Introduction

The beginning of all knowledge is the name, becauseeach term is specified by its name. The folkloricknowledge and the differentiation of the plants is the baseon which the botanical nomenclature has been created (thescientific names for the plants and their groups).

The studying of this part of the knowledge of eachpeople or region of the world is a subject of a series ofethnobotanical studies (Al Azharia Jahn 2006). Atheoretical model of ethnotaxonomic systems based onethnobotanical studies in Central and South America wasdeveloped by Berlin et al. (1966). The same authorelaborated the general principles of the folktaxonomy anddrew convincing parallels with the taxonomic way ofthinking among the European people, which have becomethe basis of the taxonomy in the Western science.

In Bulgaria traditions in the studying of the way inwhich the people get to know and name the plants aswell as how they use this knowledge in their everydaylife do exist. Such data is found mainly in ethnographicstudies (Gerov 1899; Vakarelski 1977; Marinov 1994a,1994b; Georgiev 1999; Kitanova 2004) but it can alsobe discovered in some botanical ones (Achtarov et al.1939; Stojanov and Kitanov 1960; Stranski 1963). Thereis no doubt that the issue of “Materials for BulgarianBotanical Glossary” (Achtarov et al. 1939) is of greatestimportance. The folkloric names, their synonyms, dataabout the region in which they are used and explanations

about the meaning and the origin of the name are allgathered in it. The introduction of the book is a profoundfor its time phytolinguistic analysis of the folk names inthe botany written by Bozhimir Davidov. The localnames derive from the people and their creation is adynamic process. The studying of their diversity andtheir relation to the historical knowledge of plants in thecourse of time is important because it can reveal theattitude of the Bulgarian people towards the nature andthe plants in particular, its power of observation and itsability to analyze and put the observed into a subordinateorder taking into consideration a combination of marksand occurrences. The establishment of these regularitiesand trends reveals the taxonomic way of thinking of theBulgarian people and generally the taxonomic way ofthinking of the Europeans, which has become the basisof the taxonomy in the Botanical science.

These aspects define the purpose of the present study- that is to give general idea about the diversity of thefolk names and to reveal the regularities in their creationfrom a botanical point of view.

Material and methods

Study area: Bulgaria is situated in SoutheasternEurope, on the Balkan Peninsula and is a historicalcrossroad of the ancient cultures of Europe and Asia. TheBulgarian population consists mainly of ethnic

169

Folk botanical nomenclature and classificationin Bulgarian traditional knowledge

Anely NEDELCHEVA1 and Yunus DOGAN 2

1 Department of Botany, Faculty of Biology, Sofia University “St. Kliment Ohridski”, Sofia, Bulgaria2 Buca Faculty of Education, Dokuz Eylül University, Buca, Izmir, Turkey

Abstract (Bulgarian)Народните наименования на растенията са точката на познанието, в която се срещат ботаниката с митология, фолклор,лингвистика и филология. Народите са изобретателни да дават наименования на растенията или да превеждат иливидоизменят чужди наименования до неузнаваемост. Обект на народното познание са растенията, които човекът познаваи използва. Около 23% от растенията в България имат народни наименования. Подбудите да бъде дадено едно или другоиме са различни, както при отделните народи, така и в различи области на една страна. Давайки имена на растениятанарода създава собствена номенклатура подреждане и структуриране на растенията в групи. Създаването на народнитеимена е плод на народно творчество и динамичен процес. Проучването на тяхното разнообразие и връзката им с научнотознание за растенията във всеки един исторически момент е от значение за разкриване отношението на българския народкъм природата и в частност растенията, неговата наблюдателност и способност да анализира и подрежда в съподчиненоствидяното по комплекс от белези и явления. Установяването на тези закономерности и тенденции разкрива начина натаксономично мислене на българския народ. Настоящето проучване дава представа за разнообразието от народнинаименования и разкрие закономерностите при тяхното създаване от ботаническа гледна точка.

P l a n t s a n d C u l t u r e : s e e d s o f t h e c u l t u r a l h e r i t a g e o f E u r o p e - © 2 0 0 9 · E d i p u g l i a s . r . l . - w w w . e d i p u g l i a . i t

FOLK BOTANICAL NOMENCLATURE AND CLASSIFICATION IN BULGARIAN TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE

Bulgarians (83.9%), with two sizable minorities, Turks(9.4%) and Roma (4.7%) (N.S.I. 2001). The officiallanguage of the country is Bulgarian (written in Cyrillicalphabet), a member of the Slavic linguistic group. TheBulgarian flora comprises 159 families, 906 genera and3900 species, 12.8% of which are endemics (Petrova etal. 2005).

The study was carried out for five years (2003-2008).The information is gathered mainly from the literature(the main source) as well as from field collected data andinterviewed informants.

Results and discussion

It is difficult to point out the total number of thefolkloric names because of a series of reasons- a lot ofsynonyms are present, some of the names are out of dateand are not used actively, and new names are created allthe time. In one of the most profound sources ofinformation concerning this matter – “Materials forBulgarian botanical glossary” (Achtarov et al. 1939) –11250 folk names are included. About 23% of the plantshave folk names. About 800 are actively and widelyused, while 500 are present today (Petkov 1982;Dimitrova 1987; Kitanova 2004).

The folkloric nomenclature gives names to the plantsby taking into consideration the people’s point of view (acollective author). The people create these names in theirwillingness to distinguish the different species from oneanother and to be precise in their verbal communication.Unlike the scientific names, the folk ones don’t have anauthor. As everywhere else, here, in Bulgaria, the plantswhich are just close to the people and are in their favourand which are a part of the customs and the culture of theBulgarians have folk names.

The botanical nomenclature (the formal naming ofthe plants from a scientific point of view), represents aname that consists of two parts or a binary name for anytaxon below the rank of the genus, and includes the rankof the species (I.C.N.C.P. 2004, I.C.B.N. 2006). A binaryname comprises the name of a genus and an epithet.Unlike the scientific terms and in accordance with thepeculiarities of the Bulgarian grammar, the epithetcomes first: Abies alba (Bg: “byala ela”: white fin-tree).

We often say that the botanical classification (amethod by which botanists group and categorize thespecies) is a form of scientific taxonomy and should bedistinguished from the folktaxonomy, which lacksscientific basis. A variety of examples though illustratevery well the capability of the people to see and analysethe similarities of the nature as well as to distinguish thedifferences and to put them into a hierarchical structureby revealing the relationships between the plants.

The Bulgarians distinguish clearly the

representatives of the plant and fungi kingdoms. Somedifficult for classification subjects, usually with unclearorigin and background, are named in a way that canshow their mysterious character (a striving forexplanation with a mystical interference). The Witches’brooms are a clear example of this. They are deformitieson trees or shrubs that are result of infections caused bydifferent agents. The rates of the plant growth, size andsymmetry are disrupted. A certain part of the plant maylook like a bird’s nest (closely packed distorted twigs).Such a name is given to these deformities by otherpeoples, too (Nedelcheva et al. 2007).

The normal and the most familiar name that peoplegive to a plant is a genus name - Urtica (Bg: “kopriva”),Pinus (Bg: “bor”), etc. The plants in a genus are ofteneasily recognizable. The generic names are usuallymonomial.

Polytypic generic species (which have more than twomembers) are found among plants which are well knownand widely used by the people. These are both cultivatedand wild species. The Bulgarians correctly groupcompletely different plants into one genusphenotypically - Sambucus (Bg: “baz”: elder): S. ebulus(Bg: “trevist baz”: grass elder), S. racemosa (Bg:“cherven baz”: red elder), S. nigra (Bg: “cheren baz”:black elder).

The single plants are defined by the species’ name.The name often shows some characteristics of the plant– the colour of the flowers, the size, the shape – or it maybe named after the place where it was found for the firsttime. Together, the genus and species name (epithet)refer to only one plant, and they are used to identify thatparticular plant.

A variety in form of a plant within a species existswhen there are slightly or minor botanical differencesfrom the species plant such as colour of the flower or theshape of the leaves - Trifolium speciosum (Bg: “sinyadetelina”: blue clover), Trifolium patens (Bg: “zhultadetelina”: yellow clover), Trifolium repens (Bg: “byaladetelina”: white clover).

