Skip to content Skip to navigation
Резюме:
Резюме:
Скот У. Айвънхоу : Рицарски роман. София: Отечество; 1980. 464, 2 ил. p.
Резюме:
Adams JA. Learning and Memory: An Introduction. 2nd ed. Homewood, IL: The Dorsey Press; 1980.
Резюме:
Резюме:
Nabokov V. Lectures on Literature. Bowers F. London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson; 1980.
Резюме:
Резюме:
Резюме:
Резюме:
Попов Г. Българският книжовен живот в Атон през средновековието. In Вековни български езикови традиции. София; 1980. pp. 81–85.
Резюме:
Попов Г. Из текстологическата проблематика на славянския триод. In Славянска палеография и дипломатика. Доклади и съобщения от семинара по славянската палеография и дипломатика, София, септември 1979. София: {CIBAL}; 1980. pp. 72–86.
Резюме:
Резюме:
Попов Г. Старобългарският книжовник Константин Преславски. In Вековни български езикови традиции. София; 1980. pp. 34–39.
Резюме:
The functions of nonverbal signs in conversation. In The Social and Psychological Contexts of Language. Hillsdale. NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1980. pp. 225–244.
Резюме:
Аверинцев С. Иоанн Богослов. In: Токарев СА. Мифы народов мира. Москва: Советская энциклопедия; 1980. pp. 549–551.
Резюме:
Добрев И. Как да тълкуваме датите в старите писмени паметници. In Славянска палеография и дипломатика. София: CIBAL; 1980. pp. 153 – 167.
Резюме:
Лотман ЮМ, Минц З, Мелетинский Е. Литература и мифы. In: Токарев СА. Мифы народов мира. Москва: Советская энциклопедия; 1980. pp. 58-65.
Резюме:
Prince G. Notes on the Text as Reader. In: Suleiman S, Crosman I. The Reader in the Text: Essays on Audience and Interpretation. Princeton, Guildford: Princeton University Press; 1980. pp. 225 – 240.
Резюме:
Василев ВП. Дамаскините в българската книжовна традиция. In: Георгиева Е, Тодорова Н, Иванова-Мирчева Д. Вековни български езикови традиции. София: Народна просвета; 1980. pp. 107–110.
Резюме:
Foucault M. "Two Lectures". In Power/ Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other Writings 1972-1977. London: Pantheon Books; 1980. pp. 78-108.
Резюме:
Резюме:

В систематичен ред. Книги, статии и рецензии. Около 190 названия.

Adrados F. Les langues slaves dans le contexte des langues indo-européennes. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(4):3–15.
Резюме:

The article considers the place of the Slavic languages among the other Indo-European languages using linguistic data and results from recent archaeological findings. Grammaticalization is the basic factor in the development of the morphological systems; its mechanism is illustrated with examples from the Indo-European and Slavic languages. The Slavic languages possess both a number of archaisms which are evidenced by the Anatolian languages, and innovations common to the Greco-Aryan group. The Baltic Slavonic language group is the most conservative group in late Indo-European (Indo-European III).

Резюме:

The following information is obtained from Slavonic literary texts, each one containing 20 kilophones: 1) the frequency of occurrence of the interrogative particle ли; 2) the frequency of occurrence of the disjunctive particle ли (the disjunctive conjunction или); 3) the frequency of use of the pronominal root к- in an interrogative context; 4) the frequency of use of the pronominal root к- in a non-interrogative context. The x2 criterion is used to test the null hypothesis for two empirical sets of data as to what extent the differences in the distribution of the interrogative ли, the disjunctive (и)ли, the interrogative-pronominal k- and the non-interrogativepronominal к- may be considered as accidental, i. e. to what extent the Slavonic language family may be considered as a homogeneous set with respect to the four above-mentioned constituents.

Бенатова П. За някои значения на английския предлог for в съпоставка с функционалните му еквиваленти в българския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(6):38–45.
Резюме:

The semantic structure of the English preposition for is analysed in contrast with its functional equivalents in Bulgarian. The temporal meaning of for is discussed in opposition with during, since, from and in. No preposition in Bulgarian is completely identical in temporal meaning with the preposition for. The separate components of ‘duration’ are rendered in Bulgarian by lexical means; prepositionless equivalents prevail. In the Benefactive deep case only a small part of the semantic components of for coincides with the meanings of the Bulgarian preposition за. Since a number of the other meaning of for have corresponding translation equivalents with за, native language interference often causes errors, susceptible to fossilization, in the performance of Bulgarian learners of English.

