「#5488. 中英語期の職業名（を表わす姓）の種類は驚くほど細分化されていて多様だった」 ([2024-05-06-1]) および「#5489. 古英語の職業名の種類は中英語と同じくらい多様だったか否か」 ([2024-05-07-1]) を受けての話題．前者の記事で，中英語期には多様だった職業名が，近代英語期にかけて種類を減らしていった事実に触れた．
　同様に，職業名を表わす姓 (by-name) も，近代英語期にかけて種類を減らしていったという．これはなぜだろうか．Fransson (32) によれば，"by-name" が世襲の "family name" へ発展していく際に，一般的で短めの職業名が選択されたからではないかという．

As regards surnames of occupation we can notice that they become less specialized towards the end of the period, and if we examine rolls after 1350, we shall be surprised at the rarity of specialized names as compared with the earlier period. The reason for this has nothing to do with what has been said above about trades; it is connected with the heredity of surnames, which now begins to become prevalent. The specialized surname of occupation coincided with the trade of a person and, as a rule, does not seem to have been hereditary, which is probably due to its length and to the fact that it very easily calls to mind the trade itself. The surnames that became hereditary were usually short and denoted common trades, e.g. Smith, Cook, Tailor, Turner, etc.; it is almost exclusively names of this kind that one finds in later rolls. It is true that there are surnames of the specialized type that have survived to modern times, e.g. Arrowsmith, Cheesewright, but they are probably very rare; they owe their existence to the fact that the corresponding trade has died out or that the corresponding substantive has become extinct and its signification been forgotten, e.g. Billiter (= ME Belleyetere), Jenner (= ME Gynour), etc.

　本来的には個人に属していた by-name が家に属する family name へ発展していくにつれて，硬直化し多様性が失われたということだろう．時代は多様性の中世から画一性の近代へと変化していった，とも議論できそうだ．

　・ Fransson, G. Middle English Surnames of Occupation 1100--1350, with an Excursus on Toponymical Surnames''. Lund Studies in English 3. Lund: Gleerup, 1935.

[ ツイート | 固定リンク | 印刷用ページ ]