The variety of dialectal material and the boundaries of its representation on the language map

The article presents the work conducted during the compilation of the Slovenian Linguistic Atlas (SLA) by the Dialectological Section of the Fran Ramovš Institute of the Slovenian Language at the Scientific Research Centre of the Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts in Ljubljana. Special software (SlovarRed 2.0), based on a carefully designed database linked to the geographical information system (GIS), was developed. It not only allows accurate input of dialectological data and their analysis at different language levels but also the application of different cartographical methods (i.e., displaying linguistic data on a map). Considering the diversity (including in terms of data quality and relevancy) of the material collected in the last 60 years, the article presents those data from the database which can be displayed on a map and how. Slovenian dialects include more than sixty different lexemes (excluding phonetic variants) referring to the term \u27kolk\u27 (Eng.: hipSLA V055). Most of these lexemes are single-word lexemes - derivatives with \u27kolk\u27 as the derivational base, Old Slavic *klk, and different suffixes (e.g., kolk, kolček, also kučet, kučah, kuča ..., kolp ...). Less accurate and semantically broader terms (e.g., kost, sklep, gug, skok, kraj, stran), and words that in standard language refer to parts of the body close to the hip (e.g., ledje, bok, gulj, križ, bedro, lakotnica and hrbet) are also used, both in singular and plural/dual forms (therefore also kolki, kučta, boki, glidi, hiftne). In addition to originally Slovene lexemes, loanwords (e.g., kolp, glid, hiften, hufa, anka, femore, flank/fjank) are also frequent, in particular in dialects that are in contact with neighboring languages. Moreover, word combinations consisting of these nouns and different attributes (e.g., ritna kost, ledna kost, bočna kost, ledni členek), and prepositional expressions (e.g., v kolku, v sklepu, ta pod krajem, pri strani, v ledju, na lakotnici, v hlamu, v juge) are frequent. The article includes linguistic comments on the examined vocabulary, and emphasizes the problems that geolinguists have to cope with when transferring concrete linguistic data onto symbolic and isoglottic-inscriptional map