01316nas a2200145 4500008004100000245018200041210012400223300001200347490000700359520055800366653002400924653007700948100003901025856010601064 2006 bul d00aПроблеми на представянето на названията на растения в речниците (върху съпоставителен материал)0 aПроблеми на представянето на названията на растения в речниците a30–400 v313 aPhytonyms, like zoonyms, are transitional between terms and everyday words. This raises the question of their presentation in monolingual dictionaries. Should the definitions there include, alongside the non-specialist everyday meaning, the precise terminological meaning as well? As a linguistic picture of the world the dictionary contains both the scientific and the naïve view of the speakers of the language. Different answers can be given to the above question depending on the priority given to the scientific or the naïve picture of the world.10aContrastive Studies10aСъпоставителни изследвания, Contrastive studies1 aАврамова, Цветанка uhttps://naum.slav.uni-sofia.bg/en/librislavici/%D0%B0%D0%B2%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B02006-101113nas a2200145 4500008004100000245020300041210012600244300001100370490000700381520033500388653002400723653007700747100003900824856010400863 2003 bul d00aОсновни тенденции при образуването на префиксални съществителни в българския и чешкия език в края на ХХ век0 aОсновни тенденции при образуването на префиксални съществителни a5–420 v283 aThe article examines the leading trends in the formation of prefixal nouns in Czech and Bulgarian. These are the tendencies of internationalization and nationalization (autochthonization). The most productive native and borrowed prefixes and prefixoids are analyzed together with the meanings they have in substantival neologisms.10aContrastive Studies10aСъпоставителни изследвания, Contrastive studies1 aАврамова, Цветанка uhttps://naum.slav.uni-sofia.bg/en/librislavici/%D0%B0%D0%B2%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%BC%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0200301108nas a2200145 4500008004100000245011400041210010800155300001200263490000700275520043800282653002400720653007700744100003700821856010400858 2002 bul d00aТермини за ‘встъпвам в брак’ в българския и румънския език0 aТермини за встъпвам в брак в българския и румънския език a16–580 v273 aThe article discusses the terms referring to marriage which are shared by Bulgarian and Rumanian. Seven different patterns are established under which the terms occurring in the dialects of the two languages are subsumed. The main goals are to clarify the motivation of each pattern, the spread of the terms, the existing synonymy, and the chronology. Special attention is paid to the origin of the patterns and the individual terms.10aContrastive Studies10aСъпоставителни изследвания, Contrastive studies1 aАлексова, Василка uhttps://naum.slav.uni-sofia.bg/en/librislavici/%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0200201311nas a2200145 4500008004100000245018400041210012400225300001200349490000700361520055500368653002400923653007700947100003701024856010401061 2000 bul d00aПървото посещение на младоженката в бащиния дом. Названия на обреда в българския и румънския език0 aПървото посещение на младоженката в бащиния дом Названия на обре a33–610 v253 aThe article reviews the terms for the most important post-nuptial rituals in the Bulgarian and the Rumanian folk traditions. An attempt is made to establish the common motivation types, determined by the nature of the rituals, but the differences are also pointed out. Discussed are also formal similarities, borrowing of terms or parts of terminological combinations and differences in their use in the dialects of the two languages. The geographical area for the individual terms is established and, where possible, the chronology for some of them.10aContrastive Studies10aСъпоставителни изследвания, Contrastive studies1 aАлексова, Василка uhttps://naum.slav.uni-sofia.bg/en/librislavici/%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0200001245nas a2200145 4500008004100000245021000041210012700251300001200378490000700390520045400397653002400851653007700875100003700952856011000989 1992 bul d00aАнглийската и българската екзистенциална конструкция – резултат от прилагането на различни когнитивни модели0 aАнглийската и българската екзистенциална конструкция резултат от a84–910 v173 aThe differences between the English and the Bulgarian existential constructions are discussed as the result of the application of two different cognitive models, namely: (a) The English there + be + NP as the result of a specific type of metonymy typical of English, labelled as „predicate-splitting“ mapping, and (b) The Bulgarian има + NP as a metaphorical expansion based on the metaphor „Space (as if) has the entities inhabiting it“.10aContrastive Studies10aСъпоставителни изследвания, Contrastive studies1 aАлексиева, Бистра uhttps://naum.slav.uni-sofia.bg/en/librislavici/%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B0199200985nas a2200145 4500008004100000245003100041210003100072300001200103490000700115520046700122653002400589653007700613100003900690856011000729 1991 bul d00aДесèн и дизайн0 aДесèн и дизайн a15–230 v163 a
The article presents а contrastive synchronic-diachronic analysis of the loanwords десèн and дизайн in Bulgarian, borrowed from French and English, whose respective source-words are dessin and design. It traces the semantic development of their common etymon in Italian, French and English. The specific nature of the semantic changes of each loanword is considered in connection with the semantic conditions offered by each receptor language.
