00557nas a2200133   4500008004100000245009000041210009000131300001400221490000700235653001700242653002900259100003100288856010400319       1991                        bul d00aБиблиография на трудовете на Ирина Червенкова0 aБиблиография на трудовете на Ирина Червенкова  a116–1180 v1610abibliography10aбиблиографии1 aКовачева, Нина  uhttps://naum.slav.uni-sofia.bg/en/librislavici/%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%87%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B0199101380nas a2200133   4500008004100000245013600041210012500177300001000302490000700312520072700319100004101046700003101087856012801118       1988                        bul d00aБезличност, модалност и кореферентност (в българския и английския език)0 aБезличност модалност и кореферентност в българския и английския   a5–90 v133 aAn attempt is made to establish the systemic significance of the isomorphism between impersonal and modal constructions. While it is natural to express the clear cases of epistemic modality impersonally, there is a choice between personal and impersonal expression when different degrees of „objectified“ (within the proposition) or root modality are meant. Unlike English, Bulgarian sometimes shows an overt lack of subject-predicate agreement, i. e. the modal verb is impersonal. The analysis of personal constructions denoting epistemic modality shows that the presence or absence of co-reference of the modal and the notional verb to the same subject is a universal means of describing the cline of modal meanings.1 aКонстантинов, Юлиан1 aКовачева, Мира  uhttps://naum.slav.uni-sofia.bg/en/librislavici/%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%BD%D1%81%D1%82%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%82%D0%B8%D0%BD%D0%BE%D0%B2198800660nam a2200145   4500008004600000245008700046210008700133260002300220100003100243700003100274700005400305700003300359700002400392856009800416       1983                        bul,dchu  00aЖитие на Стефан Дечански от Григорий Цамблак0 aЖитие на Стефан Дечански от Григорий Цамблак  aСофияbБАН1 aДавидов, Ангел1 aДанчев, Георги1 aДончева-Панайотова, Невяна1 aКовачева, Пенка1 aГенчева, Т.  uhttps://naum.slav.uni-sofia.bg/en/librislavici/%D0%B4%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%BE%D0%B2198301286nas a2200121   4500008004100000245018300041210012300224300001200347490000600359520066400365100003101029856010401060       1983                        bul d00aПроблемата за граматичния подлог и разговорната употреба на то / it в българския и английския език0 aПроблемата за граматичния подлог и разговорната употреба на то i  a16–260 v83 analysis of the colloquial usage of the Bulgarian neuter pronoun mo shows that the FSP structure of the utterance is of greatest importance. In particular it is the rhematic elements that favour the occurrence of mo in full as well as in one-member sentences. The function of mo has been defined on these grounds. An interpretation of the meaning of mo / it in such sentences has been suggested. It is theoretically possible that in English and other European languages the neuter pronoun behaved once much like mo in Bulgarian. Such an analysis suggests a uniform explanation for the origin of the grammatical subject it in apparently unrelated constructions.1 aКовачева, Мира  uhttps://naum.slav.uni-sofia.bg/en/librislavici/%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%87%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B0198300562nas a2200133   4500008004100000245009900041210009900140300001400239490000600253653001100259653001900270100003300289856010600322       1983                        bul d00aТрети международен колоквиум по старобългаристика0 aТрети международен колоквиум по старобългаристика  a115–1170 v810aEvents10aХроника1 aКовачева, Пенка  uhttps://naum.slav.uni-sofia.bg/en/librislavici/%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%87%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B01983-000588nas a2200133   4500008004100000245011500041210011500156300001200271490000600283653001100289653001900300100003100319856010400350       1981                        bul d00aМеждународна конференция по исторически синтаксис в Познан0 aМеждународна конференция по исторически синтаксис в Познан  a82–830 v610aEvents10aХроника1 aКовачева, Мира  uhttps://naum.slav.uni-sofia.bg/en/librislavici/%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%87%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B0198100849nam a2200157   4500008004100000245012300041210012100164260011700285300000800402653004900410100003100459700003700490700003300527700003300560856009800593       1978                        bul d00aИстория на българския език. Анотирани текстове, анализи и речник0 aИстория на българския език Анотирани текстове анализи и речник  aВелико ТърновоbВТУ "Кирил и Методий" - Филологически факултет  a14310aбългарски език - история1 aДавидов, Ангел1 aХаралампиев, Иван1 aКовачева, Пенка1 aДамянова, Мария  uhttps://naum.slav.uni-sofia.bg/en/librislavici/%D0%B4%D0%B0%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%BE%D0%B2197801960nas a2200121   4500008004100000245026000041210012500301300001200426490000600438520125900444100003101703856010401734       1977                        bul d00aСемантико-синтактична структура на българското „студено ми е“ и английското „І аm cold“ – синхронно и диахронно изследване {(Semantic-syntactic struct0 aСемантикосинтактична структура на българското студено ми е и анг  a61–910 v23 aThe syntactic behaviour of English I am cold displays some peculiarities due to the fact that it comes from earlier me is cold. This construction is isomorphic with the corresponding phrases in other European languages. It is necessary to know the semantic-syntactic structure of this type of „impersonal“ constructions in order to gain insight into the mechanism of the change towards personal construction in Middle English. Using surface data from different languages the following predicate components have been detected: property assignment, identity, existence and location. In most European languages these relations are expressed by the verb of being. Rules are proposed for reaching surface structures like OE Cold is and me is cold, MdE It is cold. The transition to It is cold is connected with the change in the semantic structure of the verb to be. Me in Me is cold ceased to be interpreted as a Dative. The following factors are relevant in determining the surface form of an „impersonal meaning“: 1) the nature of the verb of being; 2) the way of expressing the notion of an interested person (Ethical Dative); 3) the presence/absence of a grammatical category of gender. Bulgarian is, so to say, a stage behind in all three items.1 aКовачева, Мира  uhttps://naum.slav.uni-sofia.bg/en/librislavici/%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%87%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B01977