Academic Journal of Modern Philology

doi: 10.34616/ajmp.2025.27.12

ISSN 2299–7164

Vol. 27 (2025)

Open Access. Published by Committee for Philology of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Wrocław Branch and College for Interdisciplinary Studies, University of Wrocław. This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.

Radosław Kaleta

University of Warsaw, Faculty of Applied Linguistics, Department of Belarusian Studies

rkaleta@uw.edu.pl

ORCID: 0000-0001-6892-9332

Inflectional Intricacies of Belarusian and Polish Surnames

Abstract

Inflection of Belarusian surnames is a topic of nationwide importance in Belarus. To this day, there is a great diversity in reference literature, and the standardization of surname inflection has not been established. The article describes the declension variations of Belarusian surnames in the Belarusian language, influenced by Russian patterns that are incompatible with standard practices of Belarusian speakers. Discussion includes the formation of the Belarusian linguistic norm, which has experienced historical and continuing influence by extra-linguistic factors. Complex instances of declension of Belarusian surnames in both Belarusian and Polish as well as of Polish surnames in both Polish and Belarusian are thoroughly discussed. On the one hand, comparative analysis shows the subtle similarities and differences between the two Slavic languages, from which interference errors can result. On the other hand, there are noticeable tendencies for 1) Belarusian surnames to decline according to the Russian models, as well as 2) Belarusians living in Poland to express preferences to decline Belarusian surnames used in the Polish language, according to the rules of Belarusian language.

Keywords: Belarusian language, Polish language, surname, inflection, interference, language norm

Introductory Remarks

The Belarusian language is usually described in comparison with Russian, often leading to the perception that it is not an independent language and cannot exist without this juxtaposition. This article breaks away from that tradition and contributes to Polish-Belarusian contrastive studies, which are not as extensively explored as Russian-Belarusian ones. The comparison between Polish and Belarusian stems from a desire to challenge linguistic stereotypes and to demonstrate that users of both languages engage in discussions about the inflection of surnames. Furthermore, there is a large Belarusian diaspora in Poland that encounters Polish surnames (e.g. journalists) and has to navigate inflections of both Polish and Belarusian surnames in both languages – a task that is often problematic. Therefore, comparing these languages is not only justified but also highly practical. In this article emphasis will be placed on the contemporary state of affairs from the perspective of language norm and usage.

Belarusian examples in this article are presented first in the original Cyrillic script and then analyzed in their forms written in the international standards for English transliteration: BGN – Board on Geographic Names (USA), PCGN – Permanent Committee on Geographical Names (UK). BGN/PCGN transliteration aims to provide a clear and consistent representation of the letters of the original alphabet in the Latin alphabet. This type of transliteration is also used in Belarusian passports and for Belarusian names and surnames in official Polish documents for Belarusian immigrants.

In Poland, however, there is also a Polish variant of transcription which facilitates the correct reading of Belarusian surnames for Polish readers using typical Polish letters: ch, cz, sz, w, ż, ł (see Transliteracja i transkrypcja…). This method of transcription was formerly used in Polish documents issued to Belarusian immigrants. Today, this can and should still be applied in some practical texts for Poles (not in official documents) (cf. Wolański 2024). Despite this, these forms are often met with objections from Belarusians themselves who believe that the official forms – i.e., those from their passports (based on English transliteration) – should be used in all contexts and types of texts. However, the English transliteration is difficult to interpret in Polish texts. For comparison: original Cyrillic Шчэкачыхін, Polish transcription Szczekaczychin, and English transliteration Shchekachykhin. We use Polish transcriptions in the portion of this article that analyses Belarusian surnames used in Polish language. In Polish practical texts, based on BGN/PCGN transliteration of surnames in Belarusian passports appears unnatural, especially paired with typical Polish letters (e.g. Spotkałem Yuliyę Slutskayą instead of Spotkałem Julię Słucką “I met Yuliya Slutskaya”). This usage is not recommended and may lead to a tendency either to not decline such surnames or decline them incorrectly as that they do not resemble typical Polish inflection patterns. In contrast, writing them with the Polish transcription encourages declension and, in some cases, can make usage and interpretation. In order to satisfy the expectations of both the Polish reader and the Belarusian bearer of the surname, in informal or semi-official Polish texts one may add the original spelling of the surname or its passport transliteration in the nominative case at its first mention, e.g. W czwartek otworzymy wystawę Julii Słuckiej (Юлія Слуцкая) or (Yuliya Slutskaya) “On Thursday we will open an exhibition by Yuliya Slutskaya”. In Belarusian texts, however, such a practice in which the surname is given in the Cyrillic alphabet with the original form written in the Latin alphabet in parentheses – is rare.

Inflection vs. Non-Inflection of Polish Surnames

The declension of surnames, even those that are of native origin, is often problematic both in Polish (where these issues are regulated, e.g. in the Wielki słownik poprawnej polszczyzny, Markowski [ed. 2023]) and in Belarusian (where these issues are commented on differently in various editions, as discussed below). To avoid making mistakes, many Polish speakers avoid declension. This is especially seen in official documents such as theses, employment contracts, or sales agreements. In the text of a contract, it is standard to state that the agreement is made between person X and person Y, which would require using the instrumental case for the names (the contract between whom and whom). However, the nominative form is often used to “avoid any doubts.” Belarusian linguists note similar situations describing cases when a student has a surname like Муха/Mukha or Звяруга/Zvyaruha, which should be declined, but it causes a negative reaction in the student and their close ones (Bushlyakow 2004; Kachan 2012: 3).

In such and similar specific cases, surnames are deliberately written in the nominative form out of concern that the person reading them might make a mistake. In a church, for example, one might hear that the mass is being celebrated for zmarłych z rodziny *Mackiewicz/Nowak (“deceased members of the Mackiewicz/Nowak family”), instead of z rodziny Mackiewiczów/Nowaków. Exceptions are adjectival surnames ending in -ski, -cki, -dzki (e.g. Dąbrowski, Małecki, Zawadzki), which are always declined, e.g. msza za zmarłych z rodziny Dąbrowskich (“mass for the deceased Dąbrowski family members”).

The tendency to avoid declining Polish surnames has been commented by Hanna Jadacka, who explains it with the following factors (Jadacka 2005: 37):

Declension is seen as disrespectful – a deformation of the base form of the surname (a view held by, among others, officials and older people);

Problems with recreating the base form;

Fear of incorrect declension (making a mistake).

This list could also be expanded to include the tendency to avoid declining Polish surnames modeled after foreign surnames. In Western languages, names usually take only one form, whereas in Polish, even those are mostly declined (Jadacka 2005: 48–56).

If even native speakers sometimes struggle with declension, then speakers of Polish or Belarusian as foreign languages may face even greater difficulties. Let us therefore examine in which situations specific surnames are (or may be) indeclinable.

Polish surnames should almost always be declined, unless there are morphological obstacles, such as endings in -u (Jadacka 2005: 38). Feminine surnames are indeclinable when ending in the vowel -o (e.g. Duszeńko) and nominal surnames ending in a consonant (either hard or soft), which have the same form in all cases, e.g. Nowak (Jadacka 2005: 38). Analogous male surnames should always be declined according to the normative standard, e.g. bracia Nowakowie “brothers Nowak” (not bracia *Nowak). Surnames ending in -e can be left without declension (but it is not mandatory), e.g. bracia Handke/Handkowie, as well as foreign surnames, e.g. bracia Lumière (correctly also: bracia Lumière’owie) (Jadacka 2005: 45).

