Cited by 0Linguistics and language evolutionJewish Identity and SocietyLinguistics and Language Studies

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; none of the 57 sources its claims cite is checked for support yet.

Surnames of Georgian Jews: Historical and Linguistic Aspects

Open access
Beider, Alexander·2023·Genealogy

Abstract

The article provides an analysis of several aspects of the corpus of surnames used by Jews who lived after the end of the Middle Ages in the territory that today corresponds to the Republic of Georgia. One section covers historical aspects: the earliest attestations and their exact status and the period when the use of surnames became stabilized. The next two sections discuss morphological aspects: the endings found in the surnames and historical, linguistic, and social explanations of the distribution observed, compound names, names with demonymic suffixes, and those based on hypocoristic forms of given names (a detailed coverage of methods of constructing such forms is also provided). In the remaining sections, the reader will find an analysis of phonetic peculiarities found in Georgian Jewish surnames, the types of surnames with their statistical distribution, as well as the description of surnames that were not created in Georgia but were brought as ready-made forms by Jews who migrated during the 19th–20th centuries to Georgia from other territories.

Overview

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

This article analyzes the historical, morphological, phonetic, and typological aspects of surnames used by Georgian Jews, arguing that hereditary surnames stabilized mainly in the 18th century and that most end in -shvili. It also distinguishes local Georgian Jewish surnames from ready-made surnames brought by 19th–20th-century Jewish migrants, especially Ashkenazim.

Key findings

  • The earliest doubtless hereditary surnames appear in the 17th century: Pichkhadze (1644) and Jinjikhashvili (circa 1670); the use of hereditary family names became standard for Georgian Jews during the 18th century, while before the 19th century surnames were not yet an integral part of the Georgian Jewish naming system.
  • Of 379 surnames in Table 3, 92% end in -shvili, 2% in -dze, 1% in -oti, 1% in -eli, 2% in -ovi/-evi, and 2% in other endings. More than 350 different surnames were used by Georgian Jews; Table 7 classifies 367 surnames as 56% patronymic, 8% matronymic, 23% nickname-based, 7% occupational, and 6% toponymic.
  • Morphological and phonetic features of Georgian Jewish surnames are generally not specifically Jewish; they are shared with Georgian Christian surnames, though Judeo-Georgian pronunciation of Hebrew and Russian-language intermediation produced distinctive variants.
  • Among 20th-century Tbilisi tombstone surnames, 83% are Ashkenazic, 12% Georgian, and 5% Mountain Jewish or Bukharan (total 2411 surnames); Ashkenazic migrants came with ready-made surnames, while some Mountain Jews acquired surnames only after migration to Georgia.

Methods

  • Historical-linguistic corpus analysis of surnames used by Jews in the territory of modern Georgia after the Middle Ages, drawing on published documents, censuses (e.g., Tskhinvali 1781, Kareli 1781, Kutaisi 1850, 1886 census), tombstones, and prior scholarship.
  • Morphological analysis of endings, compound names, demonymic suffixes, and hypocoristic formation; phonetic analysis of Georgian, Russian, and Judeo-Georgian variation; statistical tabulation of surname endings and types.
  • Comparative analysis with Georgian Christian surname distributions and with migrant Jewish groups, including Ashkenazic, Mountain Jewish, Bukharan, and Krymchak surnames.

Limitations

  • Paper-stated: scarcity of historical documents before the 17th century prevents determining when Georgian Jews began using hereditary family names; the exact status of early -shvili and -dze forms can be firmly determined only with genealogical data; absence of earlier references must be complemented by additional factors.
  • Paper-stated: several etymologies and scenarios are theoretical or conjectural, including some -ov(i)/-ev(i) origins, the Manasherashvili progenitor, and possible borrowing from Christians; some sources are corrupted or ambiguous.
  • Evident from the text: the corpus depends on available sources that are geographically and socially uneven, with women and serfs underrepresented before the 19th century, and transliteration or Russian intermediary forms create uncertainty in identifying exact Georgian consonants.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.3390/genealogy7030068

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

139 No basis given · 117 Own interpretation · 56 Own result · 49 Sources not found · 14 Not checked yet · 5 Own method

Verify all 1 references — free account

Show all 228 claims

  • It may state two separate claims as one. 92
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 4
  • Probably not a substantial claim. 62
152 of 152
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The earliest references in available sources approximate the period when surnames were actually formed.