Бечка ЙВацла. Конфронтативната лингвистика като основа за решаването на преводаческите проблеми. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(4):46–54.
Резюме:

Contrastive linguistics studies the coincidences and differences between languages in their actual use. Utterances belonging to the same functional style are contrasted in different languages. The linguistic confrontation of an original text and its translation equivalent is a most reliable study. Contrastive studies are based on establishing and analysing the similarities and differences in the field of categorial phenomena, i. e. those phenomena which are relevant on the systematic level. The differences in translation assume the form of obligatory deviations. Optional deviations based on the differences in the stylistic norm are also studied, as well as the constructive deviations which inevitably accompany the obligatory and optional deviations. So far the contrastive approach has not proved sufficiently reliable in the field of differences in the choice of lexical means and in the use of expressive means. When the phenomenon is of high frequency the quantitative differences can be also established by statistical methods which make the contrastive study more objective.

Резюме:

n attempt is made to apply some of F. Daneš’s ideas about the structural organization of the text and some of J. Firbas’ ideas about the functional sentence perspective to Bulgarian and Byelorussian texts. The role of the communicative factor has been analysed in text paragraphs (larger than a sentence) in the following cases: bearer of a given quality

Валтер Х. Проблеми при превода на означенията на реалиите от българска художествена проза на немски език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(2):36–41.
Резюме:

n the basis of a contrastive study of some translations from Bulgarian into German several important problems are considered: literary translation which is the object of study of Translations-linguistic; problems connected with linguistic realia and the so-called relations of zero equivalence; the basic means of removing zero equivalence in translations of Bulgarian fiction into German; other means of achieving adequacy and high quality of translations, etc.

Вапорджиев В. Фразеологизми с ни .. ни в българския, руския и немския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(6):46–51.
Резюме:

Conjunctive phrases with ни ... ни in Bulgarian, compared with their equivalents in Russian and German are considered. On the basis of the semantics of this conjunction and the change of meaning that it undergoes in connection with concrete lexical components, some essential meanings can be determined which belong to the so-called phraseological word pairs. The structure of the phraseological unit is of primary importance in the process of change of meaning. On the basis of many examples, a close interaction between lexical and syntactic elements is established which leads to the formation of the structural-semantic unity of the phrase with ни ... ни.

Величкова С. Колебания в лексиката на печата на CP Македония. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(1):18–28.
Резюме:

Fluctuations in the vocabulary used in the press of the Socialist Republic of Macedonia within the period of 1944–1977 have been analysed. Graphic variability, phonetic variability of the lexemes and fluctuations in the choice of affix and root morphemes have been established and considered. In the attempts to eliminate the doublets a basic tendency has been revealed: a) elimination of those variants which are identical with or close to the standard Bulgarian lexemes in their graphic, phonetic or morphemic structures; b) replacement of these lexemes by Serbian forms or neologisms in conformity with the Serbo-Croatian word-building patterns.

Гинина С. Анафора, показателно местоимение и определеност на имената в българския и сърбохърватския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(4):24–32.
Резюме:

The functional characteristics of the demonstrative pronoun in its anaphorical use are considered as well as its correspondences with the definite article in Bulgarian and the zero form of definiteness in Serbo-Croatian. As a means of reference the demonstrative pronoun connects two essential elements of the utterance

Гинина С. Деиксис и определеност на имената в българския и сърбохърватския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(6):32–37.
Резюме:

The deictic function of the demonstrative pronouns този/тоя in Bulgarian and of taj/ovaj in Serbo-Croatian is analyzed and their relationship to noun definiteness is considered. As a mark of indication, the demonstrative pronoun limits the scope of concepts and turns the general concepts into particular ones. In that individualizing and identifying function the pronoun serves as a means of noun definiteness. The identification is achieved in different ways depending on the shades of meaning of deixis: through direct indication, through observation of the author’s and characters’ interior monologues. The incomplete identity of the demonstrative pronoun with the definite article (in Bulgarian) and with the zero form of definiteness (in Serbo-Croatian) show that it has an independent status in the system of identification means. Its analogous behaviour in Bulgarian and Serbo-Croatian, two languages with typologically different noun systems, shows the regular nature of its use.

