01482nas a2200133   4500008004100000245024600041210012700287300001100414490000700425520073600432100003701168700003901205856010401244       2006                        bul d00aСъпоставително-типологичен анализ на полисемията (върху материал от тематичната група „оръдия“ в български, руски и френски език)0 aСъпоставителнотипологичен анализ на полисемията върху материал о  a9–290 v313 aThe articles outlines the project Fragments of the linguistic picture of the world in the light of secondary nomination in Bulgarian, Russian, Serbian, Czech, French, English and Hebrew worked out at the Bulgarian Language Institute, the Bulgarian Academy of Sciences. The framework adopted relies on the theoretical construct of the invariant semantic structure of the word, a prototypical representative of a given thematic group. The analysis is carried out on pairs of languages: Russian – Bulgarian, Serbian – Bulgarian, Czech – Bulgarian, French – Bulgarian, English – Bulgarian. The lexical material for the article is drawn from the lexicosemantic field of Tools in Russian – Bulgarian and French – Bulgarian.1 aЛегурска, Палмира1 aВеселинов, Димитър  uhttps://naum.slav.uni-sofia.bg/en/librislavici/%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%B3%D1%83%D1%80%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B0200601332nas a2200133   4500008004100000245015400041210012500195300001300320490000700333520069400340100003301034700003901067856009201106       1991                        bul d00aОтношението между френското арго и българския сленг като лексикографски проблем0 aОтношението между френското арго и българския сленг като лексико  a30– 350 v163 a<p>The authors propose а lexicographic conception allowing the creation of a French-Bulgarian argot-slang dictionary with a cognitive purpose. Linguodidactically it is designed as a source of language information for passive use. The dictionary will contain: argotisms ordered alphabetically, a translation of their standard meaning (if they have one), an interpretation translation of their argot meaning, and their functional equivalents. Difficulties are commented on, connected with the specificity of the two unequally developed sociolects belonging to unrelated and unequally stylistically structured languages, and the authors’ position is that they are not insurmountable.</p>
1 aБанков, Димитър1 aВеселинов, Димитър  uhttps://naum.slav.uni-sofia.bg/en/librislavici/%D0%B1%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B21991