Skip to content Skip to navigation
Резюме:
Динеков П. Кирило-Методиевска енциклопедия. София: Академично издателство "Марин Дринов"; 1985.
Резюме:
Резюме:
Резюме:
Emonds JE. A unified theory of syntactic categories. Studies in generative grammar. Dordrecht/Cinnaminson: Foris Publications; 1985. IV, 356 p.
Резюме:
Резюме:
Резюме:
Гелий А. Атически нощи. Атанасов В. София: Наука и изкуство; 1985. 294 p.
Азбучен показалец на имената и античните понятия
Резюме:
Larson J. Dickens and the Broken Scripture. Athens: University of Georgia Press; 1985.
Резюме:
H. Melchert C. PIE velars in Luvian. In: Watkins C. Studies in Memory of Warren Cowgill (1929-1985). Papers from the Fourth East Coast Indo-European Conference Cornell University, June 6-9, 1985 [Internet]. 1985 [cited 2013-12-26]. pp. 182–204. http://isites.harvard.edu/fs/docs/icb.topic254229.files/melchert.pdf
Резюме:
Паралингвистические факты : Этикет и речь. In Новое в зарубежной лингвистике. Москва: Прогресс; 1985. pp. 546 – 553.
Резюме:
Holman MI. Ivan Vazov's "Under the Yoke": The First English Translation. In: Collins L. Anglo-Bulgarian Symposium, London 1982. Proceedings. London: University of London, School of Slavonic & East European Studies; 1985. pp. 161-171.
Резюме:
Аристофан поет-комедиограф. Жабите. In: Ничев А. Комедии. София: Народна култура; 1985.
В книгата е означено 1 и 2 изданиеСъдържа именен показалец
Резюме:
Хердер ЙГотфр. Трактат за произхода на езика. In Естетически студии и статии. София: Наука и изкуство; 1985.
Резюме:
Благоев Д. Принос към историята на социализма в България. In: Велева М. Избрани исторически съчинения. София: Наука и изкуство; 1985.
Първо издание на текста – 1906 г.
Резюме:
Ricoeur P. Monde du texte et monde du lecteur. In Temps et récit. Paris: Éditions du Seuil; 1985. pp. 228 – 263.
Резюме:
Резюме:

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

Büttner U. Zur Wiedergabe deutscher Vorgangs- und Zustandspassivkonstruktionen im Bulgarischen. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(3):24–32.
Резюме:

The paper contrasts German ‘process’ and ‘state’ passive constructions with their Bulgarian counterparts. Having established the categorial meaning of the passive voice and a definition of passive constructions, some possible uses of German passive constructions are presented and an attempt is made to describe them by metalinguistic means. The established characteristics serve as a basis of reference for finding their Bulgarian equivalents, which may be classified as: a) translated by passive constructions; b) translated by active constructions, i. e. there is a change in the voice of the verb; and c) some other ways of translation. As a result both the regularities and the restrictions in using each of the Bulgarian translation equivalents are presented.

Hougaard C. Invectives in Danish and Slavic: A contrastive analysis. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(4):44–54.
Резюме:

Comparing invectives in Nordic and Slavic languages we find great similarities: principles and methods of verbal abuse are the same; some constructions are peculiar to the Germanic languages or at least their appearance in Slavic is uncertain, and some constructions are specifically Slavic, possibly belonging to a single language. Although the elements of the invective in the two groups of languages roughly behave uniformly, the pattern varies, each language showing a characteristic profile.

Балкански Т. Монголски езикови следи в родопската топонимия. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(2):41–44.
Резюме:

Some problems concerning the traces of Mongolian in the toponymic system and in ethnonymy of the Northern parts of the Rhodope Mountains are discussed in the paper. Plenty of contrastive toponymic material relating to the Mongolian languages has been collected from the areas of the Soviet Republics in Central Asia and from Mongolia to prove the etymology of some local toponyms in the Rhodope region, like Semèr ulà, Bèlja, and Hajrerob, as well as the origin of the ethnonym kalmùk. The toponyms must have been introduced to the Bulgarian speech community within the period ranging from 1380 to 1750 by shepherds of Turkic origin who had started for the Balkan Peninsula from the areas in Central Asia, where the names under discussion occur quite frequently and are derived from Mongolian geographical terms. Another point the paper attempts to put across is that it was not only the Proto-Bulgarians who brought all the traces of Mongolian culture to the Balkan Peninsula, as some scholars in this country seem to imply.

Бахарев А. Способы усиления и ослабления отрицания в болгарском языке в сопоставлении с русским и польским языками. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(1):24–21.
Резюме:

The paper describes ways to intensify of weaken negation in three Slavic languages, representing the south, east and west subgroups. (Greater attention is cantered on Bulgarian). The study is based on ample factual material. The common characteristics of the category under discussion are traced out in Bulgarian, Russian and Polish. A number of differences in the functions of negation are established across the three languages. The analysis of the concrete language data has yielded the conclusion that the various means of negation are capable to express all the nuances of meaning through negation of varying strength.

Болгарова И. За българските съответствия на руските родителни падежни форми. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(3):5–9.
Резюме:

The paper discusses the results of a statistic study of the Bulgarian equivalents of the genitive case forms in Russian. By obtaining objective data, relating to the occurrence of these forms in Russian, some regular tendencies for rendering them in Bulgarian have been observed. The quantified data clarify why some scholars have claimed the existence of case structures in Bulgarian.

Резюме:

The paper sums up the data yielded by statistic analysis of text samples. Certain conclusions were made about the Bulgarian functional equivalents of the French Hypothetic Future Tense, as well as about the correspondences and contrasts of the Future Tenses across the two languages.

Велева М. Възприемане на българската фонологична опозиция звучност/беззвучност от носителите на арабския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(1):28–37.
Резюме:

Some hypotheses have been formulated as a result of the contrastive analysis of the voiced/voiceless phonological opposition in Bulgarian and literary Arabic (including regional dialects). A psycholinguistic experiment was carried out to verify the hypotheses. The basic task of the study was to examine how Bulgarian voiced and voiceless consonants are perceived by Arab learners. The technique for the perception of phonemes through semantic oppositions was applied. The results demonstrate that Arab learners are capable of acquiring the voiced/voiceless phonological opposition in Bulgarian.

Резюме:

The paper looks at the formation of secondary nomination of people, derived from the names of animals. The derived meaning of the zoonyms is related to the basic, motivational meaning and the animal sememes of the basic meaning are transformed into features, characterizing the person. Zoomorphism preserves the semantic components of the new meaning through its intrinsic form which contains emotive elements participating in the derived meaning of the word as an expressive and evaluative component. The expressive and evaluative nature of zoomorphs provokes negative or positive social effect. Typical of certain speech situations are: the frequent occurrence of metaphoric personal names in everyday communication; in fiction, metaphoric meanings are elements of the evaluation of the characters or of the social phenomena that are being described. The semantic duality of metaphoric nominations makes them context-dependent in any syntactic position of the noun.

Димитрова Т. О причинах межъязыковой омонимии (о некоторых французских заимствованиях в русском и болгарском языках). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(3):10–15.
Резюме:

The problem of the sources of cross-language homonymy is discussed in the paper. Observation centres on French loanwords in Russian and Bulgarian. The problem is approached from two angles: 1) as regards some causes for the origin of cross-language homonyms parallel to the source language; and 2) within the frameworks of the two recipient languages. The first aspect covers some of the following phenomena: the influence of the intermediary language, various semantic changes in the recipient language while the word is being integrated in its lexico-semantic system (narrowing, specialization of meaning, metonymy transfer, etc.). The second aspect includes some of the following variations: the French word has been borrowed with a different number of meanings in Russian and in Bulgarian; in one of the languages the loanword has undergone a certain semantic change, while in the other it has preserved the meaning of the French prototype unchanged; or the loanword has undergone specific semantic changes, idiosyncratic for each of the respective language systems.

Квоние ЙИвар. Възвратността в българския и румънския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(5):15–30.
Резюме:

rom а diachronic perspective the paper analyses the functions of reflexive words in Bulgarian and Romanian in contrast to the remaining two languages of the Balkan Sprachbund: Albanian and Greek. The author argues that the reflexive pronoun type себе си is common to all the Balkan languages. Bulgarian has preserved the Slavic distinction between suus and eius, while Romanian has discarded it like the rest of the Romance languages. Linguistic material from other Indo-European and non-Indo-European languages was introduced for the purposes of comparison.

Кирова Т. Стилистични особености в употребата на българското местоимение нещо и неговите руски съответствия. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(2):34–40.
Резюме:

The indefinite pronouns which refer to inanimate objects can function as intensifiers and modal particles both in Bulgarian and in Russian. Their contribution to the meaning of the utterance in those cases is to render various nuances like uncertainty, approximation, suspicion, irony, familiarity, partitive relations, etc. depending on the context and situation. The pronoun нещо can be substantivised in order to express positive evaluation relating to an object or a person.On the other hand, it can also express the reverse: lack of respect or even contempt for a person (in combination with the demonstrative pronoun това). In addition, the paper discusses some emotive informal expressions connected with the distribution of the Russian pronoun что-то.

Легурска П. Някои типове редовна метонимия при названията на предмети (върху материал от руския и българския език). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(5):5–9.
Резюме:

The paper presents а semasiological analysis of some metonymy types and models, which apply to names of objects classified into three thematic groups: animals, plants and body parts

Легурска П, Златанов И. Номинативна метафора (върху материал от славянските езици). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(4):12–26.
Резюме:

The paper discusses а model for the formation of nominative metaphors as subtype of the substantive metaphors. The model is based on the procedure of componential analysis. The phenomenon under discussion is illustrated analysing the lexical field of body parts in Russian, Ukrainian, Bulgarian Serbo-Croatian, Polish and Czech. The similarities and contrasts in the nominative metaphoric meanings of the words in the analysed languages provide evidence for certain hypotheses concerning their semantic typology.