In a very specific case, the declension of Polish surnames is not applied when the nominative form is not obvious to reconstruct. This concerns, among others, male surnames ending in the vowels -o or -a. The declined form can cause problems with reconstructing the nominative, e.g. Nie ma Mirosława Bańki (“There is no Mirosław Bańko”) vs Nie ma Aleksandra Bańki (“There is no Aleksander Bańka”) – the nominative of the surname could be either Bańko (Mirosław Bańko – professor at the Faculty of Polish Studies at the University of Warsaw) or Bańka (Aleksander Bańka – professor at the Institute of Philosophy at the University of Silesia). It is most like for this reason that some of M. Bańko’s dictionaries include the phrase pod redakcją Mirosława Bańko (“edited by Mirosław Bańko”), as opposed to the declension of his surname as Bańki to avoid associations with the common noun bańka – bańki (meaning “a jar” or “a bubble”). However, other linguists decline this surname, following the normative rule of declension in Polish insisting that everything can and must be declined (Karpowicz 2009: 108).

In common Polish, the indeclinable form of the surname, accompanied by a first name or other word indicating the grammatical case (e.g. Mirosława Bańko, pana Bańko, profesora Bańko), is accepted (Bańko 2003a; Bańko (ed.) 2006: 134). Supporters of common Polish and those of standard Polish engage in long debates, rarely coming to agreement. Thus, some editions of dictionaries edited by Mirosław Bańko can be found with the inflected form: pod redakcją Mirosława Bańki, not Bańko (Bańko 2003b). These are the rules of the normative standard, which does not provide for exceptions in this case (as pointed out several decades ago) (Obrębska-Jabłońska 1958: 379–380).

Well-known male surnames ending in the vowel -o (preceded by a hard consonant) are always declined (like feminine nouns, e.g. matka “mother”), e.g. N. Kościuszko, Matejko, Mleczko, Sidło, G. Kościuszki, Matejki, Mleczki, Sidły, D./L. Kościuszce, Matejce, Mleczce, Sidle, A. Kościuszkę, Matejkę, Mleczkę, Sidłę, I. Kościuszką, Matejką, Mleczką, Sidłą.1 On the other hand, nouns ending in -o (preceded by a soft consonant) are always declined (like masculine nouns, e.g. wujcio “uncle”), for example: N. Puzio, G. Puzia, D. Puziowi, A. Puzia, I. Puziem, L. Puziu.

The mentioned tendency to leave surnames indeclinable is accompanied by a tendency to decline indeclinable surnames. It also happens that feminine surnames are declined like masculine ones, e.g., Nie ma pana Kononenki ani pani *Kononenki (“There is no Mr. Kononenko nor Mrs. Kononenko”). This is an overgeneralization of the rule to decline everything that can be declined in Polish.

Inflection vs. Non-Inflection of Belarusian Surnames

The Belarusian equivalents of Polish Slavic surnames ending in -o are presented as -a (a phenomenon known as akanye, or akanne /aˈkanːʲɛ/ (ah-KAH-nyeh) in Belarusian), e.g. Касцюшка/Kastsyushka (Polish: Kościuszko), Манюшка/Manyushka (Polish: Moniuszko), and others like Адамейка/Adamyeyka, Бандарэнка/Bandarenka, Ігнаценка/Ihnatsyenka, Латушка/Latushka, Лукашэнка/Lukashenka, Саўчанка/Sawchanka, and Васючэнка/Vasyuchenka.

Surnames of this type (especially those ending in -энка/-enka, -енка/-yenka, -анка/-anka, -онка/-onka, -ёнка/-yonka, -інка/-inka) are often mistakenly left indeclinable in Belarusian (following the Russian pattern), even though these masculine surnames should be declined, e.g. N. Асіпенка/Asipyenka, G. Асіпенкі/Asipyenki, D./A./L. Асіпенку/Asipyenku, I. Асіпенкам/Asipyenkam (Hryhor’yeva 1994: 151; cf. Zrazikava and Hubkina 2016: 88). Therefore, it should also be заява Лукашэнкі/zayava Lukashenki “Lukashenka’s declaration” (and not заява *Лукашэнкa/zayava Lukashenka – considered incorrect (the form influenced by the Russian language, in which such surnames are not declined, cf. Stsyatsko 2002: 57; Bandarovich 2013: 20), з Лукашэнкам/z Lukashenkam “with Lukashenka.”

It is often the case that the discussed surnames, including feminine surnames, remain indeclinable, although scholars are not entirely in agreement on this matter (Zhawnyarovich 2014: 125). Therefore, in different editions, one can encounter both indeclinable and declinable forms, e.g. з Дар’яй Бандарэнкай / z Dar’yay Bandarenkay vs з Дар’яй Бандарэнка / z Dar’yay Bandarenka (cf. Zrazikava and Hubkina 2016: 89). The 2021 Belarusian correctness standards edition asserts that only masculine surnames of this type are declined, also noting that scholars have differing opinions on the declension of feminine surnames, which is becoming increasingly common in texts (Zhawnyarovich 2021: 278–279). Therefore, the reader must make their own decision in this matter, which may seem strange and unclear to non-native speakers of Belarusian. By comparison, feminine surnames of this type are not declined in Polish, in contrast to masculine surnames, as mentioned above. In Russian, neither feminine nor masculine surnames are declined. Thus, the declension of such feminine surnames would characterize Belarusian as distinct from both Polish and Russian, while non-declension would indicate an artificial tendency to align it with more “prestigious” languages.

The Belarusian linguist Pavyel Stsyatsko advocated for the declension of surnames ending in -a or -я/-ya. In his monograph on language culture, he pointed out that such surnames are extensively discussed in different sources, and normative editions often provide contradictory information (Stsyatsko 2002: 57–63).

Deliberate and political action from the 1970s was assessed by the researcher as an artificial restriction on the inflection of such surnames, aimed at aligning Belarusian more closely with the norms of standard Russian (Stsyatsko 2002: 57). However, the researcher points to a Russian source from the Institute of the Russian Language of the USSR Academy of Sciences from 1976, which permits the inflection of such surnames only in colloquial language (Stsyatsko 1992: 31). Spoken Belarusian, belles-lettres, and Belarusian dialects demonstrate that the inflection of such surnames is natural and characteristic of living Belarusian (the tendency to decline is noted by various researchers, e.g. Bushlyakow, Yankowski, Kachan, Stsyatsko, Zhawnyarovich).

P. Zhawnyarovich recommends declining surnames ending in -a or -я/-ya (i.e. considers their declension not a mistake), as it greatly helps in identifying the person, especially in situations where initials are frequently used, e.g., дапамагчы В.К. Ігнацeнка, Т.М. Бядуля / dapamahchy V.K. Ihnatsyenka, T.M. Byadulya “to help V.K. Ihnatsyenka, T.M. Byadulya” (surnames officially considered indeclinable when referring to women, Plotnikaw and Traykowskaya 2004: 529) vs. дапамагчы В.К. Ігнацeнцы, Т.М. Бядулі / dapamahchy V.K. Ihnatsyentsy, T.M. Byaduli – the declension helps identify the person as a woman (Zhawnyarovich 2014: 125; cf. Stsyatsko 2002: 60) – variants for men: дапамагчы В.К. Ігнаценку, Т.М. Бядулю / dapamahchy V.K. Ihnatsyenku, T.M. Byadulyu. Therefore, contemporary recommendations lean towards solutions rooted in the natural essence of colloquial Belarusian. However, in linguistic discussions, some argue that avoiding the declension of female surnames in the style of Кацюшэнка/Katsyushenka is more appropriate for formal or official situations. For instance, when issuing diplomas, as well as in situations where consonant alternations might occur and the surname could resemble a potentially negative common noun. In such cases, avoiding inflection could help prevent unwanted associations (see Kawrus 2019: 26).

