@article {Грозданова1991,
	title = {Отрицание в английския, българския и малтийския език},
	journal = {Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics},
	volume = {16},
	year = {1991},
	pages = {5{\textendash}9},
	abstract = {On the basis of material from typologically different languages},
	author = {Грозданова, Лиляна}
}
@article {Грозданова1988,
	title = {Наблюдения върху категорията равенство в английския и българския език},
	journal = {Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics},
	volume = {13},
	year = {1988},
	pages = {18{\textendash}25},
	abstract = {The article attempts to provide a more comprehensive analysis of the category of equality in English and Bulgarian. It discusses the conditions of expressing equality within the broader category of comparison of respective entities and the presence of a quality marked as [+scale]. The analysis of the exponents in the two languages independently points to intralingual dependence between the exponents of equality, similarity and identity. The contrastive analysis shows their interrelationships and indicates the areas where native or foreign language interference might occur.},
	author = {Грозданова, Лиляна}
}
@article {Грозданова1987,
	title = {Някои семантични наблюдения върху сравнението в английския и българския език},
	journal = {Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics},
	volume = {12},
	year = {1987},
	pages = {5{\textendash}11},
	abstract = {Some semantic factors affecting the concrete realization in English and Bulgarian of the comparison operator are dwelt upon. The categorial meaning of this operator is defined and its direct dependence on the {\textquoteleft}GRADABLE{\textquoteright} feature of the compared items is thrown into relief. It is noteworthy that this feature may be either inherent in the lexical items or assigned secondarily. It is also argued that the direction of the comparison should follow that of meaning inclusion in the hierarchy. According to the proposition status a distinction is drawn between {\textquoteleft}general{\textquoteright} and {\textquoteleft}partial{\textquoteright} comparison. Cases in which the operator affects the modal characteristics of the sentence are considered as well. In conclusion the choice of an exponent has been found to be directly related to the items governed by the comparison operator.},
	author = {Грозданова, Лиляна}
}
@article {Грозданова1986,
	title = {Идентификация на сравнението в английския и българския език},
	journal = {Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics},
	volume = {11},
	year = {1986},
	pages = {5{\textendash}13},
	abstract = {This is an attempt to identify comparison in contrast with similar language phenomena. A set of sentences defined traditionally as {\textquoteleft}comparative{\textquoteright} have been analysed and reconsidered for this purpose. The syntactic and semantic procedures employed uncovered the fact that apparent resemblance conceals different semantic relations: graded comparison, similitude and quantitative specification. Some factors determining the occurrence of the comparative syntagm as a whole and of its various components have been discussed. In conclusion the analysis has shown that the term {\textquoteleft}comparison{\textquoteright} ought to be specified to avoid any inconsistent use in the literature.},
	author = {Грозданова, Лиляна}
}
@article {Грозданова1980,
	title = {Семантичен анализ на кванторните думи only и само},
	journal = {Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics},
	volume = {5},
	year = {1980},
	pages = {26{\textendash}32},
	abstract = {This paper is an attempt to show that defining the meaning of the quantifiers only in English and само in Bulgarian involves three types of analysis: presuppositional, syntagmatic and paradigmatic. The application of these analyses has led to the following conclusions: a) a presuppositional contrastive set, the members of which are potentially related to the main proposition of the respective sentence, underlies these quantifiers; b) the words only and само indicate that any value different from the one dominated by them in the surface structure is inadmissible relative to the same sentence; c) the interpretation of these quantifiers depends on the paradigmatic value of the lexical unit in their semantic scope. The application of the same criteria to the independent study of оn1у and само shows that they have the same semantic content and that their interpretation follows the same semantic rules.},
	author = {Грозданова, Лиляна}
}
@article {Грозданова1978,
	title = {Лингвистичните пресупозиции и чуждоезиковото обучение},
	journal = {Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics},
	volume = {3},
	year = {1978},
	pages = {55{\textendash}61},
	abstract = {One of the problems of foreign-language teaching arises from the fact that producing wellformed sentences in the target language in class is not a sufficient condition for using it successfully outside the classroom. In the light of recent linguistic developments one can hypothesize that the solution of this problem involves explication of the presuppositions of the model sentences to be learned. The object of this paper is to substantiate the said hypothesis and bear out the necessity of its experimental testing. Arguments from the fields of theoretical linguistics, sociolinguistics and psycholinguistics are presented to this end. A complete teaching act is investigated (from the presentation of a model-sentence by the teacher, through its being processed into a sentence in the target language by the student, to its eventual approbation or correction by the teacher) with the conclusion that the introduction of model-sentences without explication of the respective presuppositions can bring about failure of the teaching act.},
	author = {Грозданова, Лиляна}
}
