Skip to content Skip to navigation
Iordan I, Coteanu I, Graur A. Dicționarul limbii române. București: Editura Academiei Republicii Populare Române; 1982.
Резюме:
Duhoux Y. L'étéocrétois. Les textes. La langue. Amsterdam: J. C. Gieben; 1982. VIII, 335, 35 ill. p.
Review: Leroy Maurice. 1984. Yves Duhoux, L'étéocrétois. Les textes. La langue. In: L'antiquité classique. 53. 455-457 (http://www.persee.fr/web/revues/home/prescript/article/antiq_0770-2817_1984_num_53_1_2135_t1_0455_0000_1 (22.12.2013)
Резюме:
Рупчев Г. Уморени от чудото : Стихове . Пловдив: Христо Г. Данов; 1982. 51 p.
Резюме:
Маслов ЮС. Граматика на българския език. Чуждестранна българистика. София: Наука и изкуство; 1982. 403 p.
Резюме:
Резюме:
Goody J. Cuisine, and Class: а Study in Comparative Sociology. Themes in the Social Studies. New York: Cambridge University Press; 1982. 264 p.
Резюме:
Резюме:
Резюме:
Резюме:
Lunt HG. "On Dating Old Church Slavonic Gospel Manuscripts". In: Barentsen AA, Sprenger R, Tielemans MGM. South Slavic and Balkan Linguistics. Amsterdam: Rodopi; 1982. pp. 215–231.
Резюме:
Попов Г. Битолски триод. In Речник на българската литература. София: БАН; 1982.
Резюме:
Попов Г. О наличии древнеболгарской гимнографической части в триоди. In Язык и письменность древнеболгарского периода. Москва: Наука 1982. pp. 122–131.
Резюме:
Разцветников А. Жертвени клади. In Събрани съчинения в четири тома. София: Български писател; 1982. pp. 50–60.
Резюме:
Psychological and linguistic parameters of speech accommodation theory. In Advances in the Social Psychology of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; 1982. pp. 205–255.
Резюме:
Poe EAllen. The Black Cat. In The Complete Tales and Poems of Edgar Allan Poe. London: Penguin Books; 1982. pp. 223 – 230.
Резюме:
Alissandratos J. The Structure of Gregory Camblac’s Eulogy of Cyprian. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1982;6(1):45–58.
Резюме:
Резюме:

Въз основа на изследване на данните от античните автори (Хекатей, Херодот, Ликофрон, Дионисий Халикарнаски, Стефан Византийски и др.) се оспорва възприетото от редица учени (включително и Д. Дечев) мнение, че у Херодот (1, 57) става дума за град Кротон. Аргументира се становището, че в земите на тракийското племе крестони е имало и град с име Крестон.

Резюме:

В систематичен ред. Книги, статии и рецензии, около 400 названия.

Bechkova R. Quelques observations sur les verbes bulgares caractérisés par des préfixes et leurs équivalents analytiques en français. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(1–2):79–85.
Резюме:

Some specific features of a group of Bulgarian prefixed verbs with a relatively independent prefix are analysed and some regularities in their analytic equivalents in French are established. The prefix is considered as a language element with substantial and functional content. Four types of prefixal, relatively independent verbal characteristics are distinguished: adverbial, quantitative, of degree and of phase. The conditions under which the Bulgarian prefixes for surface на-, по-, о-, have obligatory analytic equivalents in French are analysed.

Boyadjiev J. La proposition nominale assertive en bulgare, français et russe. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(1–2):85–90.
Резюме:

Nominal sentences are a universal linguistic category. The communicative nominal sentences may be classified according to the following criteria: a) structure (unexpanded and expanded sentences); b) semantics (representing descriptions of nature, the time of the action and its setting, the physical appearance and spiritual make-up of the characters); c) role in the text (introductive and conclusive). The skilful alternation between nominal and verbal sentences and nominal stanzas is an interesting stylistic device. Some authors (M. Cohen, T. Vianu) associate the more frequent use of nominal sentences with the spread of a specific literary tendency (Romanticism) and of a definite style (modern-impressionistic).