Consonant alternations in surnames ending in -га, -ка, -ха / -ha, -ka, -kha alter the phonetic shape of surnames and may lead to difficulties in reconstructing the base form, hence the proposal not to decline them, e.g., Дука & Дуца – Дуцы / Duka & Dutsa – Dutsy, Духа & Дуса – Дусе / Dukha & Dusa – Dusye, Лапега & Лапеза – Лапезе / Lapyeha & Lapyeza – Lapyezye (Haponyenka 2006: 32–33). While one could agree that surnames should not be declined in legal documents, this should not apply to general language, as these alternations are a characteristic feature of Belarusian, much like its inflectional nature. Expanding the practice of not inflecting such surnames would lead to the creation of artificially “immobilized” forms that would look odd in texts or sound awkward in speech. Additionally, bearers of surnames derived from common nouns often attempt to distinguish them by deliberately avoiding inflection of their surnames (Ustsinovich 1995: 40).

Belarusian masculine and feminine surnames ending in -o are another special case, in which the ultimate syllable is stressed (e.g. Глушко/Hlushko, Дурнаво/Durnavo, Яско/Yasko, Крамко/Kramko, Лапо/Lapo, Ралько/Ral′ko, Сцяцко/Stsyatsko, Сусло/Suslo, Жудро/Zhudro). According to most official sources and influenced by Russian standards, such surnames do not decline (e.g., без Алега Сусло / byez Alyeha Suslo, з Кацярынай Яско / z Katsyarynay Yasko) (Burak 1974: 136; Plotnikaw and Antanyuk 2003: 216; Kachan 2012: 1; Zhawnyarovich 2021: 276).

However, in some sources, it is mentioned that there is an exception for masculine surnames derived from neuter common nouns denoting common nouns or adjectives (e.g. Сцябло – Сцябла – Сцяблом / Stsyablo – Stsyabla – Stsyablom, Талакно – Талакна – Талакном / Talakno – Talakna – Talaknom) (Zrazikava and Hubkina 2016: 89; Zhawnyarovich 2021: 276). Z. Sawka noted that such surnames often come from characteristics describing a person, e.g., Глушко/Hlushko (from глушко/hlushko ← глухі/hlukhi “deaf”), Гняўко/Hnyawko (from гняўко/hnyawko ← гняўлівы/hnyawlivy “angry”), Нямко/Nyamko (from нямко/nyamko ← нямы/nyamy, “mute”) and then only masculine surnames decline according to the pattern of neuter nouns, e.g., гумно/humno “manure” (Sawka 2008: 42–43) (additionally, feminine surnames ending in -a/-o, derived from neuter nouns, do not decline).

This raises the question of how well non-native or native Belarusian speakers alike will be able to assign a given surname to the categories of common noun or a characteristic and apply declension. Identifying whether a given surname ending in -a comes from a common noun and determining the appropriate declension pattern is not always obvious. This is especially true for Russian-speaking Belarusians or foreigners who might also struggle with identifying the stress or distinguishing between feminine and neuter nouns ending in -a. It is important to emphasize that, surnames with a stem ending in г, к, х / h, k, kh are considered in different groups, as they can come from both common (e.g. Кніга/Kniha, Саладуха/Saladukha, Сарока/Saroka) and uncommon nouns (e.g. Расолька/Rasol′ka, Салоха/Salokha, Таўпыга/Tawpyha). P. Stsyatsko considers the rule of relating a surname to a common noun to be artificial, as a surname is already a different word – a common gender noun that can denote both a man and a woman. Therefore, it does not matter whether it comes from a common noun (Stsyatsko 1992: 30; Haponyenka 2006: 31).

It is worth summarizing this declension based on linguistic practice and Zhawnyarovich’s considerations (and earlier works by Stsyatsko) as follows: all surnames ending in an unstressed -a (whether derived from a common noun or not) should be declined like general gender nouns – with different endings in the dative/locative and instrumental cases, depending on the person’s gender. However, surnames with a stressed -a ending should have the same forms for both genders. These rules would better reflect the specificity of the Belarusian language and would also be easier for both Belarusians and foreigners using Belarusian.

Summary of Declensions in Polish and Belarusian

Similarities

In both languages, female surnames ending in a consonant, such as Monice Nowak (PL), Зосьцы Верас / Zos′cy Vyeras (BE), and those ending in the vowel -o, such as z panią Duszeńko (PL), з Кацярынай Яско / z Katsyarynay Yasko (BE), are indeclinable. In Belarusian, surnames ending in -a that are not derived from common nouns do not officially decline. In Polish, surnames ending in -o do not undergo declension according to the normative standard, e.g. z Darią Bandarenko. However, in both languages, forms with declension can be found outside the official norm, such as з Дар’яй Бандарэнкай / z Dar’yay Bandarenkay (BE) and z Darią *Bandarenką (PL).

Surnames ending in -o in Polish have an -a ending in Belarusian, e.g. Манюшка/Manyushka (BE) in comparison to Moniuszko (PL) – these surnames are declined in both languages, if they concern men.

Belarusian surnames derived from common nouns with a stressed ending as well as those with an unstressed ending (according to the academic norm), such as Вярба/Vyarba and Вянсна/Vyasna, are declined the same way regardless of the gender of their owner – similarly to how they are declined in Polish, e.g. G. Вясны/Vyasny, Крапівы/Krapivy (BE), Wiasny, Krapiwy (PL), D./L. Вясне/Vyasnye, Крапіве/Krapivye (BE), Wiaśnie, Krapiwie (PL), A. Вясну/Vyasnu, Крапіву/Krapivu (BE), Wiasnę, Krapiwę (PL), I. Вясною/Vyasnoyu, Крапівой/Krapivoy (BE), Wiasną, Krapiwą (PL).

Differences

Belarusian masculine surnames ending in -o, such as Сцяцко/Stsyatsko, Сусло/Suslo, Яско/Yasko, do not officially undergo declension (except for the aforementioned separate opinion of some linguists), e.g. без Алега Сусло / byez Alyeha Suslo, whereas in standard Polish they should be declined, e.g. bez Aleha Susły (in common Polish, it is possible to omit the declension if a word indicating the case is used: bez Aleha Susło).

In Belarusian, feminine surnames ending in -a that refer to neuter nouns, such as Варыва/Varyva, Вярбіла/Vyarbila, Долата/Dolata, Дула/Dula, Калена/Kalyena, Пыліла/Pylila, Тармола/Tarmola, are not declined. This rule in Belarusian is not known to Polish speakers. In Polish, similar surnames are treated as feminine surnames ending in -a and follow the same declension pattern, regardless of whether they refer to women or men. e.g. N. Kalena, Warywa, G. Kaleny, Warywy, D./L. Kalenie, Warywie, A. Kalenę, Warywę, I. Kaleną, Warywą.

