00528nas a2200133   4500008004100000245011700041210006900158300000700227490000700234653002400241653005600265100001900321856005400340       2010                        eng d00aSyntactic features of inalienable possesion in the French have+small clause and the Bulgarian be with structures0 aSyntactic features of inalienable possesion in the French havesm  a230 v3510aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aMostrov, Vasil  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/mostrov201001767nas a2200145   4500008004100000245010700041210006900148300001100217490000700228520122900235653002401464653005601488100002301544856005401567       2009                        eng d00aA comparative analysis of the English and Bulgarian participles with a view to their categorial status0 acomparative analysis of the English and Bulgarian participles wi  a5–240 v343 a<p>This article presents an analysis of the categorial status of English and Bulgarian participles with special attention to the prenominally used participles. First, we isolate a group of English participles, which we call postmodified participles, which we show to be real verbal participles (not adjectival phrases), something that has been, to my knowledge, unnoticed so far. The analysis of these participles is extended to Bulgarian, where they can occur also in prenominal position. The fact that the prenominal position in Bulgarian can host clearly verbal participles is used as an argument against the wide-spread view that prenominal participles in English are all adjectival expressions. In particular, we argue that the impossibility of the postmodified participles to occur in prenominal position in English is simply due to the right recursion restriction and not to their being verbal. We provide also some semantic evidence showing that prenominally used English participles are not necessarily „stative“, as suggested in the literature. Finally, we analyse some English phrases in which the prenominally used participle can be argued to be a verbal and not an adjectival or an ambiguous expression.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aLaskova, Vesselina  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/laskova200901220nas a2200145   4500008004100000245006900041210006900110300001200179490000700191520072700198653002400925653005600949100001701005856005201022       2009                        eng d00aEtude morphosémantique du futur en parlers grecs de la Bulgarie0 aEtude morphosémantique du futur en parlers grecs de la Bulgarie  a25–400 v343 a<p>In this paper I investigate the properties of the future in Dialectal Modern Greek spoken in Bulgaria. Even though future has been described before, the analysis of its actual dialect use remains interesting for the Sparchbund and more generally for typology. I will base my analysis on the aspectual model of Desclés and Guentchéva in order to explain the double aspect (perfective and imperfective) and its particular uses in Dialectal Modern Greek. I will argue that the use of future-referring periphrases (as θe na) provides evidence for the relation between future and modality and I will try to explain the link between future on the one hand, and possibility, probability and volition, on the other hand.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aValma, Eleni  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/valma200901259nas a2200145   4500008004100000245012500041210012500166300001200291490000700303520062300310653002400933653005600957100004301013856005701056       2009                        eng d00aПолисемия в българската и английската военноморска терминология0 aПолисемия в българската и английската военноморска терминология  a21–350 v343 a<p>The article discusses both traditional and less common views of polysemy in terminology, il- lustrating them with Bulgarian and English naval terms. Polysemy, which is a manifestation of language variation and the tendency towards economy, is more strongly represented in English naval terminology. There is asymmetry between the two languages, one of the corresponding terms often having a wider/narrower meaning. In cases of borrowing of English naval terms into Bulgarian, semantic distinctions may be expressed by different suffixation. Polysemy rarely causes ambiguities leading to communication breakdown.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aГеоргиева, Валентина  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/georgieva2009a01248nas a2200145   4500008004100000245017400041210012600215300001100341490000700352520057800359653002400937653005600961100003101017856005401048       2009                        eng d00aСемантични групи при компаративните фразеологични единици в английския и в българския език0 aСемантични групи при компаративните фразеологични единици в англ  a5–220 v343 a<p>The comparative phraseological units represent a specific layer in language phraseology due to their structure and semantics. They have all the basic features of the phraseological unit. Based on a corpus of 729 English and 1315 Bulgarian comparative units, the study aims to establish the semantic relations within them. The material is organized in several semantic groups. The match between the two languages is established. The percentage is given of the identical, the close in meaning and the comparative units that have no correspondence in the other language</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aХоланди, Райна  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/holandi200901350nas a2200145   4500008004100000245025100041210012500292300001100417490000700428520059900435653002401034653005601058100003501114856005501149       2009                        eng d00aСоциолингвистични промени при предаване на чужда реч в българския печат през последните две десетилетия в съпоставка с полския печат0 aСоциолингвистични промени при предаване на чужда реч в български  a5–200 v343 a<p>The article offers a brief characterization of evidentiality in Bulgarian which, in addition to lexical and syntactic expression, finds morphological expression primarily, and of evidentiality in Polish. Lexical and syntactic markers predominate there and only one construction ma + infinitive in one of its uses approaches the Bulgarian renarrated forms. Two types of sociolinguistic changes in indirect speech, noticeable in the Bulgarian press after 1989, are also discussed: changes in the choice of forms in reports from abroad and in rendering statements made by officials at home.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aНицолова, Pyceлина  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/nicolova200900812nas a2200145   4500008004100000245008600041210006900127300001100196490000700207520030000214653002400514653005600538100002000594856005200614       2008                        eng d00aDeverbal nominalization in Swedish and Norwegian. Nomina actionis and nomina acti0 aDeverbal nominalization in Swedish and Norwegian Nomina actionis  a5–240 v333 a<p>This paper focuses on deverbal nominalization in Swedish and Norwegian in a comparative perspective. Its primary purpose is to outline the main differences between Swedish and Norwegian as regards the productive suffixes of Germanic origin used for forming nomina actionis and nomina acti</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aTenev, Ivan, Y.  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/tenev200801034nas a2200145   4500008004100000245023000041210012800271300001200399490000700411520029900418653002400717653005600741100003500797856005600832       2004                        eng d00aВозможности семантической реализации одной трехкомпонентной структурной модели в сопоставительном русско-чешском плане0 aВозможности семантической реализации одной трехкомпонентной стру  a26–330 v293 a<p>The article continues the author’s research of Russian sentences of the structural type Snom Vf – praep Sinstr in comparison with their Czech equivalents. The focus is on their semantic structure, the character of the participants and the semantic classes of verbs appearing in them.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aВагнерова, Марта  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/vagnerova200400984nas a2200145   4500008004100000245018800041210012600229300001100355490000700366520029600373653002400669653005600693100003300749856005600782       2004                        eng d00aМорфологичен характер на алтернациите на мястото на етимологичния *e в българския и хърватския език0 aМорфологичен характер на алтернациите на мястото на етимологични  a5–170 v293 aThe article criticizes the interpretation of alternations in place of the etymological *e in the Bulgarian literary language as a contemporary phonetic law indicating typological parallel in the functioning of morphophonemic alternations in place of the etymological *e in standard Croatian.10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aСтоянова, Елена  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/stoyanova200402147nas a2200145   4500008004100000245008300041210008300124300001200207490000700219520160900226653002401835653005601859100003101915856005501946       2004                        eng d00aПолупряката реч в българския и руския език0 aПолупряката реч в българския и руския език  a17–250 v293 a<p>В статье рассматриваются способы создания несобственно-прямой речи в болгарском и русском языках. Разграничиваются две разновидности: 1) в описательном авторском тексте с психологическим анализом, который незаметно уступает место речи самого персонажа и 2) в косвенной речи, которая не передает только содержание чужого высказывания, а включает экспрессивные элементы и индивидуальные особенности прямой речи персонажа. В обоих случаях речь становит полифоничной: наряду с голосом автора слышен и голос персонажа. Подчеркивается значение пересказывательных форм для создания несобственно-прямой речи в болгарском языке и прослеживается их функция в различных контекстуальных условиях. Указывается на то, что язык современной художественной литературы приближается к непринужденной разговорной ре, это оказывает влияние на авторский план и на все виды чужой речи.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aВасева, Иванка  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/vaseva2004-000980nas a2200145   4500008004100000245013200041210012200173300001100295490000700306520033700313653002400650653005600674100004400730856006000774       2004                        eng d00aПолупряката реч в италианския език (с оглед и на други романски езици)0 aПолупряката реч в италианския език с оглед и на други романски е  a5–160 v293 a<p>The article analyses semi-direct or free indirect speech in Italian in the context of the other Romance languages. Various semantic types of semi-direct speech are established, concretizing, clarifying, evaluative and deliberative, which are closely connected with the introducing word. The thematic meaning is also explored.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aПопова-Велева, Иванка  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/popova-veleva200401047nas a2200145   4500008004100000245016900041210012700210300001200337490000700349520037300356653002400729653005600753100003700809856005500846       2004                        eng d00aСпецифика внешнетемпоральной транспозиции в русском и украинском художественном тексте0 aСпецифика внешнетемпоральной транспозиции в русском и украинском  a18–270 v293 a<p>The article deals with external temporal transposition in Russian and Ukrainian literary fiction texts. Despite some common tendencies, differences between the two languages are established due to the specific features in the semantics of localization determinants and the wider use of colloquial style in the speech of literary characters in Ukrainian fiction.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aГолосова, Татьяна  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/golosova200401227nas a2200145   4500008004100000245017900041210012600220300001100346490000700357520055000364653002400914653005600938100003300994856005401027       2004                        eng d00aТипология на назоваването при древните индоевропейски термини за някои опасни и хищни животни0 aТипология на назоваването при древните индоевропейски термини за  a5–230 v293 a<p>The goal of this study is to analyse the characteristic ways of naming some predators (bear, wolf, fox, lynx, wild cat) from the period of Indo-European unity to the time of the differentiation and separation of the Indo-European dialects. The main task is to reveal the important influence of the religious-mythological world view and of the rational understanding of everyday life as extralinguistic factors working on the appearance of a number of terms with different inner form which take the place of the ancient archetypal zoonyms.