Грозданова Л. Семантичен анализ на кванторните думи only и само. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(3):26–32.
Резюме:

This paper is an attempt to show that defining the meaning of the quantifiers only in English and само in Bulgarian involves three types of analysis: presuppositional, syntagmatic and paradigmatic. The application of these analyses has led to the following conclusions: a) a presuppositional contrastive set, the members of which are potentially related to the main proposition of the respective sentence, underlies these quantifiers; b) the words only and само indicate that any value different from the one dominated by them in the surface structure is inadmissible relative to the same sentence; c) the interpretation of these quantifiers depends on the paradigmatic value of the lexical unit in their semantic scope. The application of the same criteria to the independent study of оn1у and само shows that they have the same semantic content and that their interpretation follows the same semantic rules.

Димитрова Л. За граматичния род на съществителните имена в руски и български научен текст. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(4):38–45.
Резюме:

This is а contrastive study of grammatical gender of the medical vocabulary in Russian and Bulgarian. The gender of the Russian nouns is analysed in standard Russian and scientific texts. Some observations are made in both languages concerning nouns which represent pure verbal stems and their Bulgarian correspondences, international terms, their gender in the two languages, etc. The data considered show that there are considerable differences between the gender of the scientific vocabulary words and those in standard Russian, on the one hand, and between Russian and Bulgarian, on the other hand.

Иванчев С. Някои аспекти на синтактичната характеристика на българския език при съпоставката му с полския. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(5):38–42.
Резюме:

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.

Илиева Л. Планът на съдържанието в проблематиката на превода. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(1):43–47.
Резюме:

The plane of content is a linguistic fact. Translation is a process in which the plane of content also undergoes changes. The Bulgarian translations of English books for children allow us to trace three basic tendencies of transformations in the system of literary characters. These transformations are due to differences in the planes of content in English and Bulgarian: 1. Two characters are „drawn closer“ in the translation. This phenomenon is observed only when one term in the target language corresponds to two terras in the source language. 2. Two characters are „drawn apart“. This phenomenon is observed when one term in the source language corresponds to two terms in the target language. 3. One character is replaced by another character.The reason for that substitution is that in the plane of content of the target language there is no element corresponding to an element in the plane of content in the source language. A typical example of such elements is interjection.

Крилова Г. Руският съюз да и неговите функционални еквиваленти в художествени преводи на български език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(3):18–25.
Резюме:

This paper is part of a study of the semantic-stylistic analysis of form-words соrpora extracted from Bulgarian and Russian fiction (the autobiographical trilogy of M. Gorky and its Bulgarian translation). The linguistic status of the simple conjunctions да in Russian and та, па, че in Bulgarian has been established. The similarities and differences between them are shown, as well as the degree of their functional equivalence in translations from Russian into Bulgarian

Куфнерова З. За категорията ‘определеност’ в българския и чешкия език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(4):16–23.
Резюме:

In translation from Bulgarian into Czech the category of definiteness expressed in Bulgarian by grammatical and lexical means is rendered in Czech texts by means of: 1. Zero marker, wordorder, demonstrative or possessive pronouns, adjectives or lexical means. 2. When demonstrative pronouns are used as objects, Bulgarian and Czech exhibit differences. 3. The Bulgarian indefinite pronoun един (‘one’) has a zero marker in Czech which may alternate with indefinite pronouns; the use of the demonstrative pronoun takový (‘such’) is rare.

Лилов М. За синтактичната специфика на някои конструкции, изразяващи темпоралност. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(5):43–45.
Резюме:

wo series of syntactic structures with common invariant temporal content are analysed. An attempt is made to show the complex nature of the syntactic characteristics which should be revealed in the contrastive studies of different languages and thus be assessed impartially

Лингорска Б. За един тип полски конструкции с nomina actionis и техните български съответствия. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(5):46–48.
Резюме:

Some preliminary observations on the functioning of the Polish verbal nouns with the suffixes nie, -cie in constructions with verbum finitum are made in comparison with Bulgarian.