10aContrastive Studies10aСъпоставителни изследвания, Contrastive studies1 aАлексиева, Невенка uhttps://naum.slav.uni-sofia.bg/en/librislavici/%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B0199101456nas a2200145 4500008004100000245016800041210012600209300001200335490000700347520070800354653002401062653007701086100003701163856011001200 1990 bul d00aВръзката между екзистенциалните и сензорните изречения (върху англо-български материал)0 aВръзката между екзистенциалните и сензорните изречения върху анг a14–210 v153 aThe relationship between existential and perceptual sentences is studied on the basis of a threetier system of semantic analysis, establishing the presence of common predications in their deepest semantic structures. Conclusions are also drawn about the factors determining the choice, for explicit rendering, of the existential or perceptual predication in English and Bulgarian, the most important amongst them being: the nature of space; the degree of privacy of the perception; the volume and specificity of the information received via the various channels of perception, and the quantity and character of the additional information (modal, aspectual, etc.) subsumed under the perceptual predicate.10aContrastive Studies10aСъпоставителни изследвания, Contrastive studies1 aАлексиева, Бистра uhttps://naum.slav.uni-sofia.bg/en/librislavici/%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B0199001392nas a2200145 4500008004100000245017900041210012400220300001300344490000700357520065400364653002401018653007701042100003501119856009201154 1990 rus d00aОб эксплицитности, форме и определенности субъекта в русских и чешских модальных конструкциях0 aОб эксплицитности форме и определенности субъекта в русских и че a84– 880 v153 aThe article makes an attempt at explaining the substantial differences between Russian and Czech in the ways of expressing the subject in sentences with modal verbs and predicative words. These sentences are classified according to whether their subject is expressed by a separate word, whether it has nominative or other form, and whether it has definite or indefinite reference. The conclusion is made that in Russian there is a much higher percentage of sentences with a non-expressed non-nominative subject which are also used in such communicative situations where Czech uses constructions with a pronominal or a verbally non-expressed subject.10aContrastive Studies10aСъпоставителни изследвания, Contrastive studies1 aАдамец, Пршемысл uhttps://naum.slav.uni-sofia.bg/en/librislavici/%D0%B0%D0%B4%D0%B0%D0%BC%D0%B5%D1%86199001473nas a2200145 4500008004100000245011200041210011200153300001200265490000600277520077200283653002401055653007701079100004901156856012201205 1983 bul d00aЕдна типологична особеност на българския и унгарския език0 aЕдна типологична особеност на българския и унгарския език a42–460 v83 aThe paper discusses а number of typological similarities between the Bulgarian short forms of the possessive pronouns, used after certain prepositions of the type върху ми ‘above/over me’, срещу ми ‘against/opposite me’, as well as after certain adverbs of the type напреде ми ‘in front of me/before me’, подире ми ‘after/behind me’, etc. on the one hand, and of the Hungarian postpositions with personal possessive endings, on the other hand. It is pointed out that the occurrences in Bulgarian should not be explained only with the influence of the Balkan languages, but a much wider background, including the influence of Old Bulgarian, the Balkan languages, Turkish and Hungarian should be taken into consideration.10aContrastive Studies10aСъпоставителни изследвания, Contrastive studies1 aАлександров, Александър uhttps://naum.slav.uni-sofia.bg/en/librislavici/%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B4%D1%80%D0%BE%D0%B2198301647nas a2200145 4500008004100000245015500041210012500196300001200321490000600333520092000339653002401259653007701283100003701360856010401397 1979 bul d00aНаблюдения върху употребата на определителния член в българския и румънския език0 aНаблюдения върху употребата на определителния член в българския a12–170 v43 aThe system of articles in modern Bulgarian, characterized only by a definite post-positional article, is considerably different from the Rumanian system of articles which possesses, besides the definite article, an indefinite, a proclitic possessive and a proclitic demonstrative article. The definite post-positional article has different uses in the two languages. In some cases there is similarity in the use, as for instance, in possessive constructions with possessive pronouns and with the short forms of the dative case of the personal pronouns. The