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aПопов, Борислав  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/popov2004-000980nas a2200145   4500008004100000245018500041210012600226300001200352490000700364520030000371653002400671653005600695100003100751856005200782       2004                        eng d00aЯвление омонимии и сравнительное языкознание (на материале русского, польского и финского языков)0 aЯвление омонимии и сравнительное языкознание на материале русско  a24–350 v293 a<p>The article deals with lexical homonymy in the context of contrastive linguistics. It clarifies the concepts of interlingual, as distinct from intralingual, homonymy, multiple/single pairs, internal/external homonymy. The analysed language material comes from Russian, Polish and Finnish.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aВоян, Катажина  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/voyan200401238nas a2200145   4500008004100000245007300041210006900114300001200183490000700195520073500202653002400937653005600961100002001017856005501037       2003                        eng d00aAnalyzing English-Language and Bulgarian-Language Political Speeches0 aAnalyzing EnglishLanguage and BulgarianLanguage Political Speech  a49–590 v283 a<p>The paper aims to present, first, an integrated approach to whole texts and genres exemplifying the ‘triangle of discourse-cognition-society which is indeed the site of multidisciplinary discourse analysis’ (Van Dijk) and, secondly, to suggest an alternative perspective to ‘old’ areas of research such as the analysis of political speeches. It illustrates the potential of studying the production and perception of individual text genres as governed by particular mental models. Such mental models, it argues, are possible to isolate analytically and verify statistically. Differences in English- and Bulgarian-language political speeches are used to demonstrate the possible application of the suggested approach.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aTincheva, Nelly  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/tincheva200300834nas a2200145   4500008004100000245008600041210007100127300001200198490000700210520030800217653002400525653005600549100003000605856005300635       2003                        eng d00aEl español y el búlgaro: dos lenguas posesivas, subjetivas e ... irresponsables0 aEl español y el búlgaro dos lenguas posesivas subjetivas e irres  a30–370 v283 a<p>Contrastivamente, la autora somete a análisis y descripciόn las formas átonas de los pronombres posesivos, en español y en búlgaro, resaltando la misiόn del hablante por subrayar la relaciόn entre el sujeto del evento y su complemento, directo o indirecto, expresado por tales de{ícticos.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aSavova, Slavka, Simeonova  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/savova200301415nas a2200145   4500008004100000245007900041210006900120300001200189490000700201520090000208653002401108653005601132100002501188856005601213       2003                        eng d00aOn the Semantics of some Types of Event Construal in English and Bulgarian0 aSemantics of some Types of Event Construal in English and Bulgar  a17–240 v283 a<p>The paper re-examines two specific features of morphological marking in Bulgarian from the perspective of verbal and satellite framing effects for the expression of grammatical relations. The dative and reflexive clitics in a special construction prefix + verb + dative + reflexive clitic is reanalyzed as constituted of a verb plus a satellite with aspectual or rather Aktionsart meaning. The intricate, and as yet of undetermined status, particle да is reinterpreted as an auxiliary which again appears as a satellite. The contention is that English and Bulgarian are not so far apart in the correlation between verb framing and satellite framing in relation to temporality as it appears on the surface. The analysis is carried out within the framework of cognitive semantics (L. Talmy) and uses the findings of Heine, Kuteva and K. Rudin on problems concerning auxiliation processes.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aBagasheva, Alexandra  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/bagasheva200301043nas a2200145   4500008004100000245020300041210012600244300001100370490000700381520033500388653002400723653005600747100003900803856005500842       2003                        eng d00aОсновни тенденции при образуването на префиксални съществителни в българския и чешкия език в края на ХХ век0 aОсновни тенденции при образуването на префиксални съществителни   a5–420 v283 aThe article examines the leading trends in the formation of prefixal nouns in Czech and Bulgarian. These are the tendencies of internationalization and nationalization (autochthonization). The most productive native and borrowed prefixes and prefixoids are analyzed together with the meanings they have in substantival neologisms.10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aАврамова, Цветанка  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/avramova200301038nas a2200145   4500008004100000245011400041210010800155300001200263490000700275520043800282653002400720653005600744100003700800856005500837       2002                        eng d00aТермини за ‘встъпвам в брак’ в българския и румънския език0 aТермини за встъпвам в брак в българския и румънския език  a16–580 v273 aThe article discusses the terms referring to marriage which are shared by Bulgarian and Rumanian. Seven different patterns are established under which the terms occurring in the dialects of the two languages are subsumed. The main goals are to clarify the motivation of each pattern, the spread of the terms, the existing synonymy, and the chronology. Special attention is paid to the origin of the patterns and the individual terms.10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aАлексова, Василка  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/aleksova200200948nas a2200145   4500008004100000245004600041210004600087300001200133490000700145520050000152653002400652653005600676100001900732856005100751       2000                        eng d00aDer Artikel im Deutschen und Bulgarischen0 aDer Artikel im Deutschen und Bulgarischen  a62–850 v253 a<p>Im Aufsatz wird auf das Funktionieren des bestimmten Artikels im Deutschen und im Bulgarischen eingegangen. Nach Aufdeckung der Gemeinsamkeiten und Unterschiede in seinem Gebrauch kommt die Verfasserin zum Schluss, dass das Phänomen der nominalen Determination durch den Artikel den bulgarischen Lernern wohl bekannt sein soll. Nichtsdestoweniger werden sie mit einer Reihe von Problemen im Hinblick auf grammatische Funktion und Distribution der Artikelformen im Deutschen konfrontiert.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aAlff, Violetta  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/alff200001580nas a2200145   4500008004100000245012900041210007000170300001100240490000700251520102200258653002401280653005601304100002201360856005201382       2000                        eng d00aProblèmes de la concurrence entre les connecteurs temporels les plus employés en fran{\c c}ais et en bulgare contemporains0 aProblèmes de la concurrence entre les connecteurs temporels les   a5–320 v253 a<p>This article deals with some problems related to the definition and the analysis of the linguistic mechanisms governing the competition between the most frequently used temporal conjunctions in modern French and in modern Bulgarian. The first part of the study examines an interesting question of the syntax of French compound phrases with a temporal subordinate clause, namely the alternation between the most typical temporal conjunctions quand and lorsque, es129 pecially in economic and scientific functional style. It is proved that the preference for quand is, generally, a result from the engagement of the speaking subject to processes expressed by the verb of the subordinate temporal clause in opposition to lorsque, which prevails when such an engagement is lacking. The second part considers the competition between the most important Bulgarian temporal conjunctions когато and като, as an analogy to the phenomenon studied in French, in spite of the different factors being at its basis.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aMihov, Nicola\"ı  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/mihov200000816nas a2200145   4500008004100000245008400041210008400125300001100209490001000220520028800230653002400518653005600542100001900598856005300617       2000                        eng d00aЗаметки о числительных в славянских языках0 aЗаметки о числительных в славянских языках  a5–320 vХХV3 a<p>In this article entitled „Remarks on Slavic Numerals“ the author returns to problems raised in his book Parameters of Slavic Morphosyntax (OUP,1995) trying to solve them within the Minimalist Program. The attention is focused on numerals and the genitive in quantification</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aFranks, Steven  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/franks200001241nas a2200145   4500008004100000245018400041210012400225300001200349490000700361520055500368653002400923653005600947100003701003856005501040       2000                        eng d00aПървото посещение на младоженката в бащиния дом. Названия на обреда в българския и румънския език0 aПървото посещение на младоженката в бащиния дом Названия на обре  a33–610 v253 aThe article reviews the terms for the most important post-nuptial rituals in the Bulgarian and the Rumanian folk traditions. An attempt is made to establish the common motivation types, determined by the nature of the rituals, but the differences are also pointed out. Discussed are also formal similarities, borrowing of terms or parts of terminological combinations and differences in their use in the dialects of the two languages. The geographical area for the individual terms is established and, where possible, the chronology for some of them.10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aАлексова, Василка  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/aleksova200001189nas a2200145   4500008004100000245019700041210012600238300001200364490000700376520047800383653002400861653005600885100004300941856005900984       1999                        eng d00aЖурналистическата фразеология в сърбохърватския и в българския език, семантични и функционални аспекти0 aЖурналистическата фразеология в сърбохърватския и в българския е  a12–250 v243 a<p>The article deals with Serbo-Croatian and Bulgarian journalese phraseology. Its main part is dedicated to problems of the semantic classification of set phrases from a three month file (January-April 1995) of the newspapers 24 chasa and Politika. Some aspects of the functional analysis of journalese phraseology are discussed with special attention to homonymy of phraseological units as well as to the defectivity of nouns, adjectives and verbs as their components</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aХристофорова, Албена  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/hristoforova199900907nas a2200145   4500008004100000245026100041210012600302300001100428490000700439520015300446653002400599653005600623100002900679856005300708       1999                        eng d00aСтруктурные и просодические характеристики новых сложных слов болгарского и русского языков с компонентами интернационального характера0 aСтруктурные и просодические характеристики новых сложных слов бо  a5–110 v243 a<p>The article examines the structural and prosodic characteristics of Bulgarian and Russian compound words containing international components.