Onomasiological dictionaries, which start from a concept and list its possible designations, remain largely unknown. Even their naming is unstable: numerous competing terms circulate (ideological, conceptual, methodical, topical, analogical dictionaries, thesauri, etc.), often borrowed from emblematic titles in different national contexts and tied to specific subgenres rather than to the field as a whole. This study seeks to restore visibility to these lexicographic tools by tracing their historical lineages, proposing a typology of their major subgenres, and assessing their current status and future prospects in the context of ongoing digital developments.
Alba López García (Mon,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: