim.), as typical collective nouns and not abstract nouns, hence OHG. ascahi n. `ash-wood' and eihhahi n. `oak-wood' are usually included in the nomina collectiva [Krahe, Meid, 1967, p. 194; Matasovic, 2014, p. 40].



Table 2

The derivation of tree collectives in the Germanic languages

Lp.	8.1	8.2	8.3	8.4
	a specific plant name	a denominal adjective derived from the plant name	an abstract formation in *-iiom	a singular collective name in *-iiom
1. ash tree	ON. askr m. `ash tree', Icel. askur m. `id.', Norw. ask, OSwed. asker, Swed. ask, Dan. ask `id.' (< PG. *askaz m.)	(1) ON. eskja f. earth, originally `an area grown by ash trees' [de Vries, 1977, p. 106] (if it is a substantivized adjective *askijaz adj. `of ash tree, ashen') ? the adjective *askahaz `of ash tree; ashen' is not attested	there is no noun with an abstract semantics (see fn. 8) no example	ON. eski n. coll. `ash forest', Icel. eski `id.', Far. eskja `id.', Norw. dial. oskja `id.', Dan. іxske `ash grove' (< PG. *askijan n. coll.) (2) OHG. ascahi n. `ash-wood' (orig. n. coll.)
2. beech	ON. bok f. `beech', Icel. bok, Far. bok, Norw. bok, bok, Swed. bok, Dan. bog `id.' (< PG. *bok- f.)	ON. baki adj. `of beech, beechen' (< PG. *bokijaz), attested in On. baki-skogr m. `beech forest' [de Vries, 1977, p. 69]	no abstract noun is found (see fn. 9)	Icel. beyki n. `beech forest, beech grove, beech' (< PG. *bokijan n. coll.)
3. birch	ON. bjgrk f. `birch', Norw. bjork `id.', Swed. bjork `id.' (< PG. *berko f.)	(1) ON. birkja f. `birch sap', Norw. byrkja `id.' (< PG. *berkijo f.). It seems to derive from the adjective *berkijaz `of birch' (2) ON. birkinn adj. `of birch-wood'	no example is attested	(1) ON. birki n. coll. `birch forest', Icel., Norw. birki `id.', Swed. bjorke `birch forest, birch grove' (< PG. *berkijan n. coll. `birch forest, birch grove')

Source: our own work



CONCLUSIONS

To the best of our knowledge, neither the Slavic collective suffix*-bje has ever been compared to the Germanic collective suffix *-ijan nor vice versa in the basic comparative grammars of the Indo-European, Germanic or Slavic languages [Brugmann, Delbruck, 1906, p. 187-189; Meillet, Vaillant, 1934, p. 357-358; Krahe, Meid, 1967, p. 70-72; Slawski, 1974, p. 85-87; 2011, p. 60-61; Jurisic, 1992, 52-54; Matasovic, 2014, p. 145-146]. Nevertheless, the lexical material gathered and presented in the present paper leads to the conclusion that the North Germanic as well as the Slavic affixes at issue are descended from a common ancestor, which was most probably Late Indo-European or Northern Indo-European.

Supporting this conclusion is not only the phonological correspondence but also its derivational function and semantics. The emergence and development of the Proto-Indo-European derivation in *-iiom (n. coll.) may be charted in the following sequence:

1. a specific plant name;

2. a denominal adjective in *-iio- derived from the plant name;

3. a singular collective name in *-iiom being a substantivized neu- trum of the denominal adjective, derived from a specific plant name.

The following pairs of the Proto-Germanic and Proto-Slavic arboreal collectives seem to derive from a common Indo-European archetype:

PG. *berkijan n. coll. (3.1) = PSl. *berzbje n. coll. (6.1) < PIE. *b^her- hgiiom n. coll. `a group of birch trees, birch forest, birch grove';

PG. *terwijan n. coll. (3.12) = PSl. *dervbje n. coll. (6.2) < PIE. *deruiiom n. coll. `a group of (pine) trees, (pine) forest';

PG. *alizijan n. coll. (3.4) = PSl. *obsbje n. coll. (6.3) < PIE. helisiiom n. coll. `a group of alder trees, alder forest, alder grove';

PG. *aspijan n. coll. (3.6) = PSl. *opsbje n. coll. (6.4) < PIE. *h₃epsiiom n. coll. `a group of aspen trees, aspen forest, aspen grove'.

Apart from reconstructing the common etymon of the collectives in *-iiom using Slavic and Germanic material as is argued in the present paper, there may be other issues worth examining: firstly, other functions of the Proto-Slavic suffix *-bje and the Proto-Germanic *-ijan, and secondly, possible cognate suffixes in other Indo-European branches.



LANGUAGE ABBREVIATIONS

Alb. -- Albanian

Arm. -- Armenian

Bav. -- Bavarian

Bret. -- Breton

BRu. -- Belorussian

Bulg. -- Bulgarian

CS. -- Church Slavic

Corn. -- Cornish

Cz. -- Czech

Dan. -- Danish

Du. -- Dutch

E. -- English

Elfd. -- Elfdalian (Ovdalian)