    “For this reason, if we want to avoid speculative assertions, it would be logical to consider that it was precisely during that period that the Georgian Jewish surnames were mainly formed.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The corpus of surnames analyzed in Table 3 is representative of Georgian Jewish surnames in the 19th-20th centuries.

    “Table 3 presents the statistical distribution of surnames used by Georgian Jews during the 19th-20th centuries by their endings.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Before the 19th century, there was no legal obligation to have a hereditary surname for any inhabitant of Georgia regardless of religion.

    “This situation was possible because before the 19th century, there was no legal obligation to have a hereditary surname for any inhabitant of Georgia independently of the religion.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    In genitive forms, during the addition of -is, the elision of the last vowel present in the stem can take place.

    “In genitive forms, during the addition of -is, the elision of the last vowel present in the stem can take place.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Modern Georgian uses the following suffixes to construct diminutive forms: -a, -ilo, several suffixes with /k˙/ (such as -ak˙-i, -ik˙-i, -ik˙o, and -uk˙a), -una and -unia, -uchuna, -utsuna, and -utsana.

    “Modern Georgian uses the following suffixes to construct such forms: -a, -ilo, several suffixes with /k ˙/ (such as -ak ˙-i, -ik ˙-i, -ik ˙o, and -uk ˙a), -una and -unia, -uchuna, -utsuna, and -utsana.53”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    When -a is added to base forms having a stem ending in a consonant, the elision of the final -i (present in the nominative case) is optional.

    “When it is added to base forms having a stem ending in a consonant, the elision of the final -i (present in the nominative case) is optional.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The Georgian alphabet is phonetic: one letter corresponds to one sound, and vice versa.

    “The Georgian alphabet is phonetic: one letter corresponds to one sound, and vice versa.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Georgian lacks the phoneme /f/, with the aspirated p as the closest sound.

    “One of them is the absence of /f/ in Georgian, the closest sound being the aspirated p.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Georgian has two sets of stops and affricates: ejective and aspirated.

    “The existence of two sets of stops and affricates, ejective (pronounced with a glottalic airstream) and aspirated, represents one of the main peculiarities of the Georgian phonology.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Russian was the official language of the Russian Empire and the USSR, so Russian spelling was the basic one for certain surnames in Georgia.

    “Since Russian was the official language of the Russian Empire and-later, between 1922 and 1991-the USSR, the Russian spelling was the basic one for certain surnames in Georgia.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The vowel /u/, when placed before /a/, sounds close to the consonant /v/.

    “The vowel /u/, when placed before /a/, sounds close to the consonant /v/.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    During the period when possession of a surname is not required by the local administration, surnames develop naturally from nicknames that distinguish their bearers from other members of the group.

    “During the period when the possession of a surname is not required by the local administration, surnames develop naturally from nicknames that distinguish their bearers from other members of the group.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Georgian Jews used the given names Koen and Levi.

    “since Georgian Jews used the given names Koen and Levi.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    For local Jews, surnames were either of little importance or even absent.

    “because for local Jews, surnames were either of little importance or even absent.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Georgia has never been the destination of mass migrations of Jews belonging to communities using surnames.

    “Firstly, it is clear that Georgia has never been the destination of mass migrations of Jews belonging to communities using surnames.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The corpus of surnames borne by Georgian Jews is sufficiently comprehensive to support claims of absence of migrated surnames.

    “In the corpus of surnames borne by Georgian Jews, we do not find doubtless examples of migrated surnames”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    In the Russian Empire, the change of surnames by Jews was prohibited by law.

    “in the Russian Empire, the change of surnames by Jews was prohibited by the law.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The area around Artvin, usually called eastern Lazistan, was conquered by Russians in 1828, recovered by Turks, became part of Russian Georgia in 1878, and was finally ceded to Turkey in 1921.

    “An area around the town of Artvin usually called eastern Lazistan was conquered by Russians in 1828, recovered by Turks, became the part of Russian Georgia in 1878, and was finally ceded to Turkey in 1921.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Eastern Lazistan was inhabited by Lazs, Muslims who speak a Kartvelian language akin to Mingrelian.

    “It was inhabited by Lazs, Muslims who speak a Kartvelian language akin to Mingrelian.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Both eastern Lazistan and Meskheti belonged in the past to Georgia and were taken from Turks during the 19th century.