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aСтоева, Тотка  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/stoeva199901130nas a2200145   4500008004100000245007700041210006900118300001200187490000700199520061800206653002400824653005600848100002400904856005600928       1998                        eng d00aPerception and acoustic correlates of stress in English and in Bulgarian0 aPerception and acoustic correlates of stress in English and in B  a15–240 v233 a<p>The paper investigates the acoustic manifestations and the perception of stress by native English and native Bulgarian speakers. Analyses of the acoustic correlates of stress and results from a perception experiment suggest important differences in the way stress is signalled: except for F0 max, the values for which were bigger in Bulgarian, all other acoustic cues under investigation seemed to be less strong in Bulgarian, a language exhibiting features of both stress-timed and syllable-timed rhythmic organization, than in English, a language tending towards the stress-timed end of the rhythm scale.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aDimitrova, Snezhina  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/dimitrova199801600nas a2200145   4500008004100000245018600041210012400227300001200351490000700363520090800370653002401278653005601302100003901358856005701397       1997                        eng d00aЗа някои тенденции при образуването на нови съществителни имена за лица в българския и чешкия език0 aЗа някои тенденции при образуването на нови съществителни имена   a47–540 v223 a<p>The article presents some of the most important tendencies in the formation of nouns denoting persons in Bulgarian and in Czech from the end of the 1970s until nоw, especially in connection with the democratic changes in 1989. It is pointed out that as a result of democratization and internationalization of the lexical systems some word-formation processes were activated during the period: coining of so called abbreviated compound nouns beginning with агро-, евро-, еко-, енерго-, нарко-, юго- (in Bulgarian); coining of nouns with foreign prefixes; formation of nouns for female persons derived from nouns for male persons (in Bulgarian); creating of nouns by means of univerbization, abbreviation etc. The new tendency for personal nouns with топ- as their first component to be formed in Bulgarian is to be explained with the influence of the English language.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aАврамова, Цветанка  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/avramova1997-001087nas a2200145   4500008004100000245012200041210012200163300001100285490000700296520046500303653002400768653005600792100003900848856005400887       1997                        eng d00aСъществителните човек и хора в португалския и в българския език0 aСъществителните човек и хора в португалския и в българския език  a5–120 v223 a<p>The lexemes man and people and their most frequent synonyms in Portuguese and in Bulgarian are analysed contrastively in this paper. It is obvious from the analysis that the treated lexical units have quite clear content only at first glance. In fact it is because of their small number of semantic features that they enter into complex interrelations and they often function as pronouns showing considerable differences in the two contrasted languages.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aВенкова, Валентина  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/venkova199701634nas a2200145   4500008004100000245011500041210011500156300001200271490000700283520103300290653002401323653005601347100003101403856005401434       1997                        eng d00aТекстовые функции лексемы one и её переводческие эквиваленты0 aТекстовые функции лексемы one и её переводческие эквиваленты  a18–460 v223 a<p>The paper is a detailed contrastive study of the dictionary definitions of the items one and един and their functions in original texts and their translations. On the basis of this analysis the author concludes that all the various functions of one, because of which it is often defined as belonging to various classes of words (or parts of speech), can by systematized and presented as a cline, starting with its basic numerical use to denote the singleness of an object of speech, or a certain quality of this object. Then come its more or less purely structural functions as a substitute for the name of such an object or quality, already mentioned in the text or existing in the common index-field of the participants in a speech act, or as a prop-word. Following along this cline is the use of one as a noun, i. e. with denoting functions, and finally as a morpheme with an active word-formative pattern, the elements of which are used with a variety of pragmatic nuances of the invariant meaning of singularity.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aЗлатева, Палма  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/zlateva199700738nas a2200145   4500008004100000245005300041210005200094300001100146490000700157520027600164653002400440653005600464100001900520856005300539       1996                        eng d00aBlocage du passif en fran{\c c}ais et en bulgare0 aBlocage du passif en fran c c ais et en bulgare  a7–130 v213 a<p>The article systematizes the cases in which the usage of passive constructions in French and Bulgarian is either limited or impossible. It is established that the mechanisms responsible for the blockage of the passive are mainly of a semantic or contextual nature.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aBoteva, Silvia  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/boteva199601257nas a2200145   4500008004100000245010600041210010600147300001100253490000700264520067900271653002400950653005600974100003001030856005101060       1996                        eng d00aБългарските адверзативни съюзи от типологично гледище0 aБългарските адверзативни съюзи от типологично гледище  a5–140 v213 a<p>The article analyses the linguistic expression one of the basic semantic and semantic-pragmatic adversative relations, sometimes referred to as contrast. On the basis of a specific type of contrastive constructions, expressing so-called correction or repair, the author criticizes the inadequate presentation of the interchangeability of adversative conjunction ами/но in the Bulgarian linguistic literature. The goal is to offer an outline of the uses of the most important coordinating conjunction as lexical indicators of contrast in Bulgarian in a typological comparison with Russian, as a Slavic language, Rumanian, as a Balkan-Romance language, and German.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aШик, Иванка, П.  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/shik199601331nas a2200145   4500008004100000245019900041210012800240300001100368490000700379520062200386653002401008653005601032100004101088856005601129       1996                        eng d00aЗа съотношението статален : медиален : рефлексивно-каузативен – каузативен ред в чешкия и българския език0 aЗа съотношението статален медиален рефлексивнокаузативен каузати  a5–120 v213 a<p>The article treats questions connected with the transformations in the lexical subsystems of the verbs of state in Bulgarian and in Czech. The author follows the degree of influence of the systematic changes in the semantics of the lexemes, as well as the determination of the semantic differentiation of verbs of common origin. The thesis used as a basis is that the reasons for the differences observed in the meaning of particular verbs in the two related languages have to be sought for in the pre-structuring of the verbs of state subsystem and the occurrence of a new, reflexive-causative class in Czech.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aВълчанова, Маринела  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/vlchanova199601495nas a2200145   4500008004100000245012100041210012100162300001200283490000700295520084500302653002401147653005601171100005801227856006401285       1996                        eng d00aФонологичните системи на хинди и на съвременния български език0 aФонологичните системи на хинди и на съвременния български език  a13–240 v213 a<p>The present article deals with the contrastive description of the phonologic systems of the two languages and meets the necessity of explaining the main difficulties arising in the process of teaching Hindi to Bulgarians. At the same time it proposes practical solution to some of the transcription problems arising while preparing the vocabulary part of the textbook. The influence of the phonological characteristics of Bulgarian on the speech of Bulgarians studying Hindi has been taken into consideration. Special attention has been paid to the possibility of using their own linguistic experience while improving the articulation base in order to achieve the most adequate perception of the Hindi language and to overcome not only the interfering influence of their mother tongue, but also of the Bulgarian- Hindi interlanguage.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aТодорова-Маринова, Валентина  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/todorova-marinova199601652nas a2200145   4500008004100000245010900041210006900150300001100219490000700230520111100237653002401348653005601372100002401428856005401452       1995                        eng d00aThe Comparative Phonetics of Russian and the Other Slavic Languages: Toward a Standard IPA Transcription0 aComparative Phonetics of Russian and the Other Slavic Languages   a5–220 v203 a<p>The literature on Slavic phonetics reveals a controversy about certain vowels and consonants. Dictionaries typically do not give phonetics, or if they do, it is not standard IPA. This creates problems for both researchers and teachers. These difficulties are met here by the attempt to give more careful description of articulations, and provide a better descriptive analysis than is presently available. A system is presented for the consistent and precise location of vowels. In addition, a standard articulation chart and standard descriptions are provided. This extended IPA system is used as the basis of phonetic descriptions, analysis and comparison. Emphasis is on the specific case or paradigm method of the philosophy of science so that numerous examples must of necessity be given. This contrasts with the usual article on phonology, which provides the fewest number or examples required to support a general or universal hypothesis. The examples here provide data for phonology, further research, comparative and contrastive phonetics, as well as to aid the language teacher and learner.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aShibles, Warren, A.  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/shibles199501507nas a2200145   4500008004100000245007100041210006900112300001100181490000700192520099100199653002401190653005601214100002701270856006401297       1995                        eng d00aSur les systèmes aspecto-temporels du fran{\c c}ais et du bulgare0 aSur les systèmes aspectotemporels du fran c c ais et du bulgare  a5–140 v203 a<p>The comparison between the aspect systems of a Slavic and a Romance language raises a number of theoretical and practical problems. It requires a precise and unified use of terminology, which is unfortunately not always the case, especially in French. The automatic transfer of the terms „perfective/imperfective“ from Bulgarian to French is practically impossible because the aspectual systems of the two languages function in a different way. In Bulgarian aspect is expressed by a pair of perfective and imperfective verbs, while in French it functions through two symmetrical subsystems of simple and complex verb tenses. The aspect implied in the lexical meaning of the verb is strongly influenced by the syntactic context. The article proves the necessity of a rigid distinction between aspect and tense; it discusses the question of precision in naming the verb tenses, the terms do not always reflect the linguistic reality. This is valid for both languages discussed.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aNikolova-Novakova, Iva  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/nikolova-novakova199501198nas a2200145   4500008004100000245009100041210006900132300001200201490000700213520068200220653002400902653005600926100001800982856005201000       1994                        eng d00aFunctional Correspondence of the Adverbial Pair Here/There in Bulgarian and in Finnish0 aFunctional Correspondence of the Adverbial Pair HereThere in Bul  a13–200 v193 a<p>In that article are analysed in juxtaposition the most considerable similarities and differences of the two adverbials here/there in both languages. The main regularities and their realization in speech are rationalized. An attempt is made to define more accurately the communicative factor (linguistic, situational or psychological), dynamically affecting the selection and usage of a suitable adverbial unit. The conclusion that the Bulgarian adverbs here/there have a more universal applicability is substantiated. The Finnish equivalents have more accurate semanticgrammatical frames and function within multilateral subordination to the communicative circumstances.