The name of the cultivated plants (cultivars) oftenrepresents the way of growth with epithets such asgarden, sowing, domestic - ”gradinska chubritsa”:garden savory (Satureja hortensis), which are well-known to the people. In order to distinguish from themthe garden plants, the latter are given the name “wild”:Bg: “div”: diva krastavitsa”: wild cucumber (Ecbaliumelaterium), ”div badem”: wild almond (Amygdalusnana). The adjective common is often used in oppositionin the meaning of widely spread, ruderal, different fromcultivated. The origin of some cultivated plants isobvious from the name: “turski sedef”: originated fromTurkey (Peganum harmala), ”bozhigrobski bosilek”:originated from the land of Jesus’ Tomb, Jerusalem,(Artemisia abrotanum), “stambolche”: originated from

170

P l a n t s a n d C u l t u r e : s e e d s o f t h e c u l t u r a l h e r i t a g e o f E u r o p e - © 2 0 0 9 · E d i p u g l i a s . r . l . - w w w . e d i p u g l i a . i t

Istanbul (Dahlia variabilis), ”praskova”: originated fromPersia (Persica vulgaris); in this way the common namesrepresent the economic and social relations of thepopulation from the historical aspect.

Synonyms: The Bulgarians use one and the samename for two or more obviously different species of onebotanical genus - for Taraxacum spp. (mostly T.officinale) are used more than thirty (30) commonnames, related to different characteristics of the plant:Bg: “gluharche”: hollow stem, “zhlachka”: bitter test,“magareshka mlechka”: donkey’ milk, “radika”: root,“salata”: salad and etc. This is often due to the use ofdifferent names in the different regions of the country,having their own features and way of perceiving theenvironment. The homonyms (the use of the same name

for two or more morphologically differentspecies belonging to one botanical genus)exist for the same reasons - Bg: “orlovinokti”: eagle’ nails is used for Astragalus,Cytisus, Erodium cicutarium and Lonicera(because of the twist shape of the fruits orflowers).

The folk botanical nomenclature andclassification is well developed with thefamiliar to the people plants that can befound in the environment and that are usedby the population.

A series of names represent the generaloutlook and the behaviour of the wholeplant or its parts - Bg: “ostra treva”: sharpgrass (Carex), “samodivsko darvo”: elf tree(Sorbus aucuparia).

This shows knowledge of the live formsand their classification. The size of theplant is described with the adjectives small- Bg: “malak karamfil”: small carnation(Dianthus microlepis) or with a diminutive- Bg: “gologlavche”: hatless (Globulariavulgaris), large or big - Bg: “golyam repei”:big burdock (Arctium lappa).

In the folk nomenclature superiority forpresenting the vegetative organs over thegenerative ones exists.

The direction in which the stem growsor the position of the over-groundvegetative organs “kompasna mlechka”:compass milk grass (Lactuca seriola),“klek”: squat (Pinus mugo).

An interesting example is the Ruscushypoglossum. The name of the plant”zalist” means “so mething which iscaught to leaves”. Indeed, this species hasflowers and fruits that are caught to itsleaves. Its stem is deformed and has theshape of a leaf, but the people don’t knowthis fact (fig. 1).

General content and con sistency of the plant - “debe - le ts”: tick (Sedum), “zhi lovlyak”: elastic (Plantago).

The substance, found in the inner part of the plant orin its organs - “maslina”: oil (Olea europaea), “mlechka”:milk (Euphorbia), “sapunche”: soap (Saponaria).

Small and bigger formations on the surface of theplants - “tranka”: with thorns (Prunus spinosa), “lepka”:stick on, attach to something (Galium aparine). Theycontain information about the way in which the plantoverspreads.

The colour of the flowers (perigonium or corolla) -“sinchets”: blue (Scilla bifolia) or “sinya metlichina”: bluesmall broom (Centaurea cyanus) (fig. 2), “zhalturche”:yellow (Ranunculus ficaria); as direct use of the name ofcertain flower or indirect - via resemblance to objects or

ANELY NEDELCHEVA, YUNUS DOGAN

171

1. - Stem and leaves from Horse-tongue (Ruscus hypoglossum).

2. - Chicory - blossom (Cichorium intybus).

P l a n t s a n d C u l t u r e : s e e d s o f t h e c u l t u r a l h e r i t a g e o f E u r o p e - © 2 0 0 9 · E d i p u g l i a s . r . l . - w w w . e d i p u g l i a . i t

FOLK BOTANICAL NOMENCLATURE AND CLASSIFICATION IN BULGARIAN TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE

phenomena - “ogniche”: like fire (Anagalis arvensis),“karvaviche”: like blood (Agrostemma); the colour of thefruits - “chernitsa”: blackish (Morus).