    “Both areas belonged in the past to Georgia and were taken from Turks during the 19th century.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Akhaltsikhe was the center of an Ottoman eyalet.

    “Since Akhaltsikhe was the center of an Ottoman eyalet”
21 of 21

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

3 of 3

Citations

Cites

Show all 2 references

Research works printed but not linked: 14

  1. Babalikashvili, 1970, O pamyatnikakh evreyskoy èpigrafiki g. Akhaltsikhe (XVIII-XIX v.v.), Sakartvelos Metsnierebata Aḳademia: Matsne, 6, 271
  2. Beider, Alexander (2008). A Dictionary of Jewish Surnames from the Russian Empire: Revised Edition, Avotaynu.
  3. Berdzenishvili, Niḳoloz (1940). Trudy Istoriko-Ètnograficheskogo Muzeya Evreev Gruzii. Vol. 1, Istoriko-Ètnograficheskiy Muzey Evreev Gruzii. (In Georgian).
  4. Berdzenishvili, Niḳoloz (1945). Trudy Istoriko-Ètnograficheskogo Muzeya Evreev Gruzii. Vol. 3, Istoriko-Ètnograficheskiy Muzey Evreev Gruzii. (In Georgian).
  5. Chikobava, Arnol’d Stepanovich (1967). Yazyki Narodov SSSR. Vol. 4 Iberiysko-Kavkazskie Yazyki, Nauka.
  6. Gagulashvili, 1996, Kartvel ebraelta gvarebi, Gantiadi, 22, 74
  7. Gogokhia, Baḳur (2019). Aǧmosavlet Lazetis Isṭoria da Gvarsakhelebi Sametsniero Khelmdzǧvaneli. [Ph.D. thesis, St. Andrew Georgian University of the Patriarchate of Georgia].
  8. Ḳldiashvili, Danejan, and Surguladze, Mzia (1993). Ṗirta Anoṭirebuli Leksiḳoni. Vol. 2, Metsniereba.
  9. Ḳldiashvili, Danejan, Otkhmezuri, Giorgi, Mċhedlidze, Guliḳo, Surguladze, Mzia, Zhǧenṭi, Davit, Bakradze, Ana, and Enukidze, Tina (2007). Ṗirta Anoṭirebuli Leksiḳoni. Vol. 4, Metsniereba.
  10. Ḳldiashvili, Danejan, Surguladze, Mzia, Bakradze, Ana, Raṭiani, Levan, and Otkhmezuri, Giorgi (2004). Ṗirta Anoṭirebuli Leksiḳoni. Vol. 3, Metsniereba.
  11. Ḳldiashvili, Danejan, Surguladze, Mzia, Tsagareishvili, Elene, and Jandieri, Guram (1991). Ṗirta Anoṭirebuli Leksiḳoni. Vol. 1, Metsniereba.
  12. Ḳldiashvili, Danejan, Mshvidobadze, Nana, Mċhedlidze, Guliḳo, and Surguladze, Mzia (2015). Ṗirta anoṭirebuli leksiḳoni. Vol. 5, Metsniereba.
  13. Shukyan, Mark Pavlovich (1940). Trudy Istoriko-Ètnograficheskogo Muzeya Evreev Gruzii. Vol. 1, Istoriko-Etnograficheskiy Muzey Evreev Gruzii.
  14. Tabuashvili, Apolon (2012). Ivane Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, Faculty of Humanities Institute of Georgian History, Proceedings, 5, Meridiani. (In Georgian).

Cited by

Still being checked.

Metadata

Authors
Beider, A.
Affiliations
Equipe d’Economie Le Havre Normandie (FR)
Corresponding author
Beider, Alexander
Venue
Genealogy
Publisher
MDPI AG
Published
2023-09-20
Volume
7
Issue
3
Pages
68
ISSN
2313-5778 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W4386896091
Cited by
0
References
2
FWCI
0.00
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Genealogy (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Linguistics and language evolution
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Religious studies › Jewish Identity and Society
  • Social Sciences › Arts and Humanities › Language and Linguistics › Linguistics and Language Studies
Keywords
Jewish personal names, Georgian Jews, compound names, Georgian language

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-11-10, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).

A second model labelled each claim on 2026-11-10 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review