<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>6</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Guentcheva, Zlatka</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Temps et aspect: l'exemple du bulgare contemporain</style></title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1990</style></year></dates><publisher><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Editions du Centre national de la recherche scientifique</style></publisher><pub-location><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Paris</style></pub-location><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">250</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Guentcheva, Zlatka</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%"> Implications aspecto-temporelles en français et en bulgare</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Contrastive Studies</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">съпоставителни изследвания</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1989</style></year></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">14</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">26–37</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;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.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Guentcheva, Zlatka</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Decles, Jean-Pierre</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">A la recherche d’une valeur fondamentale du parfait bulgare</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics</style></secondary-title></titles><keywords><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Contrastive Studies</style></keyword><keyword><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">съпоставителни изследвания</style></keyword></keywords><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1982</style></year></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">7</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">44–56</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">&lt;p&gt;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.&lt;/p&gt;</style></abstract></record></records></xml>