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aKukov, Nikola  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/kukov199400869nas a2200145   4500008004100000245006600041210006600107300001000173490000700183520037500190653002400565653005600589100002200645856005600667       1994                        eng d00aLes interjections et le principe de composition fonctionnelle0 aLes interjections et le principe de composition fonctionnelle  a5–90 v193 a<p>The article examines questions concerning the applicability of the hierarchical and functional models of discourse to interjections in French and Bulgarian. The author observes the functional structuring of discourses containing interjections and offers a classification of the illocutionary functions which can be performed by interjections in the two languages.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aVassileva, Albena  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/vassileva199401380nas a2200145   4500008004100000245009600041210006900137300001100206490000700217520084500224653002401069653005601093100002601149856005901175       1994                        eng d00aA Model of the Dative/Accusative Opposition for Slavic Languages Based on Data from Aphasia0 aModel of the DativeAccusative Opposition for Slavic Languages Ba  a7–160 v193 a<p>Bulgarian and Russian aphasia patients made approximately twice as many Dative/Accusative case-marker errors on verbs with generally inconsistent interlanguage case markings than on verbs whose interlanguage case marking is fairly consistent. These results suggest that paragrammatic case-marking errors reflect not purely morphological-level impairment, but rather a semantic deficit, i. e., impaired access to individual case-associated semantic features of the verb. Based on the data, it is proposed that „conflicting case marking“ verbs contain a fairly balanced proportion of both dative- and accusative-associated semantic features, and that the dative/accusative opposition is essentially a temporal one, based on the opposition [+/- cognitive engagement] on the part of the non-agent to the action presented by the verb.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aVakareliyska, Cynthia  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/vakareliyska199401260nas a2200145   4500008004100000245006000041210006000101300001100161490000700172520077900179653002400958653005600982100002101038856005501059       1994                        eng d00aPragmatic Uses of Well and their Bulgarian Translations0 aPragmatic Uses of Well and their Bulgarian Translations  a5–130 v193 a<p>The paper is an analysis of the semantic and pragmatic properties of Well and the different transformations which Well-prefaced sentences undergo in Bulgarian. The meaning with which Well functions in a particular context is considered to be a result of the influence of the linguistic and non-linguistic environment but unlike many authors who have analysed Well and other pragmatic particles, the present study presents the hypothesis that these items have an inherent meaning of their own. The latter is regarded as a prototype which is supplemented by variable components. The method of analysis used is Predication Analysis by means of which different semantic and pragmatic meanings of the particle are identified and the adequacy of the translations is tested.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aHristova, Sashka  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/hristova199401088nas a2200157   4500008004100000245009900041210006900140300001200209490000700221520052500228653002400753653005600777100002100833700001900854856005700873       1994                        eng d00aTypological characteristics of co-reference chains in English and Bulgarian journalistic style0 aTypological characteristics of coreference chains in English and  a21–270 v193 a<p>The paper focuses on the similarities and differences between English and Bulgarian journalistic texts with respect to co-reference realization. The hypothesis tested views the choice of the various means of securing the co-reference mechanism as depending primarily on sociolinguistic and psycholinguistic rather than systemic factors. Employing the contrastive analysis perspective, the whole variety of linguistic expressions referring to the same extralinguistic object are considered and discussed in detail.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aVassileva, Irena1 aSotirov, Petar  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/vassileva1994a01295nas a2200145   4500008004100000245009300041210006900134300001100203490000700214520077200221653002400993653005601017100002101073856005501094       1993                        eng d00aThe relationship between entity and space in English and Bulgarian existential sentences0 arelationship between entity and space in English and Bulgarian e  a9–160 v183 a<p>The nature of the relationship between Entity and Space is discussed along the parameters: (a) Internal / External Space and (b) Essentiality / Contingency of the „Entity / PART / : Space / WHOLE/“ relationship. It is argued that the value of these parameters determines some of the major differences between English and Bulgarian in the choice of an existential sentence (the there construction and the impersonal има) or of a personal construction (with have and the personal имам, respectively). Unlike English, the Bulgarian existential има construction is not the choice in the case of Internal Space and/or a more essential part : whole relationship, owing to the specificity of the verb, itself the result of a shift towards impersonality.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aAlexieva, Bistra  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/alexieva199300860nas a2200145   4500008004100000245011200041210006900153300001100222490000700233520030600240653002400546653005600570100002700626856006100653       1993                        eng d00aZu den Besonderheiten der adversativen Konstruktionen des Bulgarischen (in Konfrontation mit dem Deutschen)0 aZu den Besonderheiten der adversativen Konstruktionen des Bulgar  a5–140 v183 a<p>The article examines the lexical potential of Bulgarian to denote adversative relations of the corrective type, in comparison with German. The peculiar function of syntactic negation in the first conjunct in ами and a adversative constructions is shown, and their meaning is further defined.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aPetkova-Schick, Ivanka  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/petkova-schick199302047nas a2200157   4500008004100000245013700041210012700178300001100305490000700316520137000323653002401693653005601717100002901773700003301802856005401835       1993                        eng d00aСъпоставително описание на словообразуването на близкородствени езици0 aСъпоставително описание на словообразуването на близкородствени   a5–120 v193 a<p>The article takes into consideration the two main methods that can be used in contrastive analysis of word-formation in related languages: from form to meaning and from meaning to form. The choice is determined by the purpose of the description and also by the degree of typological relatedness between the compared language systems. With Slavic languages, for example, the description starting from the means of word-formation and analysing their function gives wide opportunities for a more detailed analysis and a thorough description of the multifunctioning of the formants; for determining the similarities and differences in the means of wordformation. The second method from meaning to form is more universal; it aims mainly at revealing the semantics of the derivatives, and is thus applicable to the investigation of more than two languages. This method starts from definite semantic categories and searches for their realization. The basic unit in this method is the word-formation category. It can be used as tertium comparationis, for it unifies derivatives with identical word-formative meaning. The method allows the simultaneous analysis of all compared languages. It may facilitate a more thorough and precise classification of the derivative units by specifying the general and the specific national features of the related language systems.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aБалтова, Юлия1 aШатковски, Януш  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/baltova199301220nas a2200145   4500008004100000245006100041210006000102300001200162490000700174520073200181653002400913653005600937100002600993856005501019       1992                        eng d00aAspectual oppositions in Bulgarian, Albanian and Turkish0 aAspectual oppositions in Bulgarian Albanian and Turkish  a33–380 v173 a<p>In translated Bulgarian, Albanian and Turkish examples lacking the expected correspondences of aorists and imperfects, either Turkish or Bulgarian has an imperfect where the other two have aorists. This is evidence that the imperfect is more marked in each language since a more marked form is less likely to correspond to another language’s counterpart. The noncorresponding imperfects denote sequential or inceptive activities, which contradicts the meaning of contemporaneousness suggested for Bulgarian and Albanian. Perhaps because it is Indo-European like Bulgarian but lacks a superordinate aspectual opposition like Turkish, Albanian is intermediate in using the aorist when one of the others has an imperfect.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aFriedman, Victor, А.  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/friedman199200989nas a2200145   4500008004100000245003100041210003100072300001200103490000700115520056600122653002400688653005600712100002000768856005500788       1992                        eng d00aSome thoughts on causation0 aSome thoughts on causation  a58–630 v173 a<p>The article deals with causativity/factitivity of verbs in Hungarian in comparison with English. The author attempts to prove that Hungarian is one of the languages in which the distinction between the causative and the factitive is almost entirely grammaticalized. To describe more fully the causative constructions, sublativity and other factors should be taken into account. A conclusion is reached that Hungarian is not an appropriate counterexample against passive analyses of causative constructions and Comrie’s opinion should be argued against.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aKorponay, Béla  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/korponay199201170nas a2200145   4500008004100000245021000041210012700251300001200378490000700390520045400397653002400851653005600875100003700931856005600968       1992                        eng d00aАнглийската и българската екзистенциална конструкция – резултат от прилагането на различни когнитивни модели0 aАнглийската и българската екзистенциална конструкция резултат от  a84–910 v173 aThe differences between the English and the Bulgarian existential constructions are discussed as the result of the application of two different cognitive models, namely: (a) The English there + be + NP as the result of a specific type of metonymy typical of English, labelled as „predicate-splitting“ mapping, and (b) The Bulgarian има + NP as a metaphorical expansion based on the metaphor „Space (as if) has the entities inhabiting it“.10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aАлексиева, Бистра  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/aleksieva199200901nas a2200145   4500008004100000245003100041210003100072300001200103490000700115520046000122653002400582653005600606100003700662856005600699       1991                        eng d00aДесèн и дизайн0 aДесèн и дизайн  a15–230 v163 aThe article presents а contrastive synchronic-diachronic analysis of the loanwords десèн and дизайн in Bulgarian, borrowed from French and English, whose respective source-words are dessin and design. It traces the semantic development of their common etymon in Italian, French and English. The specific nature of the semantic changes of each loanword is considered in connection with the semantic conditions offered by each receptor language.10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aАлексиева, Невена  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/aleksieva199101229nas a2200145   4500008004100000245021500041210012600256300001200382490000700394520052100401653002400922653005600946100002901002856005201031       1991                        eng d00aНякои характерни елементи на съпоставителната фонетика в шведския и българския език {(вокална система и прозодия)}0 aНякои характерни елементи на съпоставителната фонетика в шведски  a20–290 v163 a<p>The article describes the Bulgarian and Swedish vowel systems, first separately in each language, then in a contrastive way. The prosodic system in both languages is also analysed and contrasted. The author shows that both the vowel and the prosodic systems are much more complicated in Swedish than in Bulgarian. This fact creates some difficulties in the field of teaching Swedish to Bulgarian speakers. The paper shows how these difficulties can be surmounted and gives concrete methodical recommendations.