kinship vocabulary, as a separate lexico-semantic group, exhibits different use with the articles in the two languages. However, in the possessive constructions with kinship vocabulary, the distribution of the articles is the same. A comprehensive study of the two systems is necessary, as well as of all cases of use of the post-positional definite article.10aContrastive Studies10aСъпоставителни изследвания, Contrastive studies1 aАлексова, Василка uhttps://naum.slav.uni-sofia.bg/en/librislavici/%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%BE%D0%B2%D0%B0197901337nas a2200133 4500008004100000245019600041210012700237300001200364490000600376520062400382653007701006100003301083856008701116 1979 bul d00aСъпоставително семантичен анализ на полисемантични роднински названия в българския и виетнамския език0 aСъпоставително семантичен анализ на полисемантични роднински наз a42–500 v43 aThe paper is an attempt at a contrastive semantic analysis of the polysemantic kinship terms in two languages belonging to different linguistic families, Bulgarian and Vietnamese. A definite quantity of terms has been analysed and the componential method used in the analysis has the advantage of displaying the semantic characteristics of the whole lexico-semantic group. The results of the analysis have widened the range of the semantic features and have limited the range of the anthropological features. The results can be used in contrastive and typological studies of kinship terms in different languages.
10aСъпоставителни изследвания, Contrastive studies1 aТхием, Ле, Куанг uhttps://naum.slav.uni-sofia.bg/en/librislavici/%D1%82%D1%85%D0%B8%D0%B5%D0%BC1979a01541nas a2200145 4500008004100000245026000041210012500301300001200426490000600438520070100444653002401145653007701169100003901246856011001285 1977 bul d00aГраматически и семантични фактори при определяне рода на английските заемки в български език (Grammatical and semantic factors in determining the gender of English loan-words 0 aГраматически и семантични фактори при определяне рода на английс a44–540 v23 aThis paper deals with the various grammatical and semantic factors which determine the gender of English loan-words in Bulgarian. The corpus consists of 180 nouns borrowed from English into Bulgarian. The study is based on the classification of formal and semantic gender determiners offered by J. Welna. This classification turns out to be applicable to Bulgarian, a language with a highly developed grammatical gender patterning. The formal factors affect the greater part of the loan-words but the semantic ones hold for Bulgarian just as well. The number of loan-words whose gender is semantically determined confirms the activity of the semantic elements in the process of gender assignment.10aContrastive Studies10aСъпоставителни изследвания, Contrastive studies1 aАлексиева, Невенка uhttps://naum.slav.uni-sofia.bg/en/librislavici/%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B0197701873nas a2200145 4500008004100000245017300041210012100214300001100335490000600346520112600352653002401478653007701502100003701579856011101616 1977 bul d00aПодчинени предикативни единици в английски и български език (Subordinate predication units in English and Bulgarian)0 aПодчинени предикативни единици в английски и български език Subo a3–430 v23 aThe paper makes an attempt to build a paradigm of all the surface structure expressions of subordinate predication in English and Bulgarian and to study the correlations between them. Special attention is given to the „preposition + noun [+ OBJECT /EVENT]“, in the surface structure of which both the noun and the verb are deleted. The analysed examples come from a corpus of 20 novels by British and American writers and their Bulgarian translations, as well as examples from newspapers translated by informants. The factors regulating the mechanism of generating implicit constructions of this type in English and their functional equivalents in Bulgarian are discussed. While in English this type of construction is fairly frequent, in Bulgarian it occurs with only few prepositions. This difference between the two languages is due 1) to the specific mechanism in English of narrowing the meaning of verbs by means of postfixes and the prepositions of the adverbial phrases modifying them, which is non-existent in Bulgarian, and 2) to the different semantic structure of English prepositions resulting from this.10aContrastive Studies10aСъпоставителни изследвания, Contrastive studies1 aАлексиева, Бистра uhttps://naum.slav.uni-sofia.bg/en/librislavici/%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B8%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B01977a