Academic literature on the topic 'Names, classical'

Abstract Contemporary scientific terminology is populated by thousands of eponyms, technical terms derived from the names of discoverers and inventors. Since the ultimate goals of scientific language are precision and objectivity, the ever increasing use of eponyms is puzzling. Eponyms betray the inherent contradiction between the supposed neutrality and anonymity of scientific discourse and individual vindication. The systematic use of eponyms has resulted in one of the most effective reward systems in Western science. Moreover, it is interesting to note that eponyms do not represent a recent form of recognition; their genealogy can be traced back to classical antiquity, in particular to the Hellenistic era and as a feature of the scientific lexicon they have undergone surprisingly little change over more than two millennia. In my essay I explore the genealogy of scientific eponyms and their cultural background and I shall focus my attention on classical and early modern science. During classical antiquity the use of eponyms served an important dual purpose, on the one hand paying tribute to those individuals who, by dint of their discoveries and written works, gained eminence in a specific field of enquiry, and on the other hand helping to map the historical geography of a discipline and thus establish its boundaries as well as its future prospects. During the Renaissance, with the rediscovery of the classics and the reaffirmation of the cultural value of science and technology, the coining of eponyms gained unprecedented momentum and proliferated in most disciplines.

It has become a commonplace to say that, in classical Greek and Roman religion, to know the name of a god was to have power over him. The idea was rejected by Martin Nilsson, but he did not argue the point at any great length and a more detailed discussion may be of use. In this paper, I shall examine those contexts where it might be maintained that gods' names possessed some kind of intrinsic power but I shall conclude that the phenomenon is marginal and not universally true of Greek religion as a whole. To do this, we shall have to consider the whole question of how far the Greeks were worried about divine names and what the motives for this may have been. Evidence derived from prayers is of particular importance in this.

Background: Practice of Ayurveda nomenclature (Nāmākaranam) of dravyas (Medicinal Plants) in Ayurveda traces back to the Vedic periods which is supposed to be 5000 B.C. In Vedas, plants were named after mythological belief, structure of plant’s part resembling with part of birds and animals, or rituals uses, uddabhava sthana (Habitat), svarūpa (morphological characters), karma (Pharmacological action), etc. It got scientific basis in samhitas period and named more than thousand dravyas by close observation of morphological characters, habit and habitat, and therapeutic uses. However, it states that basis of Nāmākaranam of dravyas was elaborated in Nighantus and enriched with more terminologies, and hence it is known as parayāyas (synonyms). Recently, Bentham & Hooker’s binomial nomenclature has been practiced in Ayurveda so that uniformity of Dravyas names can be maintained and accepted worldwide.
 Aim and objective: The main objective of this review is to explore methodology of Nāmākaranam in Vedas, samhitas and Nighantus and its relationship with binomial nomenclature. Material and method: Ayurvedic literatures and surfing web was main sources of gathering information related to names of plants.
 Results: Nāmākaranam of plants was found to be based on scientific evidences that describe morphological features, habit and habitat, therapeutic indications, and physical and chemical properties, doctrine of signature, source of raw materials for industries or home made products, etc. For instance, the name catuḥsira for asthisamharī coined in śabdacandrikā suggests its quadrangular stem on which the Latin name Cissus quadrangularis Linn. has been accepted. Some more names can be suggested like Bahusutā (Asparagus racemosa Linn.), Raktāngi (Rubia cordifolia), Sthirasāra (Tectona grandis), Gudatvak (Cinnamomum tamala), Visākha (Boerhaavia diffusa), etc. On the basis of above examples, it can be revealed that binomial nomenclature is improved ones of Ayurveda nomenclature for its acceptance worldwide.
 Conclusion: Names of plants mentioned in Vedas and Samhitas; and parayāyas in Nighantus are based on its udabhava, svarūpa, karma, sādharma, ruḍhī, svabhāva, lokopayoga, etc. Which are also considered by Bentham & Hooker’s binomial nomenclature to coin scientific name of plant species.

The purpose of this article is to explore the evolution of feminine nouns and also paper trace out possible aspects to know through the Sangam literature that the ancient Tamil people gave importance to tradition in their lives. The uniqueness of the Tamil tradition is that it gives the home life internally and the homeless other life outside. Among them are Purannauru, who San the trio of virtue, Material and Home, which can be praised as Puram, Puranool, Purappattu, Purampu and the Tamil treasury. That is structured and subdivided into classical genetics.

The subject of the study is the producing motivational bases of nominees in the Chinese and Russian languages. The object of the study is naming in two cultures. The author examines in detail such aspects of the topic as the theory of nomination and its unique features in relation to Chinese and Russian linguistic cultures; the concept of naming and the process of creating onyms in two languages under the influence of historical background. Particular attention is paid to the Chinese tone, which influences the creation of ononyms, as well as a comparative study of onoms in the Chinese and Russian languages. The study was based on provisions formulated by linguists who study issues related to naming and nomination theory: Y.Y. Huang, A.K.K. Chan, V. Mathesius and others. Research methods: systematization and generalization, etymological analysis, conceptual analysis, linguocultural analysis. The main conclusions of the study are the provisions formulated based on the results of the comparative analysis: in Chinese culture, names are chosen to convey certain meanings and connotations. Chinese proper names often consist of two or three characters, with the surname coming first. Surnames are usually passed down through generations and carry with them a deep sense of tradition and origin. Names are often chosen to reflect virtues or values that parents hope to embody in their child. Names can also be chosen based on elements of Chinese astrology, such as the five elements and 12 animal signs. In Russian culture, names also have important meaning and are chosen based on many factors. They usually consist of a first name, a patronymic (derived from the father's name) and a last name. Surnames are usually inherited and reflect the ethnic or regional origin of the family. Names may be chosen based on religious significance, family traditions, or popular trends. The author’s special contribution to the study of the topic is that the article summarizes the main similarities and differences in Russian and Chinese naming. The novelty of the study lies in the fact that for the first time, based on etymological analysis, it established the relevant features of naming in the Chinese and Russian languages, which are also presented in a comparative aspect.