%0 Journal Article %J Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics %D 1991 %T Особен поглед върху чешкия и българския консонантизъм %A Иванчев, Светомир %X The article presents a new approach to palatal and affricate consonants in Czech and Bulgarian.A table of the consonants of the two languages is presented, followed by a discussion. This article by prof. S. Ivanchev is published posthumously and is supplemented with notes and comments by Bozhil Nikolov, Nadеzhda Kуtova and Miroslav Yanakiev. %B Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics %V 16 %P 5–9 %G bul %N 6 %0 Journal Article %J Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics %D 1991 %T Юрий С. Маслов (1914–1990) %A Иванчев, Светомир %K in memoriam %K Юрий С. Маслов %B Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics %V 16 %P 126–128 %G bul %N 1 %0 Journal Article %J Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics %D 1990 %T Ян Петър (1931–1989) %A Иванчев, Светомир %K in memoriam %K Ян Петър %B Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics %V 15 %P 115–116 %G bul %N 2 %0 Journal Article %J Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics %D 1983 %T По повод на статията „Една типологична особеност на българския и унгарския език“ от Александър Александров %A Иванчев, Светомир %X Some further comments are made on the problem discussed in A. Aleksandrov’s paper A typological peculiarity of Bulgarian and Hungarian as regards the fixed position on the dative possessive pronominal clitic in Bulgarian and its typological and etymological characteristics. It has been assumed that the phenomenon must have originated in three ways: it might have developed independently; it might have been the result of Turkic influence, prior to the contact established by Bulgarian Slavs with the Greek language. The influence of Hungarian cannot be generally excluded in the areas north of the Danube. Later on the phenomenon was influenced by Greek and much later there was Turkic influence again (this time of Ottoman Turkish) %B Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics %V 8 %P 47–53 %G bul %N 4 %0 Journal Article %J Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика %D 1982 %T Към въпроса за съчетанията РЪ/РЬ, ЛЪ/ЛЬ в старобългарските текстове %A Иванчев, Светомир %B Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика %V 6 %P 103–107 %N 3 %0 Journal Article %J Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics %D 1981 %T Класически и екзотичен, българският език – постар от българската държава %A Иванчев, Светомир %X In this article entitled „Bulgarian, a language classical and exotic, older than the Bulgarian state“, the author presents his viewpoint on the importance of Bulgarian for the study of Slavic and Balkan languages. He discusses the criteria for establishing the beginnings of a language (the appearance of a literary form as distinct from the pre-literary stage, the foundation of the respective state, the use of a distinct name for the language, the settlement on a given territory, the emergence of specific linguistic characteristics, etc.). He focuses on the beginnings of the language, its specific linguistic features and especially on the development of the Proto-Slavic sound combinations *tj,*dj, *tl, *dl, *pj, *bj, *vj, *mj, *kv, *gv and the expression of possession. The linguistic situation at the time of the establishment of the Bulgarian state 1300 years ago and subsequent language contacts are touched upon and the role of Old Bulgarian as a literary language of the Slavic world is highlighted. %B Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics %V 6 %P 5–9 %G bul %N 3–5 %0 Journal Article %J Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика %D 1981 %T Развоят на *tj, *dj в шт и жд и етногенетичният процес на Балканите %A Иванчев, Светомир %B Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика %V 5 %P 27–47 %N 1 %0 Journal Article %J Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics %D 1980 %T Някои аспекти на синтактичната характеристика на българския език при съпоставката му с полския %A Иванчев, Светомир %X artial syntactic characterisation is discussed in the context of the common characteristics of the contrasted languages. As regards Bulgarian these characteristics are Slavic (in terms of origin and language contacts), Balkan (in terms of contacts and spontaneous development) and a reflection of the earliest contacts of Bulgarian with the Turkic languages. As regards Polish, these characteristics are common West Slavic, exhibiting genetic and contactual features which have arisen spontaneously in their natural development. %B Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics %V 5 %P 38–42 %G bul %N 5 %0 Journal Article %J Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics %D 1979 %T Иван Леков %A Иванчев, Светомир %K in memoriam %K Иван Леков %B Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics %V 4 %P 114–116 %G bul %N 2 %0 Journal Article %J Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics %D 1979 %T Най-обща съпоставка на основната (безпрефиксална) глаголна лексика в българския и белоруския език %A Иванчев, Светомир %X A tentative comparison between the non-prefixal verbs in Bulgarian and Byelorussian is made. Itt shows that though closely related, the two languages have their own specific character which is partly common to the respective larger language divisions (South Slavic and East Slavic) and is partly due to the differences which are unique and typical of a given language only. %B Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics %V 4 %P 50–59 %G bul %N 2 %0 Journal Article %J Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics %D 1978 %T Бохуслав Хавранек (30 януари 1893 – 2 март 1978) %A Иванчев, Светомир %K in memoriam %K Бохуслав Хавранек %B Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics %V 3 %P 92–94 %G bul %N 5 %0 Journal Article %J Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics %D 1976 %T Един неописан семантико-словообразователен глаголен модел в съвременния български език %A Иванчев, Светомир %X ulgarian reflexive verbs have not been researched in great detail. What we find on the subject is scattered in studies on related topics and in various grammar books. Even less attention has been paid to the reflexiva tantum verbs. Polish reflexive verbs were described in a special monograph as early as 1966. The similarities and differences between Polish and Bulgarian in this sphere cannot be exhausted in such a brief text so I will concentrate on a verbal type belonging to the reflexiva tantum, which has no parallel in Polish and has to be rendered descriptively. %B Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics %V 1 %P 19–30 %G bul %N 2 %0 Journal Article %J Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics %D 1976 %T Един сравнително нов семантико-словообразователен тип глаголи в съвременния български и белоруски език %A Иванчев, Светомир %X ince ancient times Slavic languages have used nouns, adjectives and adverbs with the prefixed element само-, a calque of Greek auto-. Byelorussian has 8 verbs with this element and almost all of them have correspondences in Russian. Compared to Bulgarian this is a non-productive type in Byelorussian. Various ways of rendering the relevant meanings and functions in the two languages are discussed together with factors determining various choices. Since this verbal type is more economical and convenient in special terminology, we can expect that it will become more widely spread. %B Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics %V 1 %P 111–115 %G bul %N 5 %0 Book %D 1962 %T Български периодичен печат 1844–1944 %A Иванчев, Димитър %I Наука и изкуство %C София %V 1–2 %G bul