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aМайер, Ингрид  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/mayer199100710nas a2200145   4500008004100000245002800041210002800069300001200097490000700109520029600116653002400412653005600436100001800492856005400510       1990                        eng d00aDiversity in similarity0 aDiversity in similarity  a67–710 v153 a<p>This paper aims at showing the specific features of English and Bulgarian in view of the fact that they are both considered to be analytical languages. The basic idea is that the degree of analyticity or syntheticity can be measured by analysing their exponents on all language levels</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aMolhova, Jana  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/molhova199001099nas a2200145   4500008004100000245006400041210006400105300001200169490000700181520061500188653002400803653005600827100001800883856005200901       1990                        eng d00aInstrumentale Nominalphrasen im Deutschen und im Russischen0 aInstrumentale Nominalphrasen im Deutschen und im Russischen  a61–660 v153 a<p>This article attempts to delimitate „instrumental meaning“ as a semantic category from „object meaning“ on the one hand and „modal meaning“ on the other. Within the class of noun phrases designating instrumental meaning in both languages the group of noun phrases designating instrumental meaning (cut with a knife) is distinguished from noun phrases designating for instance means of transportation (go by train) or so-called auxiliary instruments (walk on stilts). The author discusses some specific difficulties as to the translation of instrumental noun phrases from German into Russian.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aMaier, Ingrid  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/maier199001238nas a2200145   4500008004100000245009600041210007200137300001200209490000700221520070700228653002400935653005600959100002301015856005401038       1990                        eng d00aQuelques différences typiques entre le système phonétique du fran{\c c}ais et du bulgare0 aQuelques différences typiques entre le système phonétique du fra  a72–760 v153 a<p>A generalized contrastive analysis of the French and the Bulgarian phonetic systems is made, with a focus on vowels. Some basic articulatory and structural differences are established. While contemporary French features a comparatively tense, primarily front and markedly labial way of articulation of vowels, Bulgarian features a comparatively loose, primarily back and non-labial way of articulation. In contrast to French, where nasal vowels function as separate phonemes, the nasalized vowels in Bulgarian are to be viewed as positional variants of the corresponding oral vowels. Along with these peculiarities, the difference between the accent patterns of the two languages is pointed out.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aNikolov, Bo\v, zil  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/nikolov199000919nas a2200145   4500008004100000245007300041210006500114300001200179490000700191520042700198653002400625653005600649100001700705856005100722       1990                        eng d00aOn the Slavic word for one in the predicate-noun determiner position0 aSlavic word for one in the predicatenoun determiner position  a53–550 v153 a<p>The article analyses the specific semantic conditions in which the individualizing force of the Slavic word ‘one’ in the position of a determiner of the predicative noun is realized. Its use in sentences containing a modifier само ‘only’ for the elimination of ambiguity in meaning is investigated, as well as its expressive function in defining the personal and professional qualities of an individual.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aIvić, Milka  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/ivic199001150nas a2200145   4500008004100000245010700041210006900148300001200217490000700229520061400236653002400850653005600874100002000930856005400950       1990                        eng d00aSome notes on analyticity in English and Bulgarian and the case for diachronic contrastive linguistics0 aSome notes on analyticity in English and Bulgarian and the case   a32–360 v153 a<p>Some basic points arising in the contrastive study of analyticity in English and Bulgarian are considered. It is pointed out that the motivation for bilateral diachronic contrastive studies is usually weaker than for the respective synchronic studies. More productive in a number of cases are multilateral studies which ensure a higher degree of certainty in establishing constant correlations between the emergence of analyticity and language contacts. The preference for 124 simplified analytical structure is the manifestation of a universal communicative strategy in conditions of language contact.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aDanchev, Andrei  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/danchev199001381nas a2200145   4500008004100000245016800041210012600209300001200335490000700347520070800354653002401062653005601086100003701142856005601179       1990                        eng d00aВръзката между екзистенциалните и сензорните изречения (върху англо-български материал)0 aВръзката между екзистенциалните и сензорните изречения върху анг  a14–210 v153 aThe relationship between existential and perceptual sentences is studied on the basis of a threetier system of semantic analysis, establishing the presence of common predications in their deepest semantic structures. Conclusions are also drawn about the factors determining the choice, for explicit rendering, of the existential or perceptual predication in English and Bulgarian, the most important amongst them being: the nature of space; the degree of privacy of the perception; the volume and specificity of the information received via the various channels of perception, and the quantity and character of the additional information (modal, aspectual, etc.) subsumed under the perceptual predicate.10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aАлексиева, Бистра  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/aleksieva199001267nas a2200145   4500008004100000245012500041210007000166300001100236490000700247520071000254653002400964653005600988100002101044856005601065       1990                        eng d00aЕxperimentalphonetische Untersuchung der Faktoren, die konsonantisches Sandhi im Deutschen und im Bulgarischen bedingen0 aЕxperimentalphonetische Untersuchung der Faktoren die konsonanti  a5–180 v153 a<p>The paper presents the results of a contrastive experimental phonetic study of assimilation phenomena appearing at the so-called outer-sandhi. The similarities and differences between German and Bulgarian in this process, which is physiologically conditioned, but specifically differentiated for the respective language systems, are investigated. Their close dependence upon a number of factors is taken into consideration. The results of the study can be used as the basis for the correction of some orthoepic rules in the field of „interword“ phonetics and in speech synthesis. The results may also be directly used in the teaching of phonetics to Bulgarian learners of German and vice versa.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aSimeonova, Ruska  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/simeonova199001332nas a2200145   4500008004100000245017900041210012400220300001300344490000700357520065400364653002401018653005601042100003501098856005301133       1990                        eng d00aОб эксплицитности, форме и определенности субъекта в русских и чешских модальных конструкциях0 aОб эксплицитности форме и определенности субъекта в русских и че  a84– 880 v153 aThe article makes an attempt at explaining the substantial differences between Russian and Czech in the ways of expressing the subject in sentences with modal verbs and predicative words. These sentences are classified according to whether their subject is expressed by a separate word, whether it has nominative or other form, and whether it has definite or indefinite reference. The conclusion is made that in Russian there is a much higher percentage of sentences with a non-expressed non-nominative subject which are also used in such communicative situations where Czech uses constructions with a pronominal or a verbally non-expressed subject.10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aАдамец, Пршемысл  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/adamec199001154nas a2200169   4500008004100000245006700041210005800108300001100166490000700177520059500184653002400779653005600803100002400859700002600883700002200909856005300931       1989                        eng d00aContribution à l’étude des mots-valises ou „mixonymes“0 aContribution à l étude des motsvalises ou mixonymes  a8–120 v143 a<p>The article is an attempt to reveal certain theoretically interesting aspects of so-called mixonyms like touriste + aristocrate → touristocrate that have only recently become an object of investigation. After a discussion of the terminological and the conceptual apparatus for the study of mixonyms, the authors present a short classification and dwell more extensively on the role of homophony in their formation. Homophony is seen as a consecutively destructuralizing and structuralizing element which allows a pseudomotivated transition from single meaning to parallel polysemy.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aBankov, Dimit\u, ar1 aDimitrov, Dimit\u, ar1 aDragnev, Vladimir  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/bankov198900900nas a2200145   4500008004100000245003600041210003600077300001200113490000700125520046200132653002400594653005600618100002500674856005500699       1989                        eng d00aDe la temporalité linguistique0 aDe la temporalité linguistique  a21–250 v143 a<p>Problems concerning aspect and tense in Russian and French are discussed. Special attention is paid to actual (aspectual) present tense. With respect to the syntactic pattern it is assumed that the marked aspectual character of the Russian verb and the small number of tense forms has something to do with the comparative uniformity of morpho-syntactic means; in French, conversely, the various tenses determine its great morpho-syntactic complexity.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aFontaine, Jacqueline  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/fontaine198901163nas a2200145   4500008004100000245006500041210006300106300001200169490000700181520066900188653002400857653005600881100002300937856005700960       1989                        eng d00a Implications aspecto-temporelles en français et en bulgare0 aImplications aspectotemporelles en français et en bulgare  a26–370 v143 a<p>The basic values of the French passé simple and the Bulgarian aorist, on the one hand, and the French passé composé and the Bulgarian perfect, on the other hand, are compared. In French the aspectual distinction between completedness and noncompletedness is not grammaticalized, in contrast to Bulgarian where there is a morphological opposition between perfective and imperfective aspect. The tenses of the first pair always express an event. In the second pair, passé composé can express an event (in the sphere of the past) and a resultative situation (in the discourse sphere), whereas the perfect expresses a resultative situation in both spheres.