@article {Guentcheva1989,
	title = {Implications aspecto-temporelles en fran{\c c}ais et en bulgare},
	journal = {Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics},
	volume = {14},
	year = {1989},
	pages = {26{\textendash}37},
	abstract = {<p>The basic values of the French pass{\'e} simple and the Bulgarian aorist, on the one hand, and the French pass{\'e} compos{\'e} 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, pass{\'e} compos{\'e} 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>},
	keywords = {Contrastive Studies, съпоставителни изследвания},
	author = {Guentcheva, Zlatka}
}
@article {Guentcheva1982,
	title = {A la recherche d{\textquoteright}une valeur fondamentale du parfait bulgare},
	journal = {Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics},
	volume = {7},
	year = {1982},
	pages = {44{\textendash}56},
	abstract = {<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>},
	keywords = {Contrastive Studies, съпоставителни изследвания},
	author = {Guentcheva, Zlatka and Decles, Jean-Pierre}
}