Far. -- Faroese

G. -- German

Gk. -- Greek

Go. -- Gothic

HSorb. -- High Sorbian

Icel. -- Icelandic

IE. -- Indo-European

Lac. -- Laconian

Lat. -- Latin

Latv. -- Latvian

LG. -- Low German

Lith. -- Lithuanian

LSorb. -- Low Sorbian

MBulg. -- Middle Bulgarian

MDu. -- Middle Dutch

MHG. -- Middle High German

MW. -- Midddle Welsh

NG. -- North Germanic

Norw. -- Norwegian

OCS. -- Old Church Slavic

OCz. -- Old Czech

OE. -- Old English

OFris. -- Old Frisian

OHG. -- Old High German

OIr. -- Old Irish

OLat. -- Old Latin

ON. -- Old Norse

OPol. -- Old Polish

OPrus. -- Old Prussian

ORu. -- Old Russian

OSax. -- Old Saxon

OSwed. -- Old Swedish

OUkr. -- Old Ukrainian

OW. -- Old Welsh

PC. -- Proto-Celtic

PG. -- Proto-Germanic

PIE. -- Proto-Indo-European

Pol. -- Polish

Polab. -- Polabian

PSl. -- Proto-Slavic

Ru. -- Russian

SC. -- Serbo-Croatian

Sla. -- Slovak

Sloven. -- Slovenian

Sp. -- Spanish

Swed. -- Swedish

Ukr. -- Ukrainian

Ved. -- Vedic

WG. -- West Germanic



LITERATURE

1. Bankowski A. Rzeczowniki zbiorowe od nazw drzew w toponimii polskiej. Jpzyk Polski, 1972. Vol. 52. P. 281-286.

2. Bankowski A. Slownik etymologiczny jpzyka polskiego. Vol. 2. Warszawa: Wydaw- nictwo Naukowe PWN, 2000. 977 p.

3. Berkov V. P., Bodvarsson A. Islenzk-rdssnesk ordabok. Moscow: Rikisutgafa Orda- boka Yfir Erlendar og Innlendar Tungur, 1962. 1032 p.

4. Bernstein S. Zarys gramatyki porownawczej jpzykow slowianskich. Alternacje. Te- maty imienne. Warszawa: Panstwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, 1985. 464 p.

5. Bjorvand H., Lindeman F. Vare Arveord. Etymologisk Ordbok. Oslo: Novus Forlag, 2000. 1142 p.

6. Borek H. Gornosl^skie nazwy miejscowe typu. Bucze, Turze, Zawodzie. Wokoljp- zyka. Rozprawy i studia poswipcone pamipci profesora Mieczyslawa Szymczaka. Eds M. Basaj et alii. Wroclaw, Warszawa, Krakow, Gdansk, Lodz: Zaklad Na- rodowy im. Ossolinskich, 1988. P. 87-96.

7. Brugmann K., Delbruck B. Grundriss der vergleichenden Grammatik der indoger- manischen Sprachen. Vol. 1. Teil. 1. Strassburg: Karl J. Trubner, 1906. 688 p.

8. Falk H. S., Torp A. Norwegisch-danisches etymologisches Worterbuch. Vol. 1-2. Heidelberg: Carl Winter Universitatsbuchhandlung, 1910-1911. 1732 p.

9. Francic V. Budowa slowotworcza serbochorwackich kolektywow. Krakow: Uniwer- sytet Jagiellonski, 1961. 84 p.

10. Guhman M. M. The Gothic Language. Moscow: Publishing House of the Foreign Language Literature, 1958. 288 p. (In Russian)

11. Habrajska G. Collectiva w jpzyku polskim. Lodz: Wydawnictwo Uniwersytetu Lodzkiego, 1995. 320 p.

12. Habrajska G., Witczak K. T. Slowianskie kolektywa drzewne na -bje i ich indoeu- ropejska geneza. Rocznik Slawistyczny, 1994. Vol. 49. Fasc. 1. P. 31-39.

13. Johannesson A. Islandisches etymologisches Worterbuch, Bern: Francke Verlag, 1956. XXIII+1406 p.

14. Jurisic B. Nacrt hrvatske slovnice II. Tvorba imenica u povijesnom razvoju. Zagreb: Matica hrvatska, 1992. 151 p.

15. Kaczynska E. Laconian ^oua `Band of Boys' as a Collective Noun. Graeco-Latina Brunensia, 2019. Vol. 24. Fasc. 1. P. 93-103.

16. Krahe H., Meid W. Germanische Sprachwissenschaft. Vol. 3: Wortbildungslehre. Berlin: Walter de Gruyter, 1967. 270 p.

17. Kroonen G. Etymological Dictionary of Proto-Germanic. Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2013. 794 p.

18. Lehmann W. P. A Gothic Etymological Dictionary. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1986. 712 p.

19. Levitskiy V. V. An Etymological Dictionary of Germanic Languages. Vol. 1. Vinnitsa: Nova Knyga Publ., 2010. 614 p. (In Russian)

20. Magnusson A. B. Islensk ordsifjabok. Reykjavik: Ordabok Haskolans, 1989. XLI+1231 p.

21. Makaev Ё. A. Comparative Grammar of the Germanic Languages. Vol. 4. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1966. 496 p. (In Russian)

22. Matasovic R. Etymological Dictionary of Proto-Celtic. Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2009. XI+458 p.

23. Matasovic R. Slavic Nominal Word-Formation. Proto-Indo-European Origins and Historical Development. Heidelberg: Universitatsverlag Winter, 2014. 221 p.

24. Meillet A., Vaillant A. Le slave commun. Paris: Librairie Ancienne Honore Champion, 1934. 538 p.

25. Orel V. A Handbook of Germanic Etymology. Leiden, Boston: Brill, 2003. 683 p.

26. Pokorny J. Indogermanisches etymologisches Worterbuch. Bern, Munchen: Francke Verlag, 1959. 1183 p.

...