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aGuentcheva, Zlatka  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/guentcheva198900886nas a2200145   4500008004100000245006200041210005900103300001200162490000700174520040100181653002400582653005600606100002200662856005600684       1989                        eng d00aNotes sur l’interjection en fran{\c c}ais et en bulgare0 aNotes sur l interjection en fran c c ais et en bulgare  a77–820 v143 a<p>The article discusses some questions concerning the essence and status of interjections. The author subsumes these lexemes under the general category of sentence-like words with respect to which they are an expressive subcategory. Some terminological investigations are carried out and an attempt is made at a classification of expressive sentence-like words from different points of view.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aVassileva, Albena  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/vassileva198901405nas a2200145   4500008004100000245017200041210012600213300001200339490000700351520073200358653002401090653005601114100003301170856005601203       1988                        eng d00aСъпоставително описание на категорията лице (в българския, сърбохърватския и полския език)0 aСъпоставително описание на категорията лице в българския сърбохъ  a18–240 v133 a<p>The article presents some theoretical and methodological principles, which can be applied in the contrastive analysis of the category of person. The attempt at defining the semantic category of person shows that its description should be based on an explicit discrimination between the pragmatic and the semantic level. Besides, if a complete list of the formal means of expressing semantic communicative roles is to be compiled, that is only possible within the framework of a description on the semantic level. The second part of the article shows a possible approach to the contrastive analysis of linguistic material from different languages (Bulgarian, Serbo-Croatian and Polish) in terms of the category of person.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aШимански, Мачей  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/shimanski198801045nas a2200145   4500008004100000245010500041210006900146300001100215490000700226520051000233653002400743653005600767100002000823856005600843       1987                        eng d00aRealisierung der deutschen labialisierten Vorderzungenvokale durch Bulgaren (Fortgeschrittenenstufe)0 aRealisierung der deutschen labialisierten Vorderzungenvokale dur  a5–110 v123 a<p>The article is a contribution to the theory and practice of teaching German phonetics to Bulgarian learners. It focuses on German labialized front vowels which have no equivalents in Bulgarian. The study is carried out in two directions: (a) a contrastive analysis of German labialized front vowels and Bulgarian vowel phonemes, aimed at predicting possible pronunciation errors, and (b) a diagnosis of errors in the production of German labialized front vowels made by Bulgarian advanced learners.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aDimitrova, Kana  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/dimitrova198700963nas a2200145   4500008004100000245012300041210007000164300001200234490000700246520039800253653002400651653005600675100002600731856006000757       1986                        eng d00aZum funktional-semantischen Feld der Lokativität (dargestellt am Beispiel des Russischen, Bulgarischen und Deutschen)0 aZum funktionalsemantischen Feld der Lokativität dargestellt am B  a10–210 v113 a<p>Based on the functional-semantic field theory, this study has as its object the functional-semantic field of locativity, each separate group of central (grammatical) exponents of locativity being elaborately studied. The structure of the field, the hierarchic set-up of its component elements as well as their correspondences across Russian, Bulgarian and German are examined in detail.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aBelentschikow, Renate  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/belentschikow198600992nas a2200145   4500008004100000245006000041210005900101300001200160490000700172520050800179653002400687653005600711100002400767856005500791       1985                        eng d00aInvectives in Danish and Slavic: A contrastive analysis0 aInvectives in Danish and Slavic A contrastive analysis  a44–540 v103 a<p>Comparing invectives in Nordic and Slavic languages we find great similarities: principles and methods of verbal abuse are the same; some constructions are peculiar to the Germanic languages or at least their appearance in Slavic is uncertain, and some constructions are specifically Slavic, possibly belonging to a single language. Although the elements of the invective in the two groups of languages roughly behave uniformly, the pattern varies, each language showing a characteristic profile.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aHougaard, Christian  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/hougaard198501301nas a2200145   4500008004100000245008800041210006900129300001200198490000700210520078500217653002401002653005601026100001801082856005501100       1985                        eng d00aZur Wiedergabe deutscher Vorgangs- und Zustandspassivkonstruktionen im Bulgarischen0 aZur Wiedergabe deutscher Vorgangs und Zustandspassivkonstruktion  a24–320 v103 a<p>The paper contrasts German ‘process’ and ‘state’ passive constructions with their Bulgarian counterparts. Having established the categorial meaning of the passive voice and a definition of passive constructions, some possible uses of German passive constructions are presented and an attempt is made to describe them by metalinguistic means. The established characteristics serve as a basis of reference for finding their Bulgarian equivalents, which may be classified as: a) translated by passive constructions; b) translated by active constructions, i. e. there is a change in the voice of the verb; and c) some other ways of translation. As a result both the regularities and the restrictions in using each of the Bulgarian translation equivalents are presented.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aBüttner, Uwe  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/buettner198500969nas a2200145   4500008004100000245007200041210007100113300001200184490000600196520046600202653002400668653005600692100002000748856005500768       1984                        eng d00aImparfait et présent dans la complétive fran{\c c}aise et bulgare0 aImparfait et présent dans la complétive fran c c aise et bulgare  a14–170 v93 a<p>A number of past tenses exist in French and in Bulgarian: the Aorist, the Perfect, the Imperfect, and the Pluperfect. The paper discusses the uses of the Perfect and its alternative Present tense forms in subordinate complement clauses. In French, as in all Romance languages, these clauses demand an obligatory sequence of tenses rule, while in Bulgarian there is an open choice between the obligatory Romance rule type and the non-sequence Slavic type.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aEyckmans, Karin  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/eyckmans198401388nas a2200145   4500008004100000245011200041210011200153300001200265490000600277520077200283653002401055653005601079100004901135856005801184       1983                        eng d00aЕдна типологична особеност на българския и унгарския език0 aЕдна типологична особеност на българския и унгарския език  a42–460 v83 aThe paper discusses а number of typological similarities between the Bulgarian short forms of the possessive pronouns, used after certain prepositions of the type върху ми ‘above/over me’, срещу ми ‘against/opposite me’, as well as after certain adverbs of the type напреде ми ‘in front of me/before me’, подире ми ‘after/behind me’, etc. on the one hand, and of the Hungarian postpositions with personal possessive endings, on the other hand. It is pointed out that the occurrences in Bulgarian should not be explained only with the influence of the Balkan languages, but a much wider background, including the influence of Old Bulgarian, the Balkan languages, Turkish and Hungarian should be taken into consideration.10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aАлександров, Александър  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/aleksandrov198301034nas a2200145   4500008004100000245014000041210012700181300001200308490000600320520038900326653002400715653005600739100004000795856005300835       1983                        eng d00aЯвление межъязыковой омонимии в условиях русско-болгарского билингвизма0 aЯвление межъязыковой омонимии в условиях русскоболгарского билин  a18–200 v83 a<p>The paper discusses interlingual homonymy within the conditions of Russian-Bulgarian bilingualism. Some of the reasons of interlingual homonymy are analysed against the background of their underlying theoretical prerequisites. The grammatical and morphological aspects of the problem are pointed out. A number of examples demonstrate the various cases of interlingual homonymy.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aКарпов, Владимир, А.  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/karpov198301151nas a2200145   4500008004100000245011600041210007000157300001400227490000600241520060200247653002400849653005600873100002200929856005400951       1982                        eng d00aCertains aspects de la catégorie de la diminution relatifs aux emprunts bulgares faits à la langue française0 aCertains aspects de la catégorie de la diminution relatifs aux e  a105–1140 v73 a<p>A survey is made of the lexico-grammatical category of diminutivity in Bulgarian and French. The semantic, stylistic, derivational and quantitative aspects of the phenomenon are studied. It is established that morphemiс (synthetic) diminutivity is predominant in Bulgarian, whereas in French descriptive (analytic) diminutivity prevails. While French has lost many of its diminutive forms since the 16th c., in Bulgarian this phenomenon is alive even to this day. Statistic data show that diminutives have a tenfold higher frequency of occurrence in modern Bulgarian than in modern French.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aKrăstev, Borimir  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/krastev198200629nas a2200145   4500008004100000245009700041210007000138300001000208490000600218520010900224653002400333653005600357100001700413856005300430       1982                        eng d00aEinige Bemerkungen zu einem speziellen Typ komplexer Sätze im Deutschen und im Bulgarischen0 aEinige Bemerkungen zu einem speziellen Typ komplexer Sätze im De  a3–80 v73 a<p>The present paper deals with complex sentences of the type Ich arbeite (nicht) dort, wo du denkst</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aJäger, Gert  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/jaeger198201094nas a2200145   4500008004100000245009700041210007100138300001400209490000600223520056600229653002400795653005600819100001900875856005400894       1982                        eng d00aLa nasalité vocalique en fran{\c c}ais et en bulgare: problème phonétique et phonologique0 aLa nasalité vocalique en fran c c ais et en bulgare problème pho  a122–1290 v73 a<p>The article is a contrastive study of nasalization in the following combination: vowel + n + fricative. It is established that in this combination the vowels are nasalized to almost the same degree in French and Bulgarian. The reason for that is the elimination of the feature occlusiveness of the n consonant in the two languages. However, whereas this phenomenon has led to phonologization of the nasal vowels in French, in Bulgarian reasons of morphosyntactic and semantic nature have prevented the nasalized vowels from becoming independent phonemes.