In such cases where Belarusian surnames ending in an unstressed -a may have different endings depending on gender, their Polish declension will not reflect this distinction, e.g. D. Алёне Кнізе / Alyonye Knizye – Івану Кнігу / Ivanu Knihu (BE), Alonie Knisze / Kniże – Iwanowi Knisze / Kniże (PL), I. з Марыяй Папругай / z Maryyay Papruhay – з Іванам Папругам / z Ivanam Papruham (BE), z Marią Papruhą – z Iwanem Papruhą (PL).

In Belarusian, such surnames ending in an unstressed -a that do not derive from common feminine nouns only decline when they refer to men (a contested topic among some linguists), e.g. Лукша/Luksha, Карызна/Karyzna, Сапега/Sapyeha, Нлебка/Hlyebka. In contrast, these surnames will decline the same way in Polish regardless of the gender of the person carrying them, e.g. N. Łuksza, Sapieha, G. Łukszy, Sapiehy, D./L. Łukszy, Sapiesze / Sapieże, A. Łukszę, Sapiehę, I. Łukszą, Sapiehą.

The analysis carried out in this article shows that in Belarusian – unlike Polish and Russian – there is no unambiguously standardised issue of name variety, which is also reflected in the language of the Belarusian media. Some sources point to a variety of patterns unique to Belarusian, influenced by usage and dialects, while others suggest a standard based on Russian language patterns. To date, these issues have not been clearly resolved, as they do not involve more than simply purely linguistic factors. This has negative consequences for the use of Belarusian, as it is seen as an overly non-standardised language with too many variants. Thus, it is suggested that a language user may want to use Russian as a “more standardised” language. This is also not conducive to the learning of Belarusian by Russian-speaking Belarusians and foreigners, who get lost in the maze of different interpretations and variety patterns and are afraid of exposing themselves to ridicule by making mistakes. The comparative analysis presented in this article leads the author to formulate recommendations for the codifiers of the Belarusian language when unifying the principles of name variety:

Do not rely on the traditions of other languages, including Polish and Russian;

Rely on the living language of Belarusian speakers (past and present) and on the principles of inflection of the Belarusian language.

A significant codification task rests with the Institute of Linguistics of the National Academy of Sciences of Belarus, and the official publications of this institution (e.g. the academic grammar) should consistently promote the applied inflection patterns. However, the 2007 academic grammar (Lukashanyec [ed. 2007]) did not account for the recommendations of P. Stsyatsko – professor and head of the Department of Linguistics at the Faculty of Belarusian Philology and Culture at Yanka Kupala State University of Grodno, who received the honorary award выдатнік народнай асветы / vydatnik narodnay asvyety (“Distinguished Public Education Worker”), nor the guidelines from 2001, based in part on his articles (Sklanyennye nyekatorykh prozvishchaw) nor the 2006 edition of the journal Rodnaye slova (Ad redaktsyi).

Belarusian Surnames in Polish

Even the nominative form can depend on various factors. Belarusian female surnames ending in -цкая/-tskaya, -ская/-skaya in Polish have the endings -cka, -ska and decline similarly to Polish surnames with the same endings, e.g., Уліцкая/Ulitskaya (BE) – Ulicka, Ulickiej, Ulicką (PL); Ціханоўская/Cikhanowskaya (BE) – Cichanouska, Cichanouskiej, Cichanouską (PL) (Nazwiska żeńskie…). If the Polish transcription was used (Transliteracja i transkrypcja…), the nominative would look as follows: Ulickaja, Cichanouskaja, which would be closer to the original and would be preferred by Belarusians. However, this could cause difficulties for Poles in forming the oblique cases, which is why the shortened version of the surname is used (Wolański 2020).

Belarusian surnames such as Гушчава/Hushchava, Калеснікава/Kalyesnikava decline in Polish like adjectival possessive surnames, such as Nowakowa – Nowakowej, i.e., Huszczawa – Huszczawej, Kalesnikawa2 – Kalesnikawej.

In Polish, there is no distinction, unlike as found in Belarusian, regarding whether a surname originates from a common noun or whether it has an (un)accented ending. Therefore, Belarusian surnames will decline the same way for both genders – Nina, Arciom Kniha, Iryna, Wadzim Łuksza, Nina, Mikoła Wiasna: N. Kniha, Łuksza, Wiasna, G. Knihy, Łukszy, Wiasny, D./L. Knisze/Kniże, Łukszy, Wiaśnie, A. Knihę, Łukszę, Wiasnę, I. Knihą, Łukszą, Wiasną.

Belarusian masculine surnames ending in -ka in Polish are rendered in two ways: either according to transcription (i.e. following the pronunciation), e.g. Лукашэнка/Lukashenka – Łukaszenka or in accordance with a certain tradition that renders such surnames with the ending -ko, e.g. Манюшка/Manyushka – Moniuszko, Касцюшка/Kastsyushka – Kościuszko, hence Лукашэнка/Lukashenka – Łukaszenko. Therefore, both forms of the surname are correct. The Polonized form Łukaszenko is used in both speech and writing. However, in scientific publications and library practice, transcription should be applied, hence – Łukaszenka. The issue concerns only the nominative form; in other grammatical cases, the forms are identical (Grzenia 2002). For a male surname, a woman named Łukaszenko does not inflect the surname (G. Łukaszenko), but a woman named Łukaszenka does, using the same endings as for a male surname (G. Łukaszenki).

The surname Васіль Быкаў/Vasil’ Bykaw continues to raise questions, as its Polish transcription appears as Wasil Bykau (сf. Kaleta 2013: 133; Kaleta 2014: 128; Kaleta 2015: 73; Kaleta 2017: 27). The transcribed nominative form (unlike forms, e.g. genitive or instrumental) undergoes further inflection according to Polish patterns: N. Быкаў/Bykaw (BE) – Bykau (PL), G./A. Быкава/Bykava (BE) – Bykaua (like Turnau – Turnaua, Landau – Landaua) (PL), D. Быкавy/Bykavu (BE) – Bykauowi (PL), I. Быкавым/Bykavym (BE) – Bykauem (PL), L. аб Быкаве / ab Bykavye (BE) – o Wasilu Bykau (PL) (the locative of surnames ending with the sound (u̯) takes the nominative form) (сf. Grzenia 2008). These Polish forms often provoke strong reactions from Belarusians or specialists in Belarusian studies (see Smułkowa 2017: 57), who are well aware of the different declension in the original language. However, an average Pole unfamiliar with Belarusian would never deduce the genitive *Bykawa or instrumental *Bykawym from the nominative Bykau, and could only transcribe them in the nominative form, followed by application of the declension pattern, if presented with the entire Belarusian paradigm. This would correspond to Belarusian pronunciation but clash with Polish inflection. For individuals who know both languages, there may naturally be an overlap of these differing rules. Belarusians lobbying for the Polish genitive form (Bykau – Bykawa) to mirror the Belarusian must understand that, consequently, the instrumental form should also match Belarusian: *Bykawym instead of Bykauem, which, in both cases, is clearly inconsistent with Polish linguistic norms and difficult to justify. The ending -ym (Быкавым/Bykavym), as in a Belarusian adjective, does not exist in Polish in this case; another example: Пятроў/Pyatrow – Пятровым/Pyatrovym (for a female surname, the instrumental form is Пятровай/Pyatrovay, see Barshchewskaya 2020).

On the other hand, a Pole does not expect that a surname in Belarusian will decline according to Polish paradigms, hence natural differences such as: N. Смольскі/Smol′ski (BE) – Smolski (PL), G./A. Смольскага/Smol′skaha (BE) (rather than *Смольскeгo/Smol’skyeho as under the the Polish pattern influence) – Smolskiego (PL), Смольскай/Smol’skay (BE) – Smolskiej (PL). Therefore, it should come as no surprise that the Polish adaptation of Belarusian surnames is adjusted to Polish patterns, which do not account for the alternation of -аў:-ава/-aw:-ava (the alternation -ёў:-ёва/-yow:-yova in case of surnames like Салаўёў/Salawyow – Салаўёва/Salawyova) in the genitive or -аў:-авым/-aw:-avym (the alternation -ёў:-ёвым/-yow:-yovym in case of surnames like Салаўёў/Salawyow – Салаўёвым/Salawyovym) in the instrumental, nor do they follow Belarusian rules for declining surnames like Bykau. The same applies to surnames ending in -ін/-in, e.g., N. Вялюгін/Vyalyuhin (BE) – Wialuhin (PL), I. з Вялюгіным / z Vyalyuhinym (BE) – z Wialuhinem (PL) (a Pole unfamiliar with Belarusian will not assume that the instrumental should have the Belarusian-like ending -ym, so he/she uses the Polish noun ending -em).

A compromise variant can be proposed, assuming a gradation of Polish norms:

A general norm for popular science texts (Polish declension: Bykau – Bykaua – z Bykauem);

A specialized norm for Belarusian studies texts (Belarusian-like declension: Bykau – Bykawa – z Bykawym/Bykawem) (cf. Kaleta 2017: 27).

However, the question arises whether this clarifies the issue or introduces more confusion when a casual reader encounters a specialized text. It also seems that the second variant would face opposition from Polish linguists. A genitive form Bykawa is possible in Polish if the nominative is Bykaw (instead of Bykau); in that case, the instrumental form would be Bykawem. But for some Belarusians the form Bykaw is unacceptable, because it does not reflect Belarusian linguistic features, and even resembles the Russian equivalent of the name – Быков/Bykov (in Polish Bykow).

Belarusian indeclinable male surnames ending in -o should be declined in standard Polish usage when they appear in Polish texts/speech, e.g. прафесара Сцяцко / prafyesara Stsyatsko (BE) – profesora Sciacki (PL). In common Polish, they do not have to be declined if preceded by a first name or another noun indicating the case, e.g. profesora Sciacko.

Polish Surnames in Belarusian

Polish feminine surnames ending in -cka, -ska are rendered in Belarusian with a shortened ending -цка/-tska, -ска/-ska, for example, Jasińska-Socha (PL) – Ясіньска-Соха/Yasin′ska-Sokha (BE), Suchocka (PL) – Сухоцка/Sukhotska (BE), (PL) Szymborska – Шымборска/Shymborska (BE). When declined, these surnames take endings similar to those of full adjectives, such as G. Сухоцкай/Sukhotskay, Шымборскай/Shymborskay (Zhawnyarovich 2021: 277). Forms like Баршчэўская/Barschewskaya instead of Баршчэўска/Barschewska may indicate a stronger sense of Belarusian identity (e.g. among Poles of Belarusian origin) or a desire to emphasize alignment with Belarusian linguistic traditions. On the other hand, using the first mentioned forms may also aim to highlight that these are foreign proper names. In the example above, a Pole with the surname Barszczewska might use the Belarusian form Баршчэўская/Barschewskaya to show respect for the Belarusian language or an emotional connection to it, while a Belarusian (e.g. a journalist) writing a text in Belarusian with the surname Barszczewska would use the form Баршчэўска/Barschewska to emphasize its Polish (foreign) nature.

The declension of Polish surnames ending in -a may not be straightforward. For example, the surname Kaleta (in Old Russian, kalita “a type of money bag” comes from the Tatar kalta “pocket or leather pouch,” see Wielki słownik…) can be classified in different ways:

It can be pronounced with a Polish paroxytone accent (declined like a common noun with an unaccented ending), or

With an oxytone accent, like Kalita.

In the first case, the declension might be the same for both genders, like Belarusian surnames derived from common nouns with either an accented or unaccented -a ending (Zhawnyarovich 2021: 278, 280) (N. Калета/Kalyeta, G. Калеты/Kalyety, D./L. Калеце/Kalyetsye, A. Калету/Kalyetu, I. Калетай/Kalyetay) or differentiated in the dative/locative and instrumental depending on gender (N. Калета/Kalyeta, G. Калеты/Kalyety, D./L. Калеце/Kalyetsye or Калету/Kalyetu, A. Калету/Kalyetu, I. Калетай/Kalyetay or Калетам/Kalyetam).

In the second case (with an accented ending), the declension follows the pattern of common surnames with an accented ending, e.g. N. Вябра/Vyarba, Калята/Kalyata, D./L. Вябре/Vyarbye, Каляце/Kalyatsye, I. з Вяброй / z Vyarboy, з Калятой / z Kalyatoy.

The selection of the appropriate paradigm in the Belarusian language is a challenge for both native speakers and foreigners who use Belarusian, as it requires determining the issue of stress and whether the surname derives from a common noun. In practice, different forms of declension are seen depending on the user’s interpretation of the language. Therefore, for such surnames, it is easier to apply the rules regarding the indeclinability of foreign surnames ending in a vowel (e.g. Дзюма/Dzyuma, Бруна/Bruna, Сукарна/Sukarna, Халіла/Khalila, Ціта/Tsita) (Lukashanyec [ed. 2007: 171]). Hence, an example could be an authentic dedication in the form of Радаславу Калета з шанаваннем / Radaslavu Kalyeta z shanavannyem. However, recent Belarusian publication clarifies this issue and states that most foreign surnames ending in a vowel are not declined, including those ending in an unstressed -я/-ya preceded by -i (e.g., N. Гарсія/Harsiya – I. з Гарсія / z Harsiya), but foreign surnames ending in unstressed -a, -я/-ya decline like common gendered nouns (Zhawnyarovich 2021: 276).3 This means they have different endings in the dative/locative and instrumental cases, depending on the person’s gender (e.g. N. Калета/Kalyeta, G. Калеты/Kalyety, D./L. Калеце/Kalyetsye or Калету/Kalyetu, A. Калету/Kalyetu, I. Калетай/Kalyetay or Калетам/Kalyetam).

In Polish, foreign surnames generally undergo declension, e.g., Kennedy – Kennedy’ego, Huzinga – Huzingi, Petrarka – Petrarki, Casanova – Casanovy (Jadacka 2005: 53). If Polish surnames ending in -a are to be treated as foreign in Belarusian, and thus indeclinable,4 then there is no need to consider using the Belarusian paradigm to adjust other surnames, including those ending in -a and -o. In Belarusian, these are declined only for males, while in Polish they are declined for both genders following the feminine paradigm, e.g., Wojtyła (PL) – Вайтыла/Vaytyla (BE), Lasota (PL) – Лясота/Lyasota (BE), Hołownia (PL) – Галоўня/Halownya (BE), Ziobro (dialectal name for a rib) (PL) – Зёбра/Zyobra (BE). However, one can find declined surnames of this type on the internet, e.g., У паэтычным даробку Караля Вайтылы / U paetychnym darobku Karalya Vaytyly (“In the poetic oeuvre of Karol Wojtyła”); выстава прадстаўляе Караля Вайтылу / vystava pradstawlyaye Karalya Vaytylu (“The exhibition features Karol Wojtyła”); Тшаскоўскі пачаў бой за галасы Шымона Галоўні / Tshaskowski pachaw boy za halasy Shymona Halowni (“Trzaskowski began the fight for Hołownia’s voters”).

Thus, it is no surprise that also the Polish adaptation of Belarusian surnames follows Polish patterns. It is clear that Belarusian rules are analogous to Polish ones: first through transcription into the Belarusian language, and then by inflection according to the Belarusian paradigm (сf. the previously mentioned discussion of the surname Быкаў/Bykaw in Polish).

Summary

Based on the analyzed material, it can be stated that both the Polish and Belarusian languages adapt foreign surname inflection patterns to their specific linguistic characteristics. Therefore, neither Polish speakers should have objections to the Belarusian side, nor should Belarusian speakers have complaints about the Polish side.

In both languages, similar surnames often occur (e.g. Каліта/Kalita (BE) – Kaleta [PL]), which in Belarusian can lead to different inflection patterns depending on the accent, and whether the surname is treated as foreign or derived from a (non)common noun. In the Belarusian language, there is a noticeable variation in inflection, which is confirmed by the cited Belarusian linguistic works. Based on these works, it is also evident that linguistic practice, dialectal traditions, and official rules can differ. There is also an attempt to distinguish the Belarusian inflection from the Russian tradition (especially in non-governmental publications, but also in the state sponsored journal Роднае слова/Rodnaye slova). The presence of different opinions regarding inflection patterns in Belarusian expert publications hinders a clear standardization of the Belarusian language, which is still enmeshed in a historical-ideological-propagandistic context.

On the other hand, the presence of Belarusian surnames in Polish also presents challenges for Polish speakers, as evidenced by questions posed in linguistic advisory services and the answers given by experts in Polish studies. The Belarusian and Polish languages are close yet distant enough that the differences between them regarding surnames are often very subtle and interesting, revealing distinct linguistic practices, evolution of norms, linguistic influences, and the typical peculiarities of both languages.

Appendix

Comparison in tables of Belarusian and Polish Surnames

In Belarusian, feminine names with the unaccented ending -а, -я/-ya with the stem ending in г, к, х / h, k, kh, which are derived from common nouns, decline based on the subject’s gender. Feminine surnames decline like general gender nouns, and masculine surnames decline like common nouns of the masculine gender ending in -а (e.g. бацька/bats′ka “father”). Academic grammar simplifies declension and makes no distinction between genders. In Polish, this distinction does not exist either.

Women’s names

Men’s names

N.

Ірына Кніга, Шышка

Iryna Kniha, Shyshka

Міхась Кніга, Шышка

Mikhas′ Kniha, Shyshka

G.

Ірыны Кнігі, Шышкі

Iryny Knihi, Shyshki

Міхася Кнігі, Шышкі

Mikhasya Knihi, Shyshki

D.

Ірыне Кнізе, Шышцы

Irynye Knizye, Shyshcy

Міхасю Кнігу, Шышку

Mikhasyu Knihu, Shyshku

A.

Ірыну Кнігу, Шышку

Irynu Knihu, Shyshku

Міхася Кнігу, Шышку

Mikhasya Knihu, Shyshku

I.

Ірынай Кнігай, Шышкай

Irynay Knihay, Shyshkay

Міхасём Кнігам, Шышкам

Mikhasyom Kniham, Shyshkam

L.

Ірыне Кнізе, Шышцы

Irynye Knizye, Shyshcy

Міхасю Кнігу, Шышку

Mikhasyu Knihu, Shyshku

Names of both sexes according

to academic grammar

Belarusian names in Polish

N.

Ніна, Іван Кніга, Саладуха, Сарока

Nina, Ivan Kniha, Saladukha, Saroka

Nina, Iwan Kniha, Saroka

G.

Ніны, Івана Кнігі, Саладухі, Сарокі

Niny, Ivana Knihi, Saladukhi, Saroki

Niny, Iwana Knihi, Saroki

D.

Ніне, Івану Кнізе, Саладусе, Сароцы

Ninye, Ivanu Knizye, Saladusye, Sarocy

Ninie, Iwanowi Knisze/Kniże, Saroce

A.

Ніну, Івана Кнігу, Саладуху, Сароку

Ninu, Ivana Knihu, Saladukhu, Saroku

Ninę, Iwana Knihę, Sarokę

I.

Нінай, Іванам Кнігай, Саладухай, Сарокай

Ninay, Ivanam Knihay, Saladukhay, Sarokay

Niną, Iwanem Knihą, Saroką

L.

Ніне, Іване Кнізе, Сароцы, Саладусе

Ninye, Ivanye Knizye, Sarocy, Saladusye

Ninie, Iwanie Knisze/Kniże, Saroce

In Belarusian, feminine names derived from common nouns with the unaccented ending -а, -я/-ya (excluding those previously mentioned with a stem ending in г, к, х / h, k, kh) have the same endings regardless of the person gender and are declined like feminine nouns (e.g. вада/vada, зямля/zyamlya, бульба/bul′ba, доля/dolya). The same rule applies to names derived from common names with an accented ending, e.g. Вясна/Vyasna, Вярба/Vyarba, Крапіва/Krapiva. However, in the texts, surnames with an unaccented ending are often declined like general gender nouns.

Names of both sexes

Names declined in texts as general gender nouns

N.

Ніна, Іван Вярба, Кропля, Пушча

Nina, Ivan Vyarba, Kroplya, Pushcha

Ніна, Іван Пушча

Nina, Ivan Pushcha

G.

Ніны, Івана Вярбы, Кроплі, Пушчы

Niny, Ivana Vyarby, Kropli, Pushchy

Ніны, Івана Пушчы

Niny, Ivana Pushchy

D.

Ніне, Івану Вярбе, Кроплі, Пушчы

Ninye, Ivanu Vyarbye, Kropli, Pushchy

Ніне Пушчы, Івану Пушчу

Ninye Pushchy, Ivanu Pushchu

A.

Ніну, Івана Вярбу, Кроплю, Пушчу

Ninu, Ivana Vyarbu, Kroplyu, Pushchu

Ніну, Івана Пушчу

Ninu, Ivana Pushchu

I.

Нінай, Іванам Вярбой, Кропляй, Пушчай

Ninay, Ivanam Vyarboy, Kroplyay, Pushchay

Нінай Пушчай, Іванам Пушчам

Ninay Pushchay, Ivanam Pushcham

L.

Ніне, Іване Вярбе, Кроплі, Пушчы

Ninye, Ivanye Vyarbye, Kropli, Pushchy

Ніне, Іване Пушчы

Ninye, Ivanye Pushchy

Belarusian names in Polish

N.

Nina, Iwan Puszcza, Kropla, Wiarba

G.

Niny, Iwana Puszczy, Kropli, Wiarby

D.

Ninie, Iwanowi Puszczy, Kropli, Wiarbie

A.

Ninę, Iwana Puszczę, Kroplę, Wiarbę

I.

Niną, Iwanem Puszczą, Kroplą, Wiarbą

L.

Ninie, Iwanie Puszczy, Kropli, Wiarbie

Names that are not derived from common feminine nouns (including those on г, к, х / h, k, kh) are only declined when they refer to men (officially), although older and more recent sources recommended their declension for women as well.

Male and female surnames

(according to new official sources)

Male and female surnames

according to older and some newer sources as a manifestation of the separation of Belarusian from Russian

N.

Іван Лукша, Карызна, Сапега, Глебка

Ванда Лукша, Карызна, Сапега, Глебка

Ivan Luksha, Karyzna, Sapyeha, Hlyebka

Vanda Luksha, Karyzna, Sapyeha, Hlyebka

Іван, Ванда Барута, Таўпыга, Расолька, Саўчанка

Ivan, Vanda Baruta, Tawpyha, Rasol′ka, Sawchanka

G.

Івана Лукшы, Карызны, Сапегі, Глебкі

Ванды Лукша, Карызна, Сапега, Глебка

Ivana Lukshy, Karyzny, Sapyehi, Hlyebki

Vandy Luksha, Karyzna, Sapyeha, Hlyebka

Івана, Ванды Баруты, Таўпыгі, Расолькі, Саўчанкі

Ivana, Vandy Baruty, Tawpyhi, Rasol′ki, Sawchanki

D.

Івану Лукшу, Карызне, Сапегу, Глебку

Вандзе Лукша, Карызна, Сапега, Глебка

Ivanu Lukshu, Karyzny, Sapyehu, Hlyebku

Vandzye Luksha, Karyzna, Sapyeha, Hlyebka

Івану Баруту, Таўпыгу, Расольку, Саўчанку

Вандзе Баруце, Таўпызе, Расольцы, Саўчанцы

Ivanu Barutu, Tawpyhu, Rasol′ku, Sawchanku

Vandzye Barutsye, Tawpyzye, Rasol′cy, Sawchancy

A.

Івана Лукшу, Карызну, Сапегу, Глебку

Ванду Лукша, Карызна, Сапега, Глебка

Ivana Lukshu, Karyznu, Sapyehu, Hlyebku

Vandu Luksha, Karyzna, Sapyeha, Hlyebka

Івана, Ванду Баруту, Таўпыгу, Расольку, Саўчанку

Ivana, Vandu Barutu, Tawpyhu, Rasol′ku, Sawchanku

I.

Іванам Лукшам, Карызнам, Сапегам, Глебкам

Вандай Лукша, Карызна, Сапега, Глебка

Ivanam Luksham, Karyznam, Sapyeham, Hlyebkam

Vanday Luksha, Karyzna, Sapyeha, Hlyebka

Іванам Барутам, Таўпыгам, Расолькам, Саўчанкам

Вандай Барутай, Таўпыгай, Расолькай, Саўчанкай

Ivanam Barutam, Tawpyham, Rasol′kam, Sawchankam

Vanday Barutay, Tawpyhay, Rasol′kay, Sawchankay

L.

Іване Лукшу, Карызне, Сапегу, Глебку

Вандзе Лукша, Карызна, Сапега, Глебка

Ivanye Lukshu, Karyznye, Sapyehu, Hlyebku

Vandzye Luksha, Karyzna, Sapyeha, Hlyebka

Іване Баруту, Таўпыгу, Расольку, Саўчанку

Вандзе Баруце, Таўпызе, Расольцы, Саўчанцы

Ivanye Barutu, Tawpyhu, Rasol′ku, Sawchanku

Vandzye Barutsye, Tawpyzye, Rasol′cy, Sawchancy

Belarusian names in Polish

N.

Iwan, Wanda Baruta, Taupyha, Rasolka, Sauczanka

G.

Iwana, Wandy Baruty, Taupyhi, Rasolki, Sauczanki

D.

Iwanowi, Wandzie Barucie, Taupysze/Taupyże, Rasolce, Sauczance

A.

Iwana, Wandę Barutę, Taupyhę, Rasolkę, Sauczankę

I.

Iwanem, Wandą Barutą, Taupyhą, Rasolką, Sauczanką

L.

Iwanie, Wandzie Barucie, Taupysze/Taupyże, Rasolce, Sauczance

Names ending in -a/-o, which by their form refer to neuter nouns, are only declined if they refer to males.

Men’s names

Belarusian names in Polish

N.

Іван Шыла, Вясло

Ivan Shyla, Vyaslo

Iwan Szyła, Wiasło

G.

Івана Шыла, Вясла

Ivana Shyla, Vyasla

Iwana Szyły, Wiasła

D.

Івану Шылу, Вяслу

Ivanu Shylu, Vyaslu

Iwanowi Szyle, Wiaśle5

A.

Івана Шыла, Вясло

Ivana Shyla, Vyaslo

Iwana Szyłę, Wiasłę

I.

Iванам Шылам, Вяслом

Ivanam Shylam, Vyaslom

Iwanem Szyłą, Wiasłą

L.

Іване Шыле, Вясле

Ivanye Shylye, Vyaslye

Iwanie Szyle, Wiaśle

References

“Ad redaktsyi” (2006) [in:] Rodnaye slova 6; 33.

Bandarovich, Vyeranika (2013) Styl’na pa-byelarusku. Kompleksny davyednik pa kul’tury mawlyennya. Minsk: Pachatkovaya shkola.

Bańko, Mirosław (ed.) (2006) Polszczyzna na co dzień. Warszawa: PWN.

Burak, Lyeanid (1974) Suchasnaya byelaruskaya mova. Minsk: Vysheyshaya shkola.

Haponyenka, Iryna (2006) “Sklanyennye prozvishchaw.” [In:] Rodnaye slova 6; 29–33.

Hryhor’yeva, Larysa (1994) Byelaruskaya mova. Fanyetyka. Arfaepiya. Hrafika. Arfahrafiya. Minsk: Vysheyshaya shkola.

Jadacka, Hanna (2005) Kultura języka polskiego. Fleksja, słowotwórstwo, składnia. Warszawa: PWN.

Yankowski, Fyodar (1975) Suchasnaya byelaruskaya litaraturnaya mova. Marfalohiya. Minsk: Vysheyshaya shkola.

Kaleta, Radosław (2013) “Złudne odpowiedniki białorusko-polskie.” [In:] Studia z Filologii Polskiej i Słowiańskiej; 123–141.

Kaleta, Radosław (2014) Białorusko-polska homonimia międzyjęzykowa. Warszawa: Slawistyczny Ośrodek Wydawniczy.

Kaleta, Radosław (2015) “Kilka uwag o nauczaniu Polaków języka białoruskiego jako obcego.” [In:] Iryna Bahdanovich (ed.) Byelaruska-pol’skiya mownyya, litaraturnyya, histarychnyya i kul’turnyya suvyazi. Zbornik artykulaw. Minsk: Knihazbor; 69–78.

Kaleta, Radosław (2017) “Białoruś w dyskursie naukowym w roku jubileuszowym białorutenistyki.” [In:] Radosław Kaleta (ed.) Białoruś w dyskursie naukowym. Lingwistyka, socjologia, politologia. Warszawa: Katedra Białorutenistyki UW; 11–34.

Karpowicz, Tomasz (2009) Kultura języka polskiego. Wymowa, ortografia, interpunkcja, Warszawa: PWN.

Kawrus, Ales′ (2019) “Sklanyac’ ci nye sklanyac’ prozvishchy na -a (-ya)? Pytayemsya w Pyatra Zhawnyarovicha i padumayem sami.” [In:] Rodnaye slova 5; 25–27.

Lukashanyec, Alyaksandr (ed.) (2007) Karotkaya hramatyka byelaruskay movy. U 2 ch. Ch. 1. Fanalohiya. Marfanalohiya. Marfalohiya. Minsk: Nacyyanal′naya akademiya navuk Byelarusi.

Markowski, Andrzej (ed.) (2023) Wielki słownik poprawnej polszczyzny PWN, T. 1–2. Warszawa: PWN.

