English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

The contribution focuses on the use and collocation analysis of basic notions linked to the field of onomastics, including those that are specialized (e.g., “proprium”, “anthroponym”, “toponym”, “chrematonym”, etc.) and the ones that are commonly used (e.g., “proper name/naming”). In the latter case, attention will be paid to whether these terms are connected to onomastic contexts. In general, the research analyses sources where the lemmata are used, including their typical surroundings. The goal of the paper is to show how the public perceives onomastics, whether it is familiar with its key terms. The analysis is based on the data of the Czech National Corpus, version 8, opinion-journalism texts.

Science of many names: Onomastic terms in the opinion journalism of the Czech National Corpus