The issue author deals with in the opening part of the article is concerned with a problem of explanatory semantics; in the second part, starting from the point of analysing the source fragments, the author is claiming that the term lekton does not corresponds with the term expression; the third part is discussing the attitudes that locate lekton directly to out thoughts; the fourth part presents searching for the answer referring to the question in what sense is possible to talk of the Stoics that they were formalists; the fifth part demonstrates some of the parallels and also differences between the semantics of Frege and that of the Stoics; the sixth part contents discussing an adequacy in explaining lekton as the speech act; the seventh part is trying to presents Stoics\' understanding of the concept of individual lekton across the solution of \'the dead one\' paradox; in the eight part, the author is sketching the óbject\'-explaining lekta as the logical constructions, while in the concluding part he is explaining the functional mature of some distinct kinds of lekta. In reconstructing the nature of lekta as logical constructions (since the most of lekta are constructions that construct the functions and value this functions is related with the term of śtate of affairs\'), author is commenting them not just as more adequate than so far served explanations, but also as well as the candidates of an acceptable and a persuasive unique theory.