Obrębska-Jabłońska, Antonina (1958) “Na manowcach odmiany nazwisk męskich na -o.” [In:] Język polski XXXVIII; 379–380.

Plotnikaw, Branislaw, Lyubow Antanyuk (2003) Byelaruskaya mova. Linhvistychny kampyendyum. Minsk: Knizhny Dom.

Plotnikaw, Branislaw, Valyantsina Traykowskaya (2004) Slownik tsyazhkastsyaw byelaruskay movy. Minsk: Knizhny Dom.

Sawka, Zmicyer (2008) Mowny manual: Praktychny davyednik dlya pracawnikow telyekanalu «Byelsat»: Preedycyya (papyarednyaye vydannye). Varshava.

Stsyatsko, Pavyel (1992) “Zhonkay, Alyenkay, Shawchenkay...” [In:] Rodnaye slova 2; 30–31.

Stsyatsko, Pavyel (2002) Kul′tura movy. Minsk: Tekhnalohiya.

“Sklanyennye nyekatorykh prozvishchaw” (2001) [in:] Rodnaye slova 3; 65.

Smułkowa, Elżbieta (2017) “Omówienie wieloautorskiej pracy Tożsamości zbiorowe Białorusinów.” [In:] Radosław Kaleta (ed.) Białoruś w dyskursie naukowym. Lingwistyka, socjologia, politologia. Warszawa: Katedra Białorutenistyki UW; 37–60.

Ustsinovich, Hanna (1995) “Zhuk, Zhaba i Miklukha-Maklay. Pra sklanyennye nyekatorykh prozvishchaw.” [In:] Rodnaye slova 5; 39–42.

Wielki słownik języka polskiego [at:] https://wsjp.pl/haslo/podglad/83028/kaleta (date of access: 4 Nov 2024).

Zrazikava, Valyantsina, Alyena Hubkina (2016) Byelaruskaya mova. Prafyesiynaya lyeksika dlya ekanamistaw. Minsk: Vysheyshaya shkola.

Zhawnyarovich, Pyotr (2014) Stylistyka dzyelavoha mawlyennya i redahavannye sluzhbovykh dakumyentaw. Vuchebny dapamozhnik. Minsk : Respublikanski instytut.

Zhawnyarovich, Pyotr (2021) Davyednik pa litaraturnay prawcy. Arfahrafichny, punktuacyyny, leksichny, marfalahichny, sintaksichny, tekhnichny wzrowni. Minsk: Adukacyya i vykhavannye.

Online Sources

Bańko, Mirosław (2003a) “Mleczko i Kościuszko.” [At:] https://sjp.pwn.pl/poradnia/haslo/Mleczko-i-Kosciuszko;4476.html (date of access: 1 Nov. 2024).

Bańko, Mirosław (2003b) “Nazwiska męskie na -o.” [At:] https://sjp.pwn.pl/poradnia/haslo/nazwiska-meskie-na-o;3279.html (date of access: 4 Nov. 2024).

Barshchewskaya, Nina (2020) “«Pa-byelarusku byez pamylak»: asablivasci sklanyennya prozvishchaw dy nazownikaw u mnozhnym liku.” [At:] https://www.polskieradio.pl/396/7811/artykul/2434876 (date of access: 9 Nov. 2024).

Bushlyakow, Juras (2004) “Valyancina Mukha, Valyanciny Mukhi, Valyancinye Musye…” [At:] https://www.svaboda.org/a/24876915.html (date of access: 1 Nov 2024).

Grzenia, Jan (2002) “Łukaszenko czy Łukaszenka?” [At:] https://sjp.pwn.pl/poradnia/haslo/Lukaszenko-czy-Lukaszenka;1650.html (date of access: 5 Nov. 2024).

Grzenia, Jan (2008) “Vasil Bykau.” [At:] https://sjp.pwn.pl/poradnia/haslo/Vasil-Bykau;8978.html (date of access: 5 Nov. 2024).

Kachan, Vol′ha (2012) “Asablivasci sklanyennya prozvishchaw u suchasnay byelaruskay movye.” [At:] https://elib.bspu.by/handle/doc/815 (date of access: 6 Nov. 2024).

“Nazwiska żeńskie na -цкая, -ская” [at:] https://sjp.pwn.pl/zasady/328-79-C-2-Nazwiska-zenskie-na-%D1%86%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F-%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%8F;629724.html (date of access: 4 Nov. 2024).

“Transliteracja i transkrypcja współczesnego alfabetu białoruskiego” [at:] https://sjp.pwn.pl/zasady/325-79-A-Transliteracja-i-transkrypcja-wspolczesnego-alfabetu-bialoruskiego;629720.html (date of access: 4 Nov. 2024).

Wolański, Adam (2020) “Cichanouska” [at:] https://sjp.pwn.pl/poradnia/haslo/Cichanouska;20580.html (date of access: 6 Nov. 2024).

Wolański, Adam (2024) “Imiona i nazwiska białoruskich i ukraińskich artystów w polskim folderze.” [At:] https://sjp.pwn.pl/poradnia/haslo/imiona-i-nazwiska-bialoruskich-i-ukrainskich-artystow-w-polskim-folderze;23651.html (date of access: 6 Nov. 2025).

1 Despite the same ending, the declension of the above surnames should not be confused with non-Slavic surnames ending in -o, which follow a different declension pattern – the noun (masculine) declension, for example: N. Canaletto, Tasso, G. Canaletta, Tassa D. Canalettowi, Tassowi, A. Canaletta, Tassa, I. Canalettem, Tassem L. Canaletcie (pron. /kanalɛˈt͡ɕɛ/, ka-na-LEH-tcheh), Tassie (pron. /ˈtæsie/, TASS-ee), cf. Bańko (ed.) 2006: 126.

2 This is the Polish transcription form of the original Калеснікава/Kalyesnikava, but in Polish, the consonant cluster sn before i becomes soft (the “softening” rule), e.g., wiosna – wiośnie, so theoretically, instead of the hard form of the surname Kalesnikawa, there should be the soft form Kaleśnikawa. However, transcription rules do not allow for this. For Belarusian pronunciation, this softness is also characteristic, but it is not reflected in the official spelling due to the policy of aligning Belarusian rules with Russian ones. Classical Belarusian orthography conveys this softness in writing through the soft sign: Калесьнікава/Kalyes′nikava.

3 Foreign surnames ending in an unstressed -a or -я/-ya decline like common gender nouns, meaning they have different endings depending on the gender in the dative/locative and instrumental cases, e.g. D./L. Гамалею/Hamalyeyu, Лумумбу/Lumumbu (for males), Гамалеі/Hamalyei, Лумумбе/Lumumbye (for females), I. Гамалеем/Hamalyeyem, Лумумбам/Lumumbam (for males), Гамалеяй/Hamalyeyay, Лумумбай/Lumumbay (for females) (Zhawnyarovich 2021: 276).

4 This would cause even more confusion in the surnames declension because the language user doesn’t always know if he/she is dealing with a Polish or Belarusian surname, especially since some surnames appear in both Polish and Belarusian, e.g. Polish Sapieha and Belarusian Сапега/Sapyeha.

5 The surname Wiasło is declined like the common noun masło – maśle “butter.” Acknowledgement to Magadelena Wanot-Miśtura for her opinions on these surnames.

Received:

27.06.2025

Reviewed:

28.09.2025

Accepted:

12.11.2025