Резюме:

An essential difference between Polish as a West Slavic language and Bulgarian as South Slavic is pointed out. In Polish the negative perfective imperative is actually a specific syntactic mood, the cautioning mood (Nie wylej tei wody!). Such a form of the imperative is impossible in modern standard Bulgarian (cf. Да не излееш водата!). The explanation of the expressiveness of this construction is to be sought in the aspectual semantic features of the verbal forms in the light of some of the latest studies of the category of aspect.

Михайлова С. Членуването в българския и арабския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(2):30–35.
Резюме:

The use of the articles in Bulgarian and Arabic is compared. The study is based on a corpus consisting of excerpts from Bulgarian and Arabic texts. Ten samples, each of them of a hundred text words, taken from analogous texts in the two languages have been analysed. Definiteness in Bulgarian, judged by the average quantity (x = 14,2) occurs twice less than in Arabic (x = 27,5). The data have been obtained from Bulgarian texts translated into Arabic and from the original Arabic language practice. Whereas in Bulgarian the definite article exhibits a certain stability of occurrence, in Arabic the fluctuations are considerable. The definite article occurs within the limits of 17–42. The average rate of occurrence of the definite morphemes in Bulgarian and Arabic differs considerably.

Михов Н. Съществителните със суфикс -ция в българския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;V(2):20–29.
Резюме:

The paper considers the characteristic features of the adaptation process which occurs in Bulgarian in borrowing French and international nouns with the suffix -tiоn. An important stage in this respect is the substitution of the foreign suffix by the Bulgarian morpheme -иране and the formation, as a result of it, of two classes of lexemes which have the same root but different suffixes, and are opposed by their relation to the expression of verbal action. In some words ending in -tiоn, the verbal action is insufficiently expressed; in other nouns it is completely lacking. Unlike them, substantives with the deverbative suffix -иране always express a high degree of verbal action; therefore, the class they form may be termed secondary or dynamic

Молошна ТН. За адективните словосъчетания в българския и сърбохърватския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(1):29–42.
Резюме:

The paper is а contrastive study of two closely related South Slavic languages Bulgarian and Serbo-Croatian in the field of word-group syntax. The source language is Bulgarian and the corpus from Serbo-Croatian is used to illustrate the formal and semantic correspondences. After describing the conceptual and syntactic units and their relationship in Bulgarian, the author has tried to juxtapose the results with their distribution in Serbo-Croatian, and partially in some other Slavic languages. The adjectival word-groups are described after the scheme: a class of patterns, a concrete pattern, the meanings expressed by it. The prepositionless patterns in both languages are discussed first, then, the prepositional constructions. The use of the prepositions на, за, от, с, до, към, по, в, поради is analysed. Word-groups with adverbs are also considered. It is concluded that the similarities in word-group syntax between Bulgarian and Serbo-Croatian are essential, while the differences are displayed in the distribution of the structural units and the degree of their use and productivity, rather than in the system itself.

Ничев А. Седем етимологии. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(4):33–37.
Резюме:

The seven words [баядерка, въпор, дживгар, кантарион, керал, латинин (латинец), морто] are excerpted from an unpublished monograph which considers the etymology of Bulgarian words of Latin and Greek origin. The words considered are not necessarily directly derived from Greek or Latin. In most cases there is an intermediary language: Russian, French, etc. The contribution of the study is not equal for all the words: for some it sheds new light on the problem; for others it amounts to additional information or corrections of already existing explanations.

Резюме:

The prepositionless collocations consisting of two nouns (of the чаша вода ‘a glass of water’ type) are analysed in modern Bulgarian. In terms of their grammatical relationship the head of these constructions, according to the author, is the first word denoting the exact or approximate measure.

Резюме:

The expansion of the Bulgarian conjunction като in equative comparisons where it functions as a preposition and is characterized by government is considered. The form като governs the remnants of the personal pronoun case forms. Such sentences contain an ellipsis of a purely grammatical nature.

Осадник В. По някои въпроси на адвербиалното детерминиране. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(5):31–37.
Резюме:

A different approach to the semantic and syntactic studies of the adverb should be worked out depending on whether the object of study is the possibilities of adverbial modification or the description of the adverbs themselves. The functions of the adverbial modifiers introduced in simple chains and containing transitive verbs are considered: in initial position, in pre-position, and in final position. The necessity of studies dealing with both the similarities and differences between the two languages are pointed out.

Петрова М. Съпоставителен преглед на видовата категория в българския и френския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(6):52–57.
Резюме:

The paper is a contrastive survey of the category of aspect in Bulgarian and French. Some basic uses of the perfective and imperfective aspects are considered. The French aspect is treated on the lexical, grammatical and syntagmatic levels. Irrespective of the influence of the lexical content of the verb, aspect in Bulgarian is mainly a grammatical category. The lack of a formal aspectual marker in French is compensated for by the use of adverbs, special phrases and above all by the context. The French language makes use of lexical, morphological, syntagmatic and stylistic means to express the category of aspect.

Радева С. Витолд Ташицки (1898–1979). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(5):124–126.
Резюме:
Симеонова Р. Българо-немска вокална интерференция. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(3):14–17.
Резюме:

The results of the spectral and audio-statistical analysis of the pronunciation of four students of German philology at Sofia University are analysed and checked against German native speakers’ data. Several conclusions are drawn. The results of this experiment confirm and further clarify some views of the author’s stated earlier in connection with Bulgarian-German vocal interference.

Супрун АЕ. Въпроси на типологичното съпоставяне на белоруската и българската лексика. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(5):4–11.
Резюме:

The types of correspondences existing between Byelorussian and Bulgarian words (identity, approximate correspondence, non-correspondence in form and content) are determined. The choice of words from the Bulgarian vocabulary and their Byelorussian and Russian correspondences are analysed, as well as equivalent texts in Bulgarian, Slovenian, Polish, Byelorussian and Russian. The texts exhibit a greater similarity than the vocabularies because of the higher frequency of the identical words. Pairs of closely related languages are established (Byelorussian,Polish, Russian, Bulgarian), medium-related languages (Russian,Polish, Byelorussian – Bulgarian) and more distantly related languages (Byelorussian-Slovenian, Russian, Slovenian). The data and methodology are preliminary.

Тхием ЛКуанг. За някои особености на полисемията в българския и виетнамския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(6):19–22.
Резюме:

The article is an attempt at making a contrastive analysis of polysemantic words and at determining some characteristics of these words in Bulgarian and Vietnamese. When determining the lexicosemantic characteristics of the polysemantic words in the two languages their qualitative aspect is considered in close relationship with their quantitative parameters. Some concepts in the field of polysemy are defined on the basis of this analysis.

Резюме:

The relationship between semantics and context as principles of functional sentence perspec111 tive (1) is considered in the introductory part of the paper. The main factors which influence the structure of the thematic section of utterances are pointed out: the fact that the thematic elements belong to different contextual spheres; their position in the thematic progressions and their syntactic and semantic nature (2.2). The notions of foregrounding („aktualizace“), and of central and secondary („průvodní“) thematic components are explained in (2.1). When comparing the ways of building up the thematic section of utterances in Czech and Bulgarian special attention is paid to the position of the central (3.1) and secondary (3.2) thematic components, and to the hierarchization of the thematic components in complex sentences (3.3). In conclusion (3.4), the similarities and differences, established in (3.1)-(3.3), are viewed in respect of the nature of the two language systems and further possibilities for contrastive studies are pointed out.

Ханегрефс Н. Наименования на цветовете в балканските езици. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(2):3–19.
Резюме:

The most important colour-terms in the Balkan languages (red, brown, yellow, green, blue, black and white) are reviewed in the article. Their classification varies depending on the specific character of the scientific analysis applied. Most colour-terms are of Indo-European origin. A strong Turkish influence is noticed on the colour-terms and through Turkish, the influence of Arabic and Persian can be seen as well. On the other hand, the Balkan languages have interacted with each other as regards colour-terms.

Хеншел Х, Кунце Ю, Кюстнер Х, Щарке И. Сричкоразделянето на думите в конфронтативен аспект. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(1):3–17.
Резюме:

The paper is а general survey of the difficulties existing in syllabication considered as a problem of automatization (for the purposes of printing). The difficulties arise from the following problems: 1. Establishing a norm; 2. The morphematic structure of word-forms; 3. Syllabication of morphemes; 4. Foreign words; 5. Stress of word forms (only in English); 6. Homographs. The following languages are considered: German, Bulgarian, English, Hungarian, Czech and Slovak. With respect to syllabication these languages differ greatly, the reasons for the differences being: the typological place of the languages considered, the extent of the derivational system (compounds in particular), the attitude towards foreign words and the specific conventions in the field of orthography and syllabication. Procedures for automatic syllabication have been worked out for the considered languages in the German Democratic Republic.

Цихун Г. За определяне на генетичната, типологичната и ареалната близост на славянските езици (в частност. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(5):11–17.
Резюме:

The genetic, typological and areal studies of the Slavic languages aim at establishing the degree of their relationship in terms of their relatedness, similarity and territorial proximity. There is no strictly defined correlation between these characteristics in the modern Slavic languages, though such a correlation must have existed in the Proto-Slavonic period. The relative autonomy of the formal, structural and areal characteristics of the modern Slavic languages justifies the reconstruction of the old genetic, typological and areal relationships, the major task being the establishment of the Proto-Slavonic areal structure of the centre/periphery type. With respect to the ancient Byelorussian-Bulgarian ties which have been studied so far mainly in terms of vocabulary and word-formation, the present study is devoted to some specific structural similarities between the ancient Byelorussian and Bulgarian dialects of the Polessie region (the use of the positive instead of the comparative in comparisons, the use of constructions with the preposition на to express the indirect object, etc.)

Широкова АГ. Некоторые вопросы эквивалентики в связи с транспозицией форм наклонений. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(3):3–13.
Резюме:

An attempt has been made at defining the concept of functional-semantic equivalence type which is of great importance to the practice of translation and foreign language teaching and the theory of comparative and contrastive studies. The conditions for determining the types of interlingual equivalents are described: determining the theoretical principles of linguistic analysis, the spheres of stylistic functioning of the phenomena studied, etc. The obligatory criteria for the presence of an equivalent have been established: identity of the type meaning of the word form, collocation or the whole utterance; identity of the relations expressed; regularity of the appearance of the phenomena analysed in the contrasted languages; their stylistic adequacy

Angelov D. L ’Etat bulgare et l’Europe médiévale. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1980;4(1):30–38.
Резюме:
Dujčev I. Das Synodicon von Boril als Geschichts- und Literaturdenkmal. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1980;6(2):8–17.
Резюме:
Džonov B. Le modèle de confession chez les bogomiles et les cathares. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1980;4(4):87–92.
Резюме:
Eckert R. Notizen zu altbulg. бракъ, браци¸ ‘Hochzeit, Heirat’. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1980;4(4):63–71.
Резюме:
Eichler E. Wissenschaftliches Kolloquium über das Schaffen August Leskiens. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1980;{IV}(4):119–121.
Резюме:
Kujumdžieva S. Die Notenmanuskripte in der Bibliothek des Rila-Klosters. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1980;6(2):81–87.
Резюме:
Matejič M. Hilendar at the Time of Paisij Hilendarski: 1745–1773. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1980;4(3):32–44.
Резюме:
Mečev K. Die bulgarische Kultur am Anfang des 13. Jh. (I. Teil). Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1980;4(3):57–68.
Резюме:
Mukerjee G. Age-Old Ties Between the East and the Wes. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1980;4(2):79–80.
Резюме:
Schütz J. Zur Psaltervokabel aksl. въоушити/въноушити. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1980;4(1):90–91.
Резюме:
Резюме:
Резюме:
Резюме:
Павлов И. Чешки доказателства за името Страхота. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1980;4(1):68–72.
Резюме:
Резюме:
Тот И. К изучению одноеровых памятников ХІ в. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1980;4(2):26–29.
Резюме:
Херей-Шиманска К. Старобългарското вощага. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1980;4(2):75–78.
Резюме:
Резюме:

 . .

Богданов Б. Alexandri Milev Professoris in Memoriam (1904–1980). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(4):103–104.
Резюме:
Николова А. Тодор Д. Сарафов. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(6):127–128.
Резюме:
Радева С. Витолд Ташицки (1898–1979). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(5):124–126.
Резюме:
Лингорска Б, Бъчваров Я. Библиография на трудовете на проф. Светомир Иванчев. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(3):74–88.
Резюме:
Милойкова Р. Съдържание на год. V (1980) на списание Съпоставително езикознание. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(6):141–148.
Резюме:
Хрусанова В. Съпоставително изследване на български с други езици. Библиография за 1979 година. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(6):129–140.
Резюме:
Алексова В, Младенова О. Семинар по славянска Палеография и дипломатика. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(3):94–95.
Резюме:
Асенова П. Втора лятна школа по езикознание в Залцбург. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(2):87–88.
Резюме:
Афанасиева-Колева А. Девети славистичен семинар в Белград. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(2):85–86.
Резюме:
Резюме:
Бенатова П. Теоретична конференция Проблеми на превода от български на чужди езици. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(6):125–126.
Резюме:
Бъчваров Я. Конференция по въпросите на превода в Прага. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(4):101–102.
Резюме:
Бъчваров Я. Международен симпозиум на бохемистите в Прага. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(3):93–94.
Резюме:
Бъчваров Я. Обсъждане на списание Съпоставително езикознание. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(5):123–124.
Резюме:
Велева М. Първи българо-скандинавски симпозиум по български език и литература. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(3):89–90.
Резюме:
Веселинова-Караниколова И. Първа национална младежка школа по езикознание. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(3):90–92.
Резюме:
Георгиев И. Национална конференция на преподавателите по руски език в българските висши учебни заведения. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(3):95–96.
Резюме:
Герганова Д. Научно-методическа конференция Съпоставително езикознание и чуждоезиково обучение. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(4):100–101.
Резюме:
Дамянова Д. Трети международен симпозиум на русистите по интерференция. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(1):78–79.
Резюме:
Златева П. Работна школа по математическа и приложна лингвистика. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(1):80.
Резюме:
Карастойчева Ц. Двайсет и четвърти летен курс по полски език във Варшава. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(2):84.
Резюме:
Кметова Т. Втора научно-методическа конференция Съпоставително езикознание и чуждоезиково обучение. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(6):122–124.
Резюме:
Куфнерова З. Сдружение на чешките преводачи. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(1):82–83.
Резюме:
Куцаров И. Двадесет и четвърта лятна славистична школа в Прага. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(6):126–127.
Резюме:
Куцаров И. Петнайсети летен семинар по словашки език и литература (Studia academica slovaca). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(2):84–85.
Резюме:
Л Б. Начало на българистиката в Мелбърн. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(3):92–93.
Резюме:
Лингорска Б. Полско-български синтактични паралели – Трета българо-полска конференция (София, 16–18.X.1979 г.). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(5):52– 56.
Резюме:
Менкаджиева В. Загребска славистична школа. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(2):86.
Резюме:
Ницолова P. Четвърти международен симпозиум Л. Витгеншайн. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(2):81–82.
Резюме:
Павлов И. Седемнайсети софийски летен семинар по българистика за чуждестранни българисти и слависти. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(2):82–83.
Резюме:
Радева В. Летни курсове по германистика в Лайпциг. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(2):86–87.
Резюме:
Редакционна CL. Двадесето пленарно заседание на Международния комитет на славистите. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(1):83–84.
Резюме:
Селимски Л. Българо-белоруски езикови паралели, Втора българо-белоруска конференция (София, 17.–21.IX.1979 г.). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(5):23–26.
Резюме:
Селимски Л. Втори великотърновски летен семинар за чуждестранни българисти и слависти. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(2):83.
Резюме:
Спасова-Михайлова С. Симпозиум по въпросите на семасиологията на славянските езици. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(2):79–81.
Резюме:
Федосеева Н. Втора всесъюзна научна конференция по теоретични въпроси на езикознанието. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(5):118–120.
Резюме:
Чаушев А. Българо-френски симпозиум по съпоставително езикознание. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1980;5(5):120–123.
Резюме:
Kortlandt FHH. Albanian and Armenian. Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachforschung. 1980;94:243–251.
Резюме:
Accommodation theory : Some new directions. York Papers in Linguistics. 1980;9:105–136.
Резюме:
Резюме: