PROBLEMS OF USING DOUBLE NAMES OF SUBJECTS OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION ON THE EXAMPLE OF KEMEROVO OBLAST
The article analyzes the procedure for determining the forms of naming units of subjects of the Russian Federation that have double names at the regional level, as well as the established practice of using various forms of their names in the Constitutions and Charters of subjects of the Russian Federation, other regulatory legal acts of such subjects of the Russian Federation. With a variety of approaches to the issue of unity or variability of using full double naming units and synonymous parts of double names of regions, their specific forms, as well as the preference for using one of them in conditions where the region has two or more names, a tendency to use parts of the subject's double naming unit separately from each other was revealed. At the same time, the issue of parallel use of the full double name of a subject of the Russian Federation, as equivalent to its two constituent parts, is decided by each region independently, based on the existing practice of using such a naming unit in the language. Features of writing double names of subjects (using brackets or dashes) do not affect the order of practical use of these names. Using the example of Kemerovo oblast, we consider the option of simultaneous use of three equivalent naming units of this subject of the Russian Federation. The two naming units of the region "Kemerovo oblast" and "Kuzbass" are synonymous, and the choice of one of them when used in speech or text of legal acts of authorities or other official documents is mainly due to the stylistic features of the text. However, an equivalent naming unit "Kemerovo oblast - Kuzbass" established in the regional Charter as the third option, which is in a certain sense a calque from the name of the subject fixed in the Constitution of the Russian Federation, does not have a historical and linguistic basis for its use and appears an artificial mechanical connection of two synonymous toponyms.