Skip to content Skip to navigation
Резюме:
Сапарев О. Игра на сенките : Българска диаболична фантастика. Пловдив: Христо Г. Данов; 1983. 307 p.
Съдържа произведения на Чавдар Мутафов, Владимир Полянов, Георги Райчев, Константин Константинов, Светослав Минков. ХУдожник: Владимир Генадиев
Резюме:
Leech GN. Principles of pragmatics. 9th ed. Longman linguistics library. London: Longman; 1983. 250 p.
Резюме:
Jackendoff RS. Semantics and Cognition. Current studies in linguistics. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press; 1983. 283 p.
Резюме:
Резюме:
Маринов А, Петрова Н. Инвентарни описи на лични фондове. Пловдив: Окръжен държавен архив – Пловдив; 1983.
Резюме:
Цицерон МТулий. Избрани писма. Георгиева Н. Библиотека за антична литература Хермес. София: Народна култура; 1983. 236 p.
Резюме:
Fabian J. Time and the Other: How Anthropology Makes Its Object. 1980: Институт за изследване на изкуствата; 1983.
Резюме:
Brâncuş G. Vocabularul autohton al limbii române. Bucureşti: Editura ştiinţifică şi enciclopedică; 1983.
Резюме:
Ohala JJ. The origin of sound patterns in vocal tract constraints. In: MacNeilage P. The production of speech. New York: Springer; 1983. pp. 189–216.
Резюме:
Грабар А, Грабар А. Един цариградски литургичен свитък и неговите илюстрации. In Избрани съчинения. София: Наука и изкуство; 1983. pp. 104–134.
Резюме:
Heidegger M. Aus der Erfahrung des Denkens. In Gesamtausgabe. Frankfurt am Main: Vittorio Klostermann; 1983. p. 111, 247.
Бележка на Хайдегер, предоставена на списанието за образование и възпитание »Welt der Schule«, и публикувана във факсимиле в год. 7, бр. 11 (изд. Ehrenwirth и R.Oldenbourg, Мюнхен).
Резюме:
Вазов И. Христо Ботев. Критическа студия. In: Пауновски И. Българската критика за Христо Ботев. София: Български писател; 1983.
Първа публикация на текста: сп. „Денница“, 1891, кн. 6, 7, 8 и 10
Резюме:
Бакалов Г. Из Христо Ботев. In: Павлов Л. Студии, статии, рецензии. София: Български писател; 1983. p. 130.
Първа публикация: Ботев лист. Издание на Съюза на артистите, музикантите и театралните служещи в България, 02 юни 1921, бр. 2.
Резюме:
Шимански Т. Из старата българска лексика. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1983;7(2):55–58.
Резюме:
Чешко ЕВ. Система письма Псалтыри Томича. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1983;7(4):3-33.
Резюме:
Резюме:

Материалите групирани по вид (монографии, сборници, периодични издания, студии, библиографии и др.) 488 названия, публикувани у нас и в чужбина.

Резюме:

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

Александров А. Една типологична особеност на българския и унгарския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(4):42–46.
Резюме:

The 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.

Андреева М. Антонимията при фразеологичните единици в българския и словашкия език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(1):20–25.
Резюме:

The paper contrasts the antonymous relations of phraseological units in Bulgarian and Slovak

Резюме:

The results of an experiment conducted with native speakers of Bulgarian, Russian and English are discussed in the paper along with part of the samples published in Munsell’s colour-terms charts. Some possibilities are pointed out for compiling a full list of the linguistic means used to denote colours. Some of the techniques applied in the formation of synonym clusters of col24 our terms are outlined and contrasted across the three languages in order to obtain the most precise bilingual equivalents.

Георгиев И. Изреченията с екзистенциално значение в българския и руския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Conrastive linguistics. 1983;8(1):4–14.
Резюме:

The paper discusses some sentences with the verbs съм/быть, имам/иметь and some nominative sentences. It gives general characteristics of the basic (semantically non-extended) types of existential sentences in Bulgarian and Russian. Their underlying invariable structure is determined in relation to the propositional content. A contrastive approach is used to define the functional and formal orientation of the verbal predicates and they are compared with the nucleus of the verbless (nominative) sentences. An explanation is given for the compulsory and/or optional character of some temporal and local adverbials.

Гливинска В. За глотометрическите характеристики на препозиционно-префиксалната морфема за в българския и руския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;VІІІ(4):5–18.
Резюме:

The paper presents а contrastive analysis of the prepositional and prefixal morpheme за occurring in texts of various styles in Modern Bulgarian and Russian. Quantitative data on the frequency of occurrence of the prepositional and prefixal morpheme за is discussed on the basis of text excerpts from the languages in contrast. Some similarities and differences across the two languages in the glottometric behaviour of the morpheme under discussion are analysed. An attempt is made to clarify and explain the reasons for the nature and origin of the differences.

Димова А. Модалните конструкции sein + zu + Infinitiv – съм + за + nomen actionis. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(1):35–43.
Резюме:

Two types of contrastive studies can be distinguished: a) contrastive analysis directed towards some specific features in one of the languages which might have remained unnoticed without the foreign language background; and b) contrastive analysis proper, comparing both isomorphic and non-isomorphic structures in the two languages. By contrast it becomes clear that a modal construction congruent with the German construction sein + zu + Infinitiv exists in Bulgarian. The two constructions are parallel in syntactic and semantic terms, as well as in their historical development. There are some differences mainly on the stylistic level. The use of the Bulgarian construction is limited within the colloquial speech register, whereas the German construction occurs in all functional styles.

Дренска М. Времетраенето на гласните в португалския и българския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(2):25–44.
Резюме:

The acoustic parameter of duration has no linguistic value in both Bulgarian and Portuguese. The study of this phenomenon is motivated by the significant differences across the two languages. It would be a contribution both to theoretical and to applied linguistics to establish these differences. The paper discusses the results obtained from a study of duration which depends on the specific nature of the segment and on the location of the segment in relation to word stress. The duration of Bulgarian and Portuguese vowels was compared according to numerical duration values. Some of the reasons underlying differences in duration are analysed. The contrastive analysis offers a reliable theoretical foundation for further work in corrective Portuguese phonetics for Bulgarian learners.

Резюме:

The paper discusses the lexical meaning of singularity observed in object, collective, singularia tantum nouns and grammatically expressed by their number forms. This linguistic phenomenon is discussed on a contrastive basis, having in mind the aspects of translation from Bulgarian into Russian. Being functionally derived or secondary, the plural forms receive a meaning of ‘singularity’. This meaning is usually accompanied by numerals or pronouns. The meaning of ‘singularity’ of the plural forms is activized mainly in the register of specialized language but it often pervades everyday speech as well. It is in that kind of speech where the most essential and substantial differences between Bulgarian and Russian can be observed.

Енчева Н. За семантико-синтактичната контракция на количествено-именните словосъчетания в руския и българския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(2):5–10.
Резюме:

The paper discusses some condensed quantitative nominal phrases which have not been previously investigated in linguistic studies on Bulgarian and Russian. Some common rules underlying the formation of condensed nominal phrases of the type under discussion are compared across the two languages. It is pointed out that the grammatical nature of the underlying phrase influences to a large extent the condensed nominals in Bulgarian, since the basic syntactic nominal relations in it are expressed analytically and not by inflection. A classification of condensed quantitative nominals is proposed at the end of the paper.

Резюме:

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)

Кабакчиев К. Синтактичният модел „V + О“,контекстуален маркер на перфективност в българския и английския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(4):34–41.
Резюме:

The syntactic pattern VERB + OBJECT functions as a contextual marker of perfectivity when transitive verbs in the Past Simple Tense in English and aspectually defective transitive verbs in the Aorist in Bulgarian are used. A limited number of verbs of existential and relational meaning make an exception to the perfectivity of the pattern in both languages. In English, the adverbial imperfective marker and the generic meaning of the object are two basic conditions that preclude the perfectivity of the pattern. Analytic combinations consisting of a verb and a noun, which are semantically equivalent to a separate verb and express perfective actions, are frequent in both languages because of the perfectivity inherent in the pattern.

Карпов ВА. Явление межъязыковой омонимии в условиях русско-болгарского билингвизма. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(5):18–20.
Резюме:

The paper discusses interlingual homonymy within the conditions of Russian-Bulgarian bilingualism. Some of the reasons of interlingual homonymy are analysed against the background of their underlying theoretical prerequisites. The grammatical and morphological aspects of the problem are pointed out. A number of examples demonstrate the various cases of interlingual homonymy.

Ковачева М. Проблемата за граматичния подлог и разговорната употреба на то / it в българския и английския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(6):16–26.
Резюме:

nalysis of the colloquial usage of the Bulgarian neuter pronoun mo shows that the FSP structure of the utterance is of greatest importance. In particular it is the rhematic elements that favour the occurrence of mo in full as well as in one-member sentences. The function of mo has been defined on these grounds. An interpretation of the meaning of mo / it in such sentences has been suggested. It is theoretically possible that in English and other European languages the neuter pronoun behaved once much like mo in Bulgarian. Such an analysis suggests a uniform explanation for the origin of the grammatical subject it in apparently unrelated constructions.

Резюме:

The paper discusses some basic problems concerning the semantic interpretation of the category determination/non-determination. A solution was found out as regards the basic semantic opposition defined as an opposition of singularity/non-singularity. Some lexical and morphological means for expressing this opposition are analysed across the two languages. Drawing a clear-cut distinction among the means for expressing singularity and non-singularity (general and existential) in natural languages should be of importance not only as a theoretical insight into this particular category, but it can also be efficiently applied to the practical studies of the two languages under discussion.

Резюме:

German and Bulgarian are contrasted to show that the valency model affords more ample opportunities than the logical one for establishing the place of the predicative in the structural hierarchy of the sentence. The following predicative types were differentiated on the basis of the valency model: 1) predicative to the subject and predicative to the direct object. They form the basic structure of the sentence and are considered to be among the main parts of the sentence.2) predicative attribute to the subject and predicative attribute to the direct object. They are the result of secondary predication and are left outside the basic structure of the sentence. Thus, they are considered to be secondary parts of the sentence.

Кочиш М. За членуването на собствените имена в българския и унгарския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(3):60–62.
Резюме:

In the paper Bulgarian and Hungarian are contrasted on a typological basis as regards the use of the definite article with proper names. A conclusion is drawn that the use of the definite article with proper names and toponyms in Bulgarian is quite similar to Hungarian although its distribution is more restricted than in Hungarian.

Махрова Т. Опыт сравнительной типологии мелодики русской и болгарской повествовательной фразы. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(4):19–30.
Резюме:

The paper presents an analysis of narrative intonation in Russian and Bulgarian. It is part of a larger contrastive study on intonation in Russian and Bulgarian, based on the results of intonographic analysis. The paper discusses some of the specific features of Russian and Bulgarian intonation as regards complete and incomplete syntagmas. The usage of certain types of intonation patterns has been studied along with some specific features of tune scheme realization in pre-kernel and other sentence parts.

Михов Н. Бъдеще предварително време като елемент от темпоралната система на френския и българския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(3):35–51.
Резюме:

The paper discusses the semantic structure of the futur antérieur tense in French as a unity of temporal, modal and stylistic values. The tense is contrasted with the morphological category of its Bulgarian counterpart, represented by the paradigm of its functional translation equivalents. Compared to the Bulgarian future perfect tense the French futur antérieur is characterized by higher frequency of occurrence and by a significantly greater functional load. One of the objectives of the paper is to find out some of the regularities which could be explained as a result of the characteristic features manifested by the verbal systems of the languages in contrast. The analysis of the future perfect tense in relation to the rest of the tenses has motivated the formulation of certain theoretical and practical conclusions which might have both specific and general methodological significance.

Михов Н. Обобщително-актуализиращата същност на перфекта във френския и българския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(6):33–41.
Резюме:

The paper discusses some characteristic features of the Perfect tense in French and Bulgarian in comparison to the past tenses and to the whole temporal system. In contrast to the Imperfect and Aorist, the Perfect manifests strong generalizing qualities and expresses direct contact with the present. The semantic similarities between the Perfect and the Present tenses are discussed. The similarity is enhanced in Bulgarian by the qualifying character of the auxiliary verb съм ‘to be’. It seems to be a linguistic fact with considerable consequences in the language that the passé composé has adopted most of the characteristic features of the Aorist and has become the basic narrative tense. There are considerable differences in this respect across the two languages. The author maintains that the Perfect tense in Bulgarian exhibits some typical combinatorial preferences for certain adverbial modifiers, which can be a reliable criterion for defining the value of the Perfect tense in French. It might also facilitate the choice of the most adequate functional equivalent in the process of translation.

Младенов МСл.. Има ли в българския език фразеологизъм пара пи(та)?. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(6):42–44.
Резюме:

The paper argues that the phraseological unit para pit does not exist in Bulgarian. Its occurrence in the Български фразеологичен речник ‘Bulgarian Phraseological Dictionary’ is obviously due to some misunderstanding. In fact, there is a word parapit and a word similar in form paratik, both meaning ‘free, unoccupied, empty’.

Резюме:

The Russian Language Publishers (Moscow) have issued Учебный словарь сочетаемости слов русского языка [The Learners’ dictionary of combinatorial properties of Russian words, eds. P. N. Denissov and V. V. Morkovkin]. One of its characteristics is that it was designed for all kinds of foreigners studying Russian and was not targeted to any specific group of learners. Thus, one of the prospects for further lexicographic work on the combinatorial properties of Russian words should be a dictionary directed towards a specific recipient language. The first variant of this kind, under way at present is Словарь сочетаемости слов русского языка для болгар [Dictionary of combinatorial properties of Russian words for Bulgarian learners]. Besides semantically adapting the Russian dictionary and the head words to Bulgarian, a Bulgarian-Russian index will also be added. In this way the dictionary will have a wider scope and will belong to the active type of reference books, since it will allow the Bulgarian learners to transfer notional tasks from Bulgarian into their respective Russian expression. By its structure the dictionary can be defined as both active and passive, since it suits the requirements of the productive as well as of the receptive types of verbal behaviour.

Николова А. Български еквиваленти на руските инфинитивни конструкции, означаващи невъзможност. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(6):5–15.
Резюме:

Infinitival clauses with the meaning of impossibility are one of the most frequent semantic variants of this simple clause type in Russian. The meaning of impossibility is formed by combining the terminative aspect of the independent infinitive with the negative particle не ‘no’. The lack of the infinitive in Bulgarian causes the occurrence of various means of expressing the Russian infinitival clauses. The meaning of impossibility is expressed by a combination of the modal verb не мога (може) ‘can not’ + the да-construction or by shortened infinitive forms, by negative future forms, by a number of verbal nouns, by rhetorical questions, etc. The paper discusses some grammatical means of rendering this category in Bulgarian. The Bulgarian translation equivalents of the Russian infinitival clauses are analysed as regards their syntactic and semantic properties and their respective frequencies of occurrence.

Николова Ц. Сравнителен анализ на най-фреквентната лексика в руската, чешката и българската разговорна реч. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(2):11–18.
Резюме:

The aim of the paper is to trace out the approximate boundaries of the common lexical minimum of colloquial speech across three Slavic languages – Russian, Czech and Bulgarian. The most frequent words as recorded in the frequency dictionaries of Bulgarian, Russian and Czech usage are contrasted. The rank list of the most frequent words in the speech of Bulgarians covers all the lexemes recorded with a frequency index of up to 10, within a speech соrpus of 100 000 words. The words recorded in the list cover 85% of the topic variety within the speech соrpus.

Ничева К. Фразеологизми с компонент дявол в българския, руския, чешкия, полския и френския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(3):26–34.
Резюме:

The study of phraseological units containing the component ‘devil’ reveals some of the common characteristic features of phraseology in general. The paper discusses phraseological semantic groups across five languages. Most of the groups denote similar wicked or wrong deeds, vices, etc., accounted for by the meaning of the word devil ‘the supreme spirit of evil’. The thematic groups denoting ‘the intensive manifestation of any feature’, which are common in phraseology in general, as well as some phraseological exclamations are characterized in this particular case by their negative value. They may either vary or be similar and even identical in imagery and structure. Some similar or identical features are also observed in the explicit expression of emotion. Some of the languages under investigation manifest various ways in which national psychology is reflected in the phraseology.

Периклиев В. Синтактична нееднозначност в българския и английския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(1):26–34.
Резюме:

This paper discusses some problems concerning the formal description of syntactic ambiguity in Bulgarian and English.

Попова А. Безглаголна предикация в българския и полския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(4):31–33.
Резюме:

The paper discusses the non-isomorphic character of verbless predicate phrases in Polish and Bulgarian. The widespread occurrence of verbless predication in Polish is emphasized in contrast with the very restricted occurrence of verbless predication in Bulgarian.

Раданова-Кушева Н. Съответствия на италианската форма condizionale composto в българския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(3):52–59.
Резюме:

The paper discusses the Italian verbal form condizionale composto and the tense and mood forms which can be used as translation equivalents in Bulgarian. The study is based on material excerpted from the Bulgarian novel Time of Parting by A. Donchev and its translation in Italian.

Русек Й. Из историята на предложните конструкции със значение ‘praeter’ в българския и полския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(2):45–50.
Резюме:

The paper discusses the development of prepositional phrases with the meaning of ‘praeter’ in Bulgarian and Polish against the diachronic background of Old Bulgarian and the rest of the Slavic languages. It is pointed out that both languages have developed a comparatively novel way of expressing this particular meaning.

Станишева Д. Владимир Барнет. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(5):130–132.
Резюме:
Резюме:

The paper discusses а number of experiments to spontaneously elicit from the memory of foreign learners some poorly memorized Bulgarian words. It is pointed out that the ‘tip of the tongue’ phenomenon, which occurs during the elicitation of native language words with very low frequency manifests a number of features similar to the phenomena characterizing the process of learning Bulgarian as a foreign language. The wrongly rendered words are compared according to the various degrees of phonemic proximity with their correct counterparts

Тимонина Е. Дателни местоимения в български и руски диалог (опит за количествен анализ на честотата на употребата им). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(3):5–25.
Резюме:

The paper contrasts the usage frequencies of dative pronouns in Bulgarian and Russian dialogue. The most frequent types of dative pronouns which occur in texts containing dialogue are discussed. For Bulgarian, they are mostly enclitic pronouns within the verb phrase. The statistic analysis of the material under discussion has yielded the conclusion that idiosyncratic stylistic features of various writers do not influence the use of dative pronouns in Bulgarian dialogue (if the forms for all persons singular and plural are regarded simultaneously). On the other hand, the use of dative pronouns in Russian dialogue is very sensitive to idiosyncratic stylistic features. It was found that stylistic variations in Russian dialogue determine the occurrence of certain singular and plural forms of the dative pronouns. It should be pointed out that in Bulgarian dialogue; some stylistic variants also influence the occurrence of a number of forms of the dative enclitic pronouns, although to a considerably smaller degree, as the texts under analysis have shown.

Ченева В. Към въпроса за синонимията на синтактичните единици (върху материал от руския и българския език). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(1):15–19.
Резюме:

The paper discusses some complex temporal sentences in Russian and Bulgarian which express direct succession of events in the main and the subordinate clauses, the main clause action taking place after the action in the subordinate clause. To construct this type of temporal sentences inferential (resultative) conjunctions must be used in both languages. The conditions under which all the three synonymous conjunctions can be used are outlined in the paper. Constructions in which the conjunctions can be interchanged are discussed on a contrastive basis, along with cases in which the interchangeability of the synonymous conjunctions is blocked. An analysis is made of the interrelations among the various components of the composite syntactic unit.

Резюме:

The purpose of this paper is to analyse some peculiarities of sentences with an explicit modus expressed by the adverb добре ‘well’ in Bulgarian and хорошо ‘well’ in Russian. These peculiarities are conditioned by the subsystem interdependencies, characteristic of the two languages under discussion both on the syntactic level and on the level of textual inclusion.

Olesch R. Kyrillo-methodianische Spuren im Dravänischen. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1983;7(1):3–10.
Резюме:
Schmidt W-H. Berlinski sbornik und „бохмытскаѣ вѣра“. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1983;7(4):110–115.
Резюме:
Steinke K. Joasaphus von Vidin – ein „Imitateur d’Euthyme“?. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1983;7(3):3–13.
Резюме:
Zlatanova R. Zur Syntax der adverbialen Formen bei Johannes dem Exarchen. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1983;7(1):47–63.
Резюме:
Банков Т. Ценно издание на старобългарски ръкопис. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1983;7(1):98–100.
Резюме:
Богданович Д. Книжовна школа и книжовно средище. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1983;7(4):106–109.
Резюме:
Буюклиев И. Българският „Златен век“ на чешки език. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1983;7(3):114–116.
Резюме:
Резюме:
Резюме:
Резюме:
Резюме:
Младенова М. Старобългарският глагол рачити. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1983;7(1):91–94.
Резюме:
Момина ММ. Жеравинская триодь. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1983;7(3):58–67.
Резюме:
Москов М. Прабългарски рунически надпис. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1983;7(1):35–46.
Резюме:
Резюме:
Русек Й. Из старобългарската лексика. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1983;7(4):34–51.
Резюме:
Резюме:
Тот И. Болгарское четвероевангелие в Будапеште. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1983;7(2):3–13.
Резюме:
Чешко ЕВ. Система письма Псалтыри Томича. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1983;7(4):3–33.
Резюме:
Чешко ЕВ. Система письма Псалтыри Томича. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1983;7(4):3–33.
Резюме:
Шимански Т. Из старата българска лексика. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1983;7(2):55–58.
Резюме:
Буюклиев И. Проф. Христо Кодов (1901–1982). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(1):125–127.
Резюме:
Буюклиев И. Еуген Паулини (1912–1983). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(5):132–134.
Резюме:
Кювлиева В. Стефан Илчев (1898–1983). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(4):127–128.
Резюме:
Младенов МСл.. Иван Кънчев. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(3):128–129.
Резюме:
Палкова З. Милан Ромпортъл. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(3):130–131.
Резюме:
Станишева Д. Владимир Барнет. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(5):130–132.
Резюме:
Владова И. По-важни трудове на Сидер Флорин. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(2):135.
Резюме:
Влахов К. Библиография на трудовете на проф. Борис Геров (1973–1983). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(4):109–110.
Резюме:
Кювлиева В. Библиография на трудовете на ст. н. с. I ст. Кети Ничева. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(5):116–121.
Резюме:
Милойкова Р. Съдържание на год. VІІІ (1983) на списание Съпоставително езикознание. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(6):116–123.
Резюме:
Христова И. Библиография на трудовете на проф. Мирослав Янакиев (1947–1982). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(2):125–133.
Резюме:
Хрусанова В. Съпоставително изследване на български с друга езици. Библиография за 1982 година. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(6):96–115.
Резюме:
Хрусанова В. Български езиковедски дисертации (1981 година). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(1):128–130.
Резюме:
Банков Д. Мнение за теоретичната конференция Състояние и проблеми на критиката на превода. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(5):129.
Резюме:
Бояджиев Ж. Езикознанието в Монреалския университет. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(4):123–126.
Резюме:
Брезински С. Четвърта българо-полска конференция. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(3):126–128.
Резюме:
Бъчваров Я. Из дейността на Института за руски език „А. С. Пушкин“. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(2):138–139.
Резюме:
Бъчваров Я. Из историята и дейността на Постоянния Международен комитет на славистите. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(2):136–137.
Резюме:
Бъчваров Я. Предстояща конференция със съпоставителна тематика. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(4):122.
Резюме:
Бъчваров Я. Заседание на Комисията по транскрипция при Международния комитет на славистите. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(1):117–119.
Резюме:
Карастойчева Ц. Четвърти конгрес на бъл- гарските социолози: Секция по социолингвистика. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(5):126–127.
Резюме:
Ковачева П. Трети международен колоквиум по старобългаристика. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(1):115–117.
Резюме:
Куцаров И. Втора френско-българска конференция по контрастивна лингвистика. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(4):115–117.
Резюме:
Леонидова М. Втори международен симпозиум по фразеология. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(5):124–126.
Резюме:
Лилова А. Дискусия около кръглата маса на тема Преводът в системата на чуждоезиковото обучение. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(6):94–95.
Резюме:
Манолова Л. Научна конференция за изследване и описване на речниковия състав на словашкия книжовен език в Смоленище. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(6):93–94.
Резюме:
Милойкова Р. Пети международен конгрес на преподавателите по руски език и литература. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(1):124–125.
Резюме:
Младенов МСл.. Трети българо-румънски симпозиум. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(3):125–126.
Резюме:
Недкова Р. Семинар по контрастивна лингвистика в София. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(5):130.
Резюме:
Николов С. Теоретична конференция Състояние и проблеми на критиката на превода. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(5):127–128.
Резюме:
Периклиев В. COLING ’82. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(4):117–122.
Резюме:
Селимски Л. Международна научна сесия Научното дело на проф. Б. Цонев и проф. Л. Милетич. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(6):91–93.
Резюме:
Славова Р. Български език за чужденци – актуални проблеми на обучението. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(1):119–123.
Резюме:
Тодоров В. Двадесетият летен ceминap по български език и култура за чуждестранни българисти и слависти. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(1):123–124.
Резюме:
Тончева Е. Първа научно-методическа конференция Съпоставително езикознание и чуждоезиково обучение. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(3):95–98.
Резюме:
Резюме:
Ангелова И. Семиотичен аспект на пунктуацията в текста. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(4):62–70.
Резюме:

The subsystem of punctuation has an unusual status in the system of language. It is dependent on conventionally accepted rules and it takes part in interrelations, determined by subjective perception. The paper discusses the semiotic aspect of these interrelations. Being the ultimate sign system, language subordinates other sign systems and single signs. The punctuation system is one of them, its semantic nature cannot be disputed. Little research has been dedicated to punctuation as a system, which makes it an interesting and challenging subject of scientific investigation.

Герджиков Г. Тенденцията към аналитизъм – определение, метод за измерване, причини, следствия. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1983;8(5):46–55.
Резюме:

It may be assumed that the degree of analyticity of a certain language corresponds to the average value of grammatical information, carried by the word forms of this language. The paper discusses a method for working out the average value of grammatical information carried by a word form. It is pointed out that the tendency towards analyticity might bring the reduction in the number of substantival categories, but it does preserve and even increases the number of verbal categories. Agglutinative languages distribute the grammatical information among a great number of morphemes. Inflectional languages, on the contrary, focus whole chunks of in- formation on a single morpheme – the inflexion. The development towards analyticity results in the situation where, in a similar way, information begins to be transmitted and received by formally autonomous parts. Thus, the very nature of inflexion carries the starting point of the tendency towards analyticity. The analytic organization of a language, however, preserves the maximum autonomy and the distinctive character of word classes, characteristic of inflectional languages.