The taste and the flavour of the plants (bitter, sweet,sour) - “kiselets”: with sour taste (Rumex), “sladka pa -prat”: with sweet taste (Polipodium vulgare),”zhlachka”:like bile, bitterness, (Cichorium intybus) or smell - smellydianthus (Dianthus barbatus). A combination ofcharacteristics - “sinya zhlachka”: blue and like bile(Cichorium intybus).

Knowledge of the phenology of the plants: forexample the time of flowering - “velikdenche”:flowering around Easter (Veronica chamaedrys), “maiskisnyag”: flowering in May (Spirea media) (fig. 3), the lifeof the leaves and of the whole plant - “zimzelen”: greenin winter (Vinca minor), “noshtna krasavitsa”: beautifulat night (Oenothera biennis), “bezsmartniche”: immortal(Xeranthemum annuum), “esenche”: flowering inautumn (Crocus palasianus), “zimen hvosht”: winterhorse-tail (Equisetum hiemale).

Chronological information - the names of the places,where the species are found as well as folk names showknowledge of their distribution - especially for thespecies which have limited spreading on the territory ofthe country and for the endemic ones - Bg: “rilskaiglika”: from Rila Mt. (Primula deorum) - endemic plantfrom Rila Mt.

Habitat, place of dwelling - some species grow reallywell in one specific habitat and this is obvious from theirnames - “gorotsvet”: flowering in forest (Adonisvernalis), “blatnyak”: in the marsh (Caltha palustris),“zidar”: on the walls (Sedum album), “livadina”: in themeadows (Poa spp.), “’podrumiche”: around roads

(Matricaria), “poddabiche”: underthe oak (Teucrium chamaedrys),“planinska smrika”: mountainjuniper (Juniperus nana), waterplants - “vodna leshta”: waterlentils (Lemna minor).

Medicinal plants - medicinaltea - Bg: “pirinski chai”: tea fromPirin Mt. (Sideristis scardica nameof the disease or of some of thesymptoms - “mayasal” is the oldname if haemorrhoids. Manyplants (more than 10) used fortreatment of it are named as“mayasalniche” (Filago arvensis),“mayasalche” (Sideritis montana,Erysimum spp., Lythrum salicaria,Teucrium polium, Peucedanumspp., Polygonum hydropiper).Well distinguished group areedible plants - “edliv papyrus”:edible papyrus (Cyperus

esculentus), poisonous plants - Bg: “otrova”: poison,“otrovachka” (Taxus baccata), “otrovna mlechka”(Euphorbia myrsinites) or the effects, they can causewhen being touched - “parliva treva”: burning grass(Urtica dioica).

It looks like that the main authors of the Bulgariannames of the plants are the women which pay greaterattention to the plants. They know more plant namesthan the men. The names created by women are nicerand more euphonic.

The denomination and re-denomination of the plantshas the characteristics of a collective work. It is doneimperceptibly by unknown authors and is spread amongthe people afterwards.

In case of not knowing the plants, the people usedirectly plants’ foreign names. Some of them are easilytaken in and win recognition. The history shows thatother names sometimes change beyond recognition orbecome less frequently used in the course of time. Theyacquire the characteristics of the indigenous language.This process is liable to philological changes andregularities.

The challenge that the modern times set to thefolknomenclature is the transliteration of the folkloricnames – representing the names (originally written inCyrillic alphabet) in their corresponding Latin version.This often leads to errors in the names, different records,etc.

In the latest fashion, for some ornamental plants,scientific genus names are used instead of the nicecommon ones – nowadays used “ Iris” instead ofBulgarian folk name ”perunika” (Iris).

172

3. - Flowering shrub (Spiraea media).

P l a n t s a n d C u l t u r e : s e e d s o f t h e c u l t u r a l h e r i t a g e o f E u r o p e - © 2 0 0 9 · E d i p u g l i a s . r . l . - w w w . e d i p u g l i a . i t

Conclusion

Common names clearly show how the plants areviewed, either as a whole or in terms of its separateparts, as similar to objects, people or animals, or arereminiscent of their actions and properties. Namesconjure up sounds, smells and colours typical of theplant or provide information about it; this may concernits distribution and habitat, its characteristics,compounds and texture, its usage in daily life orwhether or not it is poisonous. Many plant names aresymbols related to folk beliefs, legends and traditionalcustoms.