Culioli A. А propos de quelque. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(1–2):6–12.
Резюме:

Making use of many examples and classification criteria the author tries to solve the problem of the category of definiteness: how are to be explained the different uses of quelque (in the singular) depending on whether the problem concerns the indefinite quelqu’un and quelque chose or the syntagma quelque N.

Durin J. Ľaspect dans la structure de récit. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(1–2):13–26.
Резюме:

The accepted definitions of verbal aspect (the idea of terminativeness or соmpletiveness of the perfective aspect) are subjected to criticism, though full credit is given to V. V. Gurevič who tried to present the problem of aspect in a new light (by contrasting sequentiveness for the perfective aspect with nоn-sequentiveness for the imperfective aspect). A new definition of aspectuality in general and of verbal aspect in particular is offered.

Feuillet J. Systèmes aspectuels en français et en bulgare. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;8(1–2):26–36.
Резюме:

Not infrequently, phenomena which should be distinguished are subsumed under aspectual oppositions. Thus, for example, a contrastive study of French and Bulgarian reveals that French does not possess the aspectual opposition, restrictive opposition (imperfective/perfective), characteristic of the Slavic languages. However, the two languages possess two other common aspectual oppositions: 1) phase opposition which contrasts the forms for non-completion with those for completion; 2) the opposition of dynamism based on the opposition imperfect (nondynamic)/aorist (dynamic). The latter opposition may be considered as sub-aspectual in so far as it is an opposition between two temporal forms both of which are characterized by noncompletion.

Fontaine J. A propos de la notion d’aoriste. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(1–2):36–43.
Резюме:

The aorist structure in modern Russian is studied on the basis of its different characteristic morpho-syntactic manifestations. In the ideal case aorist (perfective) structure is defined as the only one to characterize the narrative type of text (cf. H. Weinreich’s work on grammar tenses). As a notion pertaining to text syntax, this form lends itself to morpho-syntactic con125 figurations which belong to the complex sentence: agreement, subordination by means of conjunctions or adverbial participles. The consequences of the obligatory co-existence between the perfective and imperfective forms in a real, non-ideal text are discussed as well.

Guentcheva Z, Decles J-P. A la recherche d’une valeur fondamentale du parfait bulgare. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(1–2):44–56.
Резюме:

An attempt is made to distinguish a basic value for the Bulgarian perfect which, perforce, should remain compatible with the different uses of the perfect. A survey is made of the different values which may be attributed to the morphological forms of the perfect (depending on whether the participle is formed from the aorist or from the imperfect, from the perfective or imperfective aspect); the values are defined with the same terms.

Hanegreefs-Popova N. Variations dans l’usage des mots d’origine française en bulgare moderne. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(1–2):57–60.
Резюме:

The article is part of a more detailed study on the role of the lexemes of French origin in Bulgarian. It is based on a comparison made between the first and the latest editions of Dictionary of Foreign Words in Bulgarian (1958 and 1978). The corpus contains 1537 terms excerpted from the 1958 edition and 1578 terms excerpted from the 1978 edition. The thematic fields to which these words belong and their influence on Bulgarian speakers are analysed. It is pointed out that many of these words are actually loan-words in French. In some cases the two editions of the dictionary give the etymology in a different manner.

Hristov P. Réflexions sur la subordination des propositions circonstancielles en français et en bulgare. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(1–2):90–98.
Резюме:

The semantic relations in complex sentences with adverbial clauses are analysed considering the semantics of the respective conjunctions. The study of the mechanism of subordination in Bulgarian and French is conducive to establishing the specific features which characterize the expression of the same relations in the two languages. They also illustrate the idea that grammar facts give a clue to elucidating the means used by each nation in the formation of a world outlook.

Ivantchev S. Parallèles linguistiques bulgaro-français. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(1–2):98–104.
Резюме:

The first part of the article deals with the development and present state of French studies in Bulgaria. Then, in terms of case grammar, a general contrastive analysis of Bulgarian and French is made proceeding, above all, from the specific features of Bulgarian which are determined by its Slavonic origin and its subsequent contacts with the Balkan and Turkic languages

Jäger G. Einige Bemerkungen zu einem speziellen Typ komplexer Sätze im Deutschen und im Bulgarischen. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(3):3–8.
Резюме:

The present paper deals with complex sentences of the type Ich arbeite (nicht) dort, wo du denkst

Krăstev B. Certains aspects de la catégorie de la diminution relatifs aux emprunts bulgares faits à la langue française. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(1–2):105–114.
Резюме:

A survey is made of the lexico-grammatical category of diminutivity in Bulgarian and French. The semantic, stylistic, derivational and quantitative aspects of the phenomenon are studied. It is established that morphemiс (synthetic) diminutivity is predominant in Bulgarian, whereas in French descriptive (analytic) diminutivity prevails. While French has lost many of its diminutive forms since the 16th c., in Bulgarian this phenomenon is alive even to this day. Statistic data show that diminutives have a tenfold higher frequency of occurrence in modern Bulgarian than in modern French.

Mantchev K. La genèse sémantique de la phrase complexe. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(1–2):114–122.
Резюме:

The initial formation of the complex sentence in French is considered. The synchronic-genetic method is applied, i. e. the classes of language elements are analysed in their deep-semantic sequence. The article treats in detail of the complication of the simple sentence done within the framework of the adverbial modifier which contains an infinitive construction. This type of construction is designated as sub-sentence and the means which introduce it are called connectors. A strictly defined system of three pairs of sub-sentences which represent the initial stage of building real subordinate clauses is worked out.

Nikolov B. La nasalité vocalique en français et en bulgare: problème phonétique et phonologique. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(1–2):122–129.
Резюме:

The article is a contrastive study of nasalization in the following combination: vowel + n + fricative. It is established that in this combination the vowels are nasalized to almost the same degree in French and Bulgarian. The reason for that is the elimination of the feature occlusiveness of the n consonant in the two languages. However, whereas this phenomenon has led to phonologization of the nasal vowels in French, in Bulgarian reasons of morphosyntactic and semantic nature have prevented the nasalized vowels from becoming independent phonemes.

Paillard D. А propos de quelques énoncés génériques en français et en bulgare. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(1–2):60–68.
Резюме:

Some utterances with generic meaning are considered in French and Bulgarian in terms of the speech situation; the limitations connected with the different determining words (articles above all) are elucidated.

Pottier B. Convergence et combinaison des procédés de détermination en français. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(1–2):68–72.
Резюме:

Determination (in the narrow sense of the word) is represented as a subclass of deixis. The predicate exhibits the relationship between determination and aspect; the relations of determination on the syntactic organization are observed on the level of the utterance

Requedat F. Remarques sur les constructions verbales avec l’infinitif. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(1–2):73–78.
Резюме:

A model of classifying French verbs used in constructions of the type: verb + à, de, 0 + infinitive is offered. The prepositions à and de are terms of the surface structure which show traces of operations in the deep structure: definiteness, modality, aspect. The verbs analysed are classified according to their meaning, the formal differences between the constructions being considered within the framework of the groups obtained.

Simeonov B. La structure du consonantisme français et bulgare. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(1–2):129–135.
Резюме:

Proceeding from А. Meillet’s idea of the tripartition of the phoneme systems in the Indo-European languages and from N. S. Trubetskoy’s theory of the three-dimensionality of phoneme units, further developed by A. Martinet, A. Reformatskij and the author of the present paper, a projection is formed which shows and reflects, on a contrastive basis, the inner structure of the relatively simplified French consonantism and of the relatively complete and symmetrical Bulgarian consonantism. The model of the two consonant systems is relevant to the explanation of a number of phenomena.It can interpret and predict all types of consonant changes in the two languages in terms of position and system. Besides, it proves the presence of modality in the French consonants and the absence of palatalism, a common feature of all consonant phonemes in Bulgarian.

Simeonov Y. Quelques problèmes de la grammaire contrastive dans l’optique du rapport représentation/expression. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(1–2):135–144.
Резюме:

On the basis of problems such as verbal aspect, chronological coordination (transition from parataxis to hypotaxis), expression of non-citational and citational forms, etc., the article discusses the similarities and differences between Bulgarian and French in the light of the opposition language system/ speech effects. The similarities are predominant on the level of the language system, whereas the differences on the level of speech.

Tchaouchev A. Remarques sur l’extension et la détermination du syntagme nominal-sujet en français contemporain. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(12):144–148.
Резюме:

The notional range of the noun (whether it is considered as a particular or a general notion depending on the requirements of the speech situation) is the result of both the actualizing role of the article and of factors which operate on the sentence level. One of these factors is the reciprocal semantic and syntactic determination of the main parts of the sentence, subject and predicate, which contain nominal syntagmas obtained as a result of the actualization of the noun. With the exception of sentences containing an attributive predicate the subject is to be considered as a narrow, maximally defined notion; this tendency is violated only in so far as the predicates of the remaining types of sentences (locative, possessive and active) approach in meaning the attributive predicate.

Бояджиев Ж. Още веднъж по въпроса за силно обособените части. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(6):13–21.
Резюме:

The strong isolation or ‘detachment’ phenomenon was described in the syntactic theory of Bulgarian half a century ago. Recently, however, this problem has again come to the fore as a subject of more extensive research. The paper reviews some concepts and ideas prevailing in the past and lays emphasis on certain unclarified and moot points. The collected linguistic material refers to the following types of strongly isolated segments or ‘parcels’: the strongly isolated parcel functioning as an attribute, the apposition parcel, the predicative parcel, the object parcel, the adverbial clause parcel, the subject parcel and the comparative parcel. When series of homogeneous or structurally similar parcels are formed in a text, they can be arbitrarily termed segment stanzas. Strong isolation or ‘detachment’ is a phenomenon characteristic of verbal sentences but it may also occur as an exception in nominal sentences.

Резюме:

Тhe design for 2 х 2 х 20 factorial experiment was used to test the hypothesis that learning of foreign language lexical items depends on: a) the associative value (AV) of the words, b) the number of syllables (NS) of the words to be learned, and c) the individual characteristics of the learners. The two levels of the factors AV and NS are high AV and low AV, and one-syllable and two-syllable words, respectively. The twenty subjects represent the levels of the third factor. The AV of 236 English words had been measured for Bulgarian subjects in a previous experiment. Verbal material for the present experiment was selected among those words. A paired-association learning paradigm was used so that the English words appeared as S-terms and the corresponding Bulgarian equivalents as R-terms. Learning was measured by the number of trials

Дзидзилис Х. За няколко гръцки заемки в българския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(5):1–15.
Резюме:

The paper discusses some new etymological considerations for ten words included in Volume I and Volume II of the Български етимологичен речник [Bulgarian Etymological Dictionary] and a word previously discussed in the book Гръцки заемки в съвременния български език [Greek Loanwords in Bulgarian] by M. Filipova-Bairova (Sofia, 1969). The words under discussion occur mainly in Bulgarian dialects and have been borrowed from Greek. Seven of the words are of Greek origin and three are of Latin origin but had been borrowed through Greek.

Леонидова М. Пословици и поговорки с ономастичен компонент (в руския, българския и немския език). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(4):13–20.
Резюме:

The paper discusses some theoretical and applied aspects of the functions of personal names (anthroponyms), which are components of Russian, Bulgarian and German proverbs and sayings. A number of features possessed by personal names in proverbs and sayings are revealed: 1) as components of a definite form, anthroponyms develop a more generalized meaning; 2) typical national names recur in most of the cases; 3) anthroponyms do not have a concrete referent and as a result they develop a more generalized meaning; 4) in contrast to personal names in phraseological units and idioms, the names included in proverbs and sayings do not gradually lose their lexical meaning, they do not become polysemantic and, therefore, do not turn into common nouns. The explanation of these phenomena lies in the fact that in proverbs and sayings personal names always have a permanent contextual frame.

Махрова Т. Особености на руската и българската интонация в зависимост от смисловата структура на изречението. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(3):9–15.
Резюме:

The functional sentence perspective of utterances excerpted from Russian and Bulgarian texts is compared in the paper with a view to find out to what extent the intonation of parallel Russian and Bulgarian sentences depends on their structural differences, and what are the reasons for the use of a number of typical intonation contours. The paper analyses the range of structural and semantic similarities and differences between simple declarative sentences in Bulgarian and Russian, as well as the respective characteristic functions of word order and intonation as means of marking off the theme and the rheme of the utterance.

Мишева А. Акцентно-ритмичните единици в българския и руския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(5):3–10.
Резюме:

Some statistical characteristics of accent-rhythmical units (phonetic words) in Bulgarian and Russian have been compared in the paper. The comparison reveals a high degree of similarity across the two languages in the distribution of the accent-rhythmical units as regards the number of syllables and the place of accent in phonetic words. The statistic data presented in the paper provide ample evidence for defining the culminative function of accent as the most essential and representative function both in Bulgarian and in Russian.

Резюме:

The forms and distribution of the Bulgarian reflexive personal pronoun are analysed in the paper from a typological perspective. Comparisons are made with the other Slavic languages, with German and with the Balkan languages. Significant differences are observable in the distribution of the full form себе си and of the short forms се and си. Cases of complementary distribution prevail. These differences entail the question whether those forms are still part of the paradigm of one and the same pronoun.

Селимски Л. Академик Емил Георгиев (10.I.1910–1.V.1982). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(6):77–79.
Резюме:
Симеонова Х. Рубен Иванович Аванесов (1902–1982). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(5):98–99.
Резюме:
Aitzetmüller R. Abg. лицемѣръ 'πρωσοπολητῆς'. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1982;6(3):140–142.
Резюме:
Alissandratos J. The Structure of Gregory Camblac’s Eulogy of Cyprian. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1982;6(1):45–58.
Резюме:
Резюме:
Резюме:
Davidov A. La tradition vieux bulgare dans le lexique de l’Ecole littéraire de Târnovo. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1982;6(3):129–139.
Резюме:
Kujev KM. Das Schicksal des Psalterium von Pogodin. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1982;6(3):108–11.
Резюме:
Mečev K. De l’appartenance nationale des éducateurs slaves Cyrille et Méthode. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1982;6(3):174–179.
Резюме:
Picchio R. VC and VM’s Pauline Connotations of Cyril and Methodius’ Apostleship. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1982;6(3):112–118.
Резюме:
Schütz J. Methods Grab in der Kathedrale von Morava. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1982;6(2):28–33.
Резюме:
Simeonov B. Die protobulgarische Inschrift aus Preslav. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1982;6(4):69–77.
Резюме:
Simeonov B. Die protobulgarische Inschrift aus Preslav. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1982;6(4):69–77.
Резюме:
Tončeva E. Bolgarskij Rospev und die Mittelosteuropäische Musik im XVI.–XVIII. Jh. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1982;6(1):102–115.
Резюме:
Резюме:
Бакалова Е. Вера Дмитриевна Лихачева (1937–1981). Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1982;6(1):130–131.
Резюме:
Резюме:
Резюме:
Милтенова А. Христо Николов Кодов (1901–1982). Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1982;6:89–90.
Резюме:
Резюме:
Резюме:
Резюме:
. Академик Емил Иванов Георгиев (1910–1982). Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1982;6:3–5.
Резюме:
Резюме:
Резюме:
Хоргоши Э. Замечания к топониму типа Боян, Бояна. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1982;6(1):116–118.
Резюме:
Хоргоши Э. Замечания к топониму типа Боян, Бояна. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1982;6(1):116–118.
Резюме:
Хоргоши Э. Замечания к топониму типа Боян, Бояна. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1982;6(1):116–118.
Резюме:
Бояджиев Т, Младенов МСл.. Приносите на д-р. Димитьр Стоев Тилков (1933–1981) в българското езикознание. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(1–2):184–189.
Резюме:
Лингорска Б. Професор доктор Пшемислав Зволински. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(1–2):195–196.
Резюме:
Павлова Р, Богданова С. Федот Петрович Филин (1908–1982). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(5):96–97.
Резюме:
Селимски Л. Академик Емил Георгиев (10.I.1910–1.V.1982). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(6):77–79.
Резюме:
Симеонова Х. Рубен Иванович Аванесов (1902–1982). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(5):98–99.
Резюме:
Янакиев М. Роман Якобсон (1896–1982). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(6):79–81.
Резюме:
Влахов С. Библиография на трудовете на доц. Иванка Васева. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(4):78–82.
Резюме:
Милойкова Р. Съдържание на год. VII (1982) на списание Съпоставително езикознание. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(6):97–103.
Резюме:
Мишева А. Библиография на трудовете на д-р Димитър Стоев Тилков. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(1–2):189–195.
Резюме:
Младенов МСл.. Книжовна дейност на акад. Стоян Романски (24.II.1882–26.II.1959). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(6):50–66.
Резюме:
Попова З. Библиография на трудовете на проф. д-р Александър Ничев (1972–1981). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(5):62–64.
Резюме:
Стаменов Х. Библиография на трудовете на проф. Жана Молхова (1973–1981). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(5):59–60.
Резюме:
Хрусанова В. Съпоставително изследване на български с други езици. Библиография за 1981 година. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(6):82–96.
Резюме:
Хрусанова В. Български езиковедски дисертации (1979–1980). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(3):91–95.
Резюме:
Бояджиев Ж. Езикознанието в някои канадски университети. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(1–2):179–181.
Резюме:
Бояджиев Ж. Общото и приложното езикознание в някои френски университети. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(1–2):177–179.
Резюме:
Бъчваров Я. Четвърта конференция по превод в Прага. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(1–2):182.
Резюме:
Васева И. Международна конференция по теория на превода в Лайпциг. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(5):90–92.
Резюме:
Василева Р. Трето национално съвещание на Дружеството на преподавателите по чужд език и литература в България. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(5):94–96.
Резюме:
Георгиева Е. За работата на Комисията за лингвистична терминология на славянските езици. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(3):82–85.
Резюме:
Резюме:
Резюме:
Данчев А. Седемнадесетата международна конференция по контрастивна лингвистика в Полша. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(4):94–96.
Резюме:
Карастойчева Ц. Втора национална конференция на чехословашките сленголози (Пълзен, 23–26 септември 1980 г.). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(3):89–90.
Резюме:
Куцаров И. Юбилейната двадесет и пета лята славистична школа в Прага. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(1–2):182–183.
Резюме:
Московска М. Трета научно-методическа конференция Съпоста- вително езикознание и чуждоезиково обучение. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(3):85–88.
Резюме:
Ненковски H. Първа национална младежка школа по математика и лингвистика. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(6):75–76.
Резюме:
П. П. Изнесени лекции. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(4):96.
Резюме:
Стаменов Х. Международна езиковедска конференция в Копенхаген. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(3):79–82.
Резюме:
Виденов М. Към българската паралингвистика. Годишник на СУ „Кл. Охридски“, Факултет по славянски филологии. 1982;72(1):6 – 93.
Резюме:
Резюме:
Герджиков Г. Тъй нареченото преизказване и въпросът за модалните категории, които глаголът може да притежава. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;7(4):21–38.
Резюме:

In Bulgarian there are four modes of speech quotation, depending on the specific features of the information expressed by the verb: a testimonial mode (modus testimonialis), an inferential mode (modus conclusivus), a reproductory mode (modus renarrativus) and a mode of distrust (modus inveritativus). A clear-cut distinction should be made between the categories ‘mode of expression of the action’ (modus dicendi actionis) and ‘mood’. The category of ‘mood’ can also be defined as ‘mode of action’ (modus actionis). Linguistic theory must break, once and for all, with the notion that the verb may have no more than one modal category. As any other grammatical category, except in cases of neutralization, the category of modus dicendi is obligatory for the speaker.

Гилин Р. Морфологична класификация на определителния член в българския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1982;8(3):16–22.
Резюме:

As а morphological category the definite article in Bulgarian is unusually difficult to classify in a way which is entirely satisfactory. The present paper discusses alternative solutions advocated by other linguists to classify the definite article as: 1) a member of the word class ‘particles’, 2) a derivational suffix, 3) a morphemic class of its own, on the same level as prefixes, roots, suffixes and endings. None of the three classifications is accepted, however, and a conclusion is drawn that the classification of the definite article as a flexional ending remains the best solution.