Rural emotionality (based on the example of unofficial anthroponymy of the inhabitants of Babice commune in Chrzanów district).

Abstract

The aim of the article is to show the attitudes of village inhabitants towards displaying emotions within both marital and parental relationships. The study is based on a collection of 915 nicknames gathered in the years 2004–2020 in the rural commune of Babice, Chrzanów district. The analysed onymic material was collected during informal conversations with representatives of the oldest and middle generations of the residents of the villages selected for the study. Each of the nicknames recorded was confirmed by different informants which testifies to their consistent use and, therefore, to permanent anthroponymy differentiation. In the analysis of the nicknames, use was also made of excerpts from the residents’ statements not directly related to the names referred to but nevertheless providing an important cultural context. Informal anthroponymy centred around a thematic field related to feelings indicates that the family environment is the appropriate area for the affective-emotional activation of individuals. It is the family where the most intimate verbal behaviours reflecting the emotional intimacy of the members are expressed. However, feelings – very personal – should be a hermetic area of human life. The family should defend its intimacy instead of making it public. The manifestation of emotions in too external forms is a blatant violation of the norm; this involves the interference of the rural micro-community in the life of a specific community, the verbal manifestation of which are acts of nomination, resulting in the creation of unofficial anthroponymy. Affection is often connected with a sense of familial belonging which is determined by blood ties. At the linguistic and cultural levels, nicknames play a special role in maintaining continuity of a family community and cultivating family traditions. In the context of the general tendency to diminish the importance of a more general family, folk epithets have a peculiar function as a link between generations. Both the aspect of their permanence and the intergenerational integration to which they contribute seem very important to forging family ties. As the analysis shows, the family is protected by a certain taboo, so family members should not express opinions that refer to their own family. Both the glorification of one’s own emotions and the public escalation of negative emotions directed towards relatives are inadvisable.