«Apart from the way they are formed structurally,Bulgarian plant folk names are similar to those found inother nations, because the same reasons and rules guidepeople when naming plants. No matter where they livein the world, what counts is their close contact withnature. Bulgarians have demonstrated a remarkableattention in their plant observations, showing asensitivity to typical plant characteristics and folk artwhen naming them. A knowledge of plants is necessaryto appreciate just how picturesque and vivid their namesare. Plants often become symbols because of theirnames. A plant folk name recounts a story or evokes agentle melody. Sometimes the name, or common name,can be obscene, but they are so expressive, so trulyunique, that they are poetic» Bozhimir Davidov (1870-1927), Bulgarian botanist.

Plant folk names are the area of overlap whereBotany meets Ethnology, Mythology, Folklore,Linguistics and Philology. People can be very creativewhen giving names to plants, generally translating oraltering foreign plant names, sometimes beyondrecognition. The reasons for choosing one name oranother vary from nation to nation, as well as region toregion. They reflect the country’s ethno-psychology,national history and geopolitical position. Folk plantnames allow us a clear insight into Bulgarian nationalspiritual culture and heritage.

References

Achtarov et al. 1939: B, Achtarov, B. Davidov and A.Javashev - Materials for Bulgarian Botanical Glossary,Sofia, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, PridvornaPechatnitza, 1939 (in Bulgarian).

Al Azharia Jahn 2006: S. Al Azharia Jahn - How Plant

Names Reveal Folk Botanical Classification, Trade,Traditional Uses and Routes of Dissemination (II), inAsian Studies, International Journal for Asian Studies,7, 2006, p. 77-128.

Berlin et al. 1966: B. Berlin, D.E. Breedlove and P.H.Raven - Folk Taxonomies and Biological Classification,in Science, 154, 1966, p. 273-275.

Dimitrova 1987: L. Dimitrova (Ed.) - Rechnik nanazvaniata na lechebnite rastenia, Sofia, Medicina Ifizkultura, 1987 (in Bulgarian).

Georgiev 1999: M. Georgiev - Enciklopedia balgarskanarodna medicina, Sofia, Petar Beron, 1999, 543 p. (inBulgarian).

Gerov 1899: N. Gerov - Bulgarian Language Glossary,Part III., Plovdiv, DP Saglasie, 1899 (in Bulgarian).

I.C.B.N. 2006: International Code of BotanicalNomenclature (Vienna Code), ed. by J. McNeill,Vienna, Gantner Verlag KG., 2006(http://ibot.sav.sk/icbn/main.htm)

I.C.N.C.P. 2004: International Code of Nomenclature forCultivated Plants, ed. by C.D. Brickell, Leuven, 2004,647 p. (Acta Horticulturae).

Kitanova 2004: M. Kitanova - Materials for anEtholinguistic Dictionary, in Bulgarian Folklore, 4,2004, p. 123-126.

Marinov 1994a: D. Marinov - Folk believe, Sofia,Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, 1994 (in Bulgarian).

Marinov 1994b: D. Marinov - National faith and religiousfolk customs, Sofia, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences,1994 (in Bulgarian).

N.S.I. 2001: National Statistical Institute of Bulgaria -Population and demographic Processes, Report, 2001,http://www.nsi.bg/

Nedelcheva et al. 2007: A.M. Nedelcheva, Y. Dogan andP.M. Guarrera - Plants traditionally used to makebrooms in several European countries, in Journal ofEthnobiology and Ethnomedicine, 3, 2007, p. 20.

Petkov 1982: V. Petkov - Savremenna fitoterapia, Sofia,Medicina i fizkultura, 1982, 517 p. (in Bulgarian).

Petrova et al. 2005: A. Petrova, V. Vladimirov, D.Dimitrova and D. Ivanova - Current state of Bulgarianbiodiversity - problems and perspectives, BulgarianBioplatform, 2005, 645 p.

Stojanov and Kitanov 1960: N. Stojanov and B. Kitanov- Wild useful plants in Bulgaria, Sofia, BulgarianAcademy of Sciences, 1960 (in Bulgarian).

Stranski 1963: I. Stranski - Wild and cultural plants inBulgaria, Sofia, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, 1963(in Bulgarian).

Vakarelski 1977: H. Vakarelski - Ethnography of Bulgaria,Sofia, Izd. “Nauka i Izkustvo”, 1977 (in Bulgarian).

ANELY NEDELCHEVA, YUNUS DOGAN

173

P l a n t s a n d C u l t u r e : s e e d s o f t h e c u l t u r a l h e r i t a g e o f E u r o p e - © 2 0 0 9 · E d i p u g l i a s . r . l . - w w w . e d i p u g l i a . i t