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aNikolov, Bojil  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/nikolov198201235nas a2200145   4500008004100000245007300041210006900114300001200183490000600195520073100201653002400932653005600956100002101012856005601033       1982                        eng d00aLa proposition nominale assertive en bulgare, fran{\c c}ais et russe0 aLa proposition nominale assertive en bulgare fran c c ais et rus  a85–900 v73 a<p>Nominal sentences are a universal linguistic category. The communicative nominal sentences may be classified according to the following criteria: a) structure (unexpanded and expanded sentences); b) semantics (representing descriptions of nature, the time of the action and its setting, the physical appearance and spiritual make-up of the characters); c) role in the text (introductive and conclusive). The skilful alternation between nominal and verbal sentences and nominal stanzas is an interesting stylistic device. Some authors (M. Cohen, T. Vianu) associate the more frequent use of nominal sentences with the spread of a specific literary tendency (Romanticism) and of a definite style (modern-impressionistic).</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aBoyadjiev, Jivco  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/boyadjiev198200978nas a2200157   4500008004100000245006600041210006200107300001200169490000600181520044900187653002400636653005600660100002300716700002400739856005700763       1982                        eng d00aA la recherche d’une valeur fondamentale du parfait bulgare0 ala recherche d une valeur fondamentale du parfait bulgare  a44–560 v73 a<p>An attempt is made to distinguish a basic value for the Bulgarian perfect which, perforce, should remain compatible with the different uses of the perfect. A survey is made of the different values which may be attributed to the morphological forms of the perfect (depending on whether the participle is formed from the aorist or from the imperfect, from the perfective or imperfective aspect); the values are defined with the same terms.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aGuentcheva, Zlatka1 aDecles, Jean-Pierre  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/guentcheva198200852nas a2200145   4500008004100000245005200041210005000093300001300143490000600156520038400162653002400546653005600570100002400626856005600650       1982                        eng d00aParallèles linguistiques bulgaro-fran{\c c}ais0 aParallèles linguistiques bulgarofran c c ais  a98–1040 v73 a<p>The first part of the article deals with the development and present state of French studies in Bulgaria. Then, in terms of case grammar, a general contrastive analysis of Bulgarian and French is made proceeding, above all, from the specific features of Bulgarian which are determined by its Slavonic origin and its subsequent contacts with the Balkan and Turkic languages</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aIvantchev, Svetomir  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/ivantchev198201099nas a2200145   4500008004100000245003800041210003400079300001200113490000600125520066200131653002400793653005600817100002500873856005500898       1982                        eng d00aA propos de la notion d’aoriste0 apropos de la notion d aoriste  a36–430 v73 a<p>The aorist structure in modern Russian is studied on the basis of its different characteristic morpho-syntactic manifestations. In the ideal case aorist (perfective) structure is defined as the only one to characterize the narrative type of text (cf. H. Weinreich’s work on grammar tenses). As a notion pertaining to text syntax, this form lends itself to morpho-syntactic con125 figurations which belong to the complex sentence: agreement, subordination by means of conjunctions or adverbial participles. The consequences of the obligatory co-existence between the perfective and imperfective forms in a real, non-ideal text are discussed as well.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aFontaine, Jacqueline  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/fontaine198201135nas a2200145   4500008004100000245013400041210007100175300001200246490000600258520057000264653002400834653005600858100002000914856005500934       1982                        eng d00aQuelques observations sur les verbes bulgares caractérisés par des préfixes et leurs équivalents analytiques en fran{\c c}ais0 aQuelques observations sur les verbes bulgares caractérisés par d  a79–850 v73 a<p>Some specific features of a group of Bulgarian prefixed verbs with a relatively independent prefix are analysed and some regularities in their analytic equivalents in French are established. The prefix is considered as a language element with substantial and functional content. Four types of prefixal, relatively independent verbal characteristics are distinguished: adverbial, quantitative, of degree and of phase. The conditions under which the Bulgarian prefixes for surface на-, по-, о-, have obligatory analytic equivalents in French are analysed.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aBechkova, Radka  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/bechkova198201024nas a2200145   4500008004100000245010300041210007000144300001200214490000600226520048900232653002400721653005600745100002300801856005400824       1982                        eng d00aRéflexions sur la subordination des propositions circonstancielles en fran{\c c}ais et en bulgare0 aRéflexions sur la subordination des propositions circonstanciell  a90–980 v73 a<p>The semantic relations in complex sentences with adverbial clauses are analysed considering the semantics of the respective conjunctions. The study of the mechanism of subordination in Bulgarian and French is conducive to establishing the specific features which characterize the expression of the same relations in the two languages. They also illustrate the idea that grammar facts give a clue to elucidating the means used by each nation in the formation of a world outlook.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aHristov, Pa\"ıssy  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/hristov198201226nas a2200145   4500008004100000245005600041210005500097300001200152490000600164520075600170653002400926653005600950100001901006856005501025       1982                        eng d00aSystèmes aspectuels en fran{\c c}ais et en bulgare0 aSystèmes aspectuels en fran c c ais et en bulgare  a26–360 v83 a<p>Not infrequently, phenomena which should be distinguished are subsumed under aspectual oppositions. Thus, for example, a contrastive study of French and Bulgarian reveals that French does not possess the aspectual opposition, restrictive opposition (imperfective/perfective), characteristic of the Slavic languages. However, the two languages possess two other common aspectual oppositions: 1) phase opposition which contrasts the forms for non-completion with those for completion; 2) the opposition of dynamism based on the opposition imperfect (nondynamic)/aorist (dynamic). The latter opposition may be considered as sub-aspectual in so far as it is an opposition between two temporal forms both of which are characterized by noncompletion.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aFeuillet, Jack  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/feuillet198200908nas a2200145   4500008004100000245004500041210004300086300001200129490000600141520046700147653002400614653005600638100001600694856005200710       1982                        eng d00a{\v L}aspect dans la structure de récit0 av L aspect dans la structure de récit  a13–260 v73 a<p>The accepted definitions of verbal aspect (the idea of terminativeness or соmpletiveness of the perfective aspect) are subjected to criticism, though full credit is given to V. V. Gurevi{\v c} who tried to present the problem of aspect in a new light (by contrasting sequentiveness for the perfective aspect with nоn-sequentiveness for the imperfective aspect). A new definition of aspectuality in general and of verbal aspect in particular is offered.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aDurin, Jean  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/durin198201168nas a2200145   4500008004100000245008500041210006900126300001200195490000600207520063400213653002400847653005600871100003100927856006400958       1982                        eng d00aVariations dans l’usage des mots d’origine fran{\c c}aise en bulgare moderne0 aVariations dans l usage des mots d origine fran c c aise en bulg  a57–600 v73 a<p>The article is part of a more detailed study on the role of the lexemes of French origin in Bulgarian. It is based on a comparison made between the first and the latest editions of Dictionary of Foreign Words in Bulgarian (1958 and 1978). The corpus contains 1537 terms excerpted from the 1958 edition and 1578 terms excerpted from the 1978 edition. The thematic fields to which these words belong and their influence on Bulgarian speakers are analysed. It is pointed out that many of these words are actually loan-words in French. In some cases the two editions of the dictionary give the etymology in a different manner.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aHanegreefs-Popova, Noëlle  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/hanegreefs-popova198200733nas a2200145   4500008004100000245002500041210002500066300001100091490000600102520032400108653002400432653005600456100002100512856005400533       1982                        eng d00aА propos de quelque0 aА propos de quelque  a6–120 v73 a<p>Making use of many examples and classification criteria the author tries to solve the problem of the category of definiteness: how are to be explained the different uses of quelque (in the singular) depending on whether the problem concerns the indefinite quelqu’un and quelque chose or the syntagma quelque N.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aCulioli, Antoine  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/culioli198201659nas a2200145   4500008004100000245011700041210011600158300001400274490000600288520104400294653002401338653005601362100003701418856005801455       1981                        eng d00aНемски, нидерландски и скандинавски заемки в българския език0 aНемски нидерландски и скандинавски заемки в българския език  a181–1890 v63 a<p>The article is а survey of the loan-words borrowed from the modern Germanic languages (with the exception of English) which have penetrated into Bulgarian directly or indirectly for the last 100–150 years. The aim is to give a more complete and correct idea of their number and the regions where they are used. A more detailed analysis is made of the German loan-words and terms (over 950 in number) taken from MA theses, Речник на чуждите думи в българския език [Dictionary of Foreign Words in Bulgarian] and other lexicographic reference books. The Dutch loan-words (about 170) are presented after R. Detrez’s paper with certain additions and examples from South African Dutch. The Scandinavian loan-words (about 50) have been excerpted from Речник на чуждите думи в българския език [Dictionary of Foreign Words in Bulgarian] and other sources. Because of the limited size of the present article the meanings and etymons of the loan-words are not discussed.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aПарашкевов, Борис  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/parashkevov198101116nas a2200145   4500008004100000245007000041210006900111300001100180490000600191520061600197653002400813653005600837100002300893856005400916       1980                        eng d00aLes langues slaves dans le contexte des langues indo-européennes0 aLes langues slaves dans le contexte des langues indoeuropéennes  a3–150 v53 a<p>The article considers the place of the Slavic languages among the other Indo-European languages using linguistic data and results from recent archaeological findings. Grammaticalization is the basic factor in the development of the morphological systems; its mechanism is illustrated with examples from the Indo-European and Slavic languages. The Slavic languages possess both a number of archaisms which are evidenced by the Anatolian languages, and innovations common to the Greco-Aryan group. The Baltic Slavonic language group is the most conservative group in late Indo-European (Indo-European III).</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aAdrados, Francisco  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/adrados198001624nas a2200145   4500008004100000245015800041210012600199300001200325490000600337520096000343653002401303653005601327100003701383856005801420       1979                        eng d00aИнтернационални съществителни със суфикс -ция и техните еквиваленти в немския език0 aИнтернационални съществителни със суфикс ция и техните еквивален  a20–290 v43 a<p>The comparison of international substantives ending in -ция in Bulgarian and their equivalents in German reveals a certain variety in the suffixation of the latter: -a(t)ion, -(t)ie, -enz, -anz, deriving from the Latin -(t)io, -(t)ia, -entia, -antia. In order to prevent inaccuracies in the reproduction of the German equivalents by Bulgarians, an additional segmentation that takes into account the component -V(C)-, i. e. vowel (+ consonant) before the syncretic suffix -ция is proposed in the article. On the basis of the transposition models thus established, some rare word-formation aberrations appear. Furthermore, possible stylistic and semantic divergences of structurally identical lexemes in both languages are pointed out. For the purposes of effective communication it is also important that the competition of international and domestic suffixes, as well as the synonymy of international and domestic lexemes should be observed.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aПарашкевов, Борис  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/parashkevov197901577nas a2200145   4500008004100000245015500041210012500196300001200321490000600333520092000339653002401259653005601283100003701339856005501376       1979                        eng d00aНаблюдения върху употребата на определителния член в българския и румънския език0 aНаблюдения върху употребата на определителния член в българския   a12–170 v43 aThe system of articles in modern Bulgarian, characterized only by a definite post-positional article, is considerably different from the Rumanian system of articles which possesses, besides the definite article, an indefinite, a proclitic possessive and a proclitic demonstrative article. The definite post-positional article has different uses in the two languages. In some cases there is similarity in the use, as for instance, in possessive constructions with possessive pronouns and with the short forms of the dative case of the personal pronouns. The kinship vocabulary, as a separate lexico-semantic group, exhibits different use with the articles in the two languages. However, in the possessive constructions with kinship vocabulary, the distribution of the articles is the same. A comprehensive study of the two systems is necessary, as well as of all cases of use of the post-positional definite article.10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aАлексова, Василка  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/aleksova197901318nas a2200145   4500008004100000245019600041210012700237300001200364490000600376520062400382653002401006653005601030100003301086856005301119       1979                        eng d00aСъпоставително семантичен анализ на полисемантични роднински названия в българския и виетнамския език0 aСъпоставително семантичен анализ на полисемантични роднински наз  a42–500 v43 a<p>The paper is an attempt at a contrastive semantic analysis of the polysemantic kinship terms in two languages belonging to different linguistic families, Bulgarian and Vietnamese. A definite quantity of terms has been analysed and the componential method used in the analysis has the advantage of displaying the semantic characteristics of the whole lexico-semantic group. The results of the analysis have widened the range of the semantic features and have limited the range of the anthropological features. The results can be used in contrastive and typological studies of kinship terms in different languages.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aТхием, Ле, Куанг  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/thiem1979a01485nas a2200145   4500008004100000245013200041210012400173300001100297490000600308520085200314653002401166653005601190100004001246856005301286       1979                        eng d00aЧислителните два, двама, две и техните съответствия в белоруския език0 aЧислителните два двама две и техните съответствия в белоруския е  a7–110 v43 a<p>The numerals два, двама, две and their analogues in Byelorussian are considered. The analysis is based on excerption by continuous selection from Vazov’s classic novel Under the Yoke and its Byelorussian translation. The different uses with and without article are considered, as well as their free use and in combinations with dependent words. The tendency of the numerals to form a concrete grammar pattern is established; their combinatorial properties, semantic and grammatical, are analysed. The hypothesis about the presence of a collective meaning and a certain generalizing meaning in the semantics of these numerals is substantiated by statistical data from Bulgarian only. The main conclusion is that when used with the article the numerals два, двама, две have a collective meaning and a generalizing one.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aКарпов, Владимир, А.  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/karpov197902400nas a2200145   4500008004100000245022400041210012500265300001100390490000600401520169000407653002402097653005602121100002502177856005202202       1978                        eng d00aКъм по-приемлива анализа и постройка на опитите за съпоставителни и типологични изследвания в славянското езикознание0 aКъм поприемлива анализа и постройка на опитите за съпоставителни  a3–130 v33 a<p>Through distribution and stratification, the author aims at a more accurate characterization of the various methods (contrastive and typological in particular) used in Slavonic language studies. The study has been prompted by the existing inconsistency in their formulation which is, to a certain extent, understandable. The starting point is the continuity and mutual complementation of all methods of study used so far. The relative difference between these methods stems from their attitude towards the presumed parent language prototype of the phenomena which is valid only for the comparative method. The Slavonic languages, being genealogically related, display a number of structures (zones and objects) which can be studied not only comparatively but also contrastively and typologically. Thus, for example, a number of contrastive studies of languages in contact during the post- Proto-Slavonic period, such as the Byelorussian and Russian akan’e, the Polish mazurzenie etc. differ from the typological interpretation of phenomena such as the system of obligatory՛ open syllables in the Proto-Slavonic period, the appearance of the genus virile in some Slavonic languages, the Bulgarian citational forms, etc. A potential relationship and interdependence are assumed to exist between descriptive, comparative and historical linguistics. The reliability of the contrastive method is enhanced by соmparison, while it sometimes loses validity if the historical principle is neglected. The typological method is becoming increasingly reliable since it applies to the essential parameters and universal categories of language and facilitates its dynamic characterology.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aЛеков, Иван  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/lekov197801238nas a2200145   4500008004100000245008700041210006900128300001100197490000600208520072500214653002400939653005600963100002001019856005301039       1977                        eng d00aZu einigen theoretischen und praktischen Problemen der grammatischen Konfrontation0 aZu einigen theoretischen und praktischen Problemen der grammatis  a5–340 v23 a<p>The article discusses general problems of contrastive linguistics. The need of detailed descriptions of the compared languages is pointed out, although this is only a necessary but insufficient condition for successful contrastive analysis. The same linguistic theory, methodology and terminology should be applied to the compared languages. The communicative function of language assumes great importance in contrastive studies. A review is made of several theoretical models. The need of stratification is pointed out. Discussed are also the problems of the choice of topic, comparability, field theory, connections with foreign language teaching. Material from various languages is used by way of illustration.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aHelbig, Gerhard  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/helbig197701465nas a2200145   4500008004100000245025900041210012500300300001200425490000600437520070100443653002401144653005601168100003901224856005601263       1977                        eng d00aГраматически и семантични фактори при определяне рода на английските заемки в български език (Grammatical and semantic factors in determining the gender of English loan-words0 aГраматически и семантични фактори при определяне рода на английс  a44–540 v23 aThis paper deals with the various grammatical and semantic factors which determine the gender of English loan-words in Bulgarian. The corpus consists of 180 nouns borrowed from English into Bulgarian. The study is based on the classification of formal and semantic gender determiners offered by J. Welna. This classification turns out to be applicable to Bulgarian, a language with a highly developed grammatical gender patterning. The formal factors affect the greater part of the loan-words but the semantic ones hold for Bulgarian just as well. The number of loan-words whose gender is semantically determined confirms the activity of the semantic elements in the process of gender assignment.10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aАлексиева, Невенка  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/aleksieva197701643nas a2200145   4500008004100000245026000041210012200301300001400423490000600437520089000443653002401333653005601357100002901413856005501442       1977                        eng d00aКатегорията род и названията за лица от мъжки и женски пол (съпоставително изследване върху материал от английски и български език). [The categor0 aКатегорията род и названията за лица от мъжки и женски пол съпос  a114–1620 v23 a<p>This study examines the correlation between sex and gender in the two languages. Since there is no grammatical gender in English it is usually said that sex distinctions are purely semantic. In Bulgarian sex distinctions are often termed as grammatical. It is our belief that the expression of „sex“ is neither purely grammatical (in Bulgarian) nor purely semantic (in English). Structural, social and other factors are taken into consideration in the analysis of a corpus of about 3000 English and 2800 Bulgarian nouns, expressing „persons by profession, occupation or rank“. The final conclusion is that in expressing the distinctions of sex the similarities between English and Bulgarian are much greater than the differences. They may be attributed to the overpowering influence of social, historical and psychological factors which dominate over this semantic area.</p>10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aПенчева, Майя  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/pencheva197701798nas a2200145   4500008004100000245017300041210012100214300001100335490000600346520112600352653002401478653005601502100003701558856005701595       1977                        eng d00aПодчинени предикативни единици в английски и български език (Subordinate predication units in English and Bulgarian)0 aПодчинени предикативни единици в английски и български език Subo  a3–430 v23 aThe paper makes an attempt to build a paradigm of all the surface structure expressions of subordinate predication in English and Bulgarian and to study the correlations between them. Special attention is given to the „preposition + noun [+ OBJECT /EVENT]“, in the surface structure of which both the noun and the verb are deleted. The analysed examples come from a corpus of 20 novels by British and American writers and their Bulgarian translations, as well as examples from newspapers translated by informants. The factors regulating the mechanism of generating implicit constructions of this type in English and their functional equivalents in Bulgarian are discussed. While in English this type of construction is fairly frequent, in Bulgarian it occurs with only few prepositions. This difference between the two languages is due 1) to the specific mechanism in English of narrowing the meaning of verbs by means of postfixes and the prepositions of the adverbial phrases modifying them, which is non-existent in Bulgarian, and 2) to the different semantic structure of English prepositions resulting from this.10aContrastive Studies10aсъпоставителни изследвания1 aАлексиева, Бистра  uhttp://scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/aleksieva1977a