Лесневская Д. Синтактична синонимия при изразяване на изяснителни и целеви отношения в руския и българския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(2):27–33.
Резюме:

The paper studies some synonymous syntactic structures expressing relations of purpose and clarification in Russian and Bulgarian. The transformation devices operating on the level of the simple and complex sentence are examined in relation to synonymous purposive and clarifying phrases. The transformation and development of Purpose and Clarifying relations across the two languages is considered from a diachronic perspective as a specific realization of the respective synthetic and analytic trends in the development of the two language systems in contrast. The paper outlines the structural and semantic features of the synonymous syntactic structures in Russian and Bulgarian, along with their modal nuances and stylistic idiosyncrasies.

Резюме:

In terms of the lexical semantics of adjectives, a particular semantic group with the meaning of ‘capability of action’ has been isolated out of the adjectives used in Russian and Bulgarian scientific literature. The adjectives conform to the existing word-formation types and were further subdivided into five subgroups. Each of the subgroups was subjected to detailed morphosemantic analysis.

Младенов МСл.. Още за конструкции от типа (върви) подире ми. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(4):36–43.
Резюме:

The paper discusses some structures of the type (върви) подире ми, i. e. combinations of preposition/adverb + the short form of a dative personal pronoun. The structures occurred in some North-Eastern Bulgarian dialects (Moesian and Balkan) and partly in the Roupian dialects. Then they were introduced into the literary language in the 19th c. The earliest evidence for the presence of the phenomenon was dated back to the 18th c. but it may have originated much earlier. The structures подире ми and подир мене, which are identical in meaning occur in parallel. Similar structures exist in Romanian: asupra in mi, which is identical to asupra mea. They correspond to the Bulgarian върху ми and върху мене. Since the same phenomenon is also observed in Modern Greek, it may be considered to be a characteristic feature of the Balkan Sprachbund, concerning the status of the enclitic pronouns in the Balkan languages.

Осипцова И. Болгарские функциональные эквиваленты русских глаголов многократного способа действия. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(1):5–11.
Резюме:

The paper analyses one of the ways to express reiterative verbal action in Bulgarian. In this respect, some of the specific features of Bulgarian constitute certain nuances of Past Tense, expressed by reiterative verbs in Russian. The Bulgarian functional equivalents of the Russian reiterative verbs have been defined as tense-aspect forms with respective lexical indices. The material used for the contrastive study was excerpted from Russian classical novels written by 19th c. writers and their translations into Bulgarian.

Резюме:

The paper studies the word-formation productivity of English socio-economic and political terms of Latin and Greek origin which belong to the category of nouns. The pattern structures of terminological units are analysed to establish the depth and range that the common regularities of the patterns can account for. The patterns for the formation of English terminological units derived from nouns of Greek and Latin origin are contrasted with their functional equivalents in Bulgarian. An inventory is made of the basic ways to translate the terms into Bulgarian. The author discusses some differences in the derivational systems of the two languages under discussion.

Резюме:

The paper studies the international vocabulary of formally similar words in Bulgarian, English, French and Spanish. In terms of foreign language teaching objectives, three semantic groups of international words have been distinguished: a) formally similar synonymous words; b) formally similar partially synonymous words; c) formally similar words lacking any semantic correspondence. Some vocabulary teaching techniques applied in the introduction of each group are specified. Having in mind the internalizing of grammar rules as a teaching objective, efforts should be directed towards the learning of formally similar words. Due attention should be paid to their proper phonetic forms, which conform to the phonetic rules of each of the languages described in the paper, as well as to their grammatical characteristics, like gender, combinatorial properties, derivation and word-formation patterns, etc. From an applied linguistics aspect the formally related words are significant as far as they facilitate the overcoming of the language barrier in the teaching of a foreign language.

Полишчук ЕВ. Към съпоставителния анализ на подбудителните изречения в българския, руския и английския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(6):10–15.
Резюме:

The main components forming the meaning of imperative utterances excerpted from Bulgarian, Russian and English texts are compared in the paper in order to find out to what extent the communicative imperative meaning of the sentences depends on the interaction of lexical, syntactic, contextual means and intonation. The paper analyses the range of structural and semantic similarities and differences between imperative sentences in Bulgarian, Russian and English.

Радева В. Семантична структура на десубстантивните глаголи в българския и немския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(1):18–23.
Резюме:

Some desubstantival verbs in Bulgarian and German are analysed by clarifying the types of motivational relations. In this way, various degrees of materializing the universal potentials of the word-formation systems in German and Bulgarian are contrasted. The concrete realization of the common tendencies for the semantic motivation of suffixal desubstantival forms is elaborated upon. The analysis of derivative desubstantival verbs is based on some common features in their structural-semantic classification where the common word-forming base, the common word-forming pattern and word-forming motivation are taken into consideration. The aim of the paper is by finding out the common meanings of the derivative verbs to demonstrate the possibilities afforded by contrastive studies in the domain of word-formation.

Русинов Р. Прилики и разлики в изграждането и развитието на съвременния книжовен български и украински език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(4):5–11.
Резюме:

There have been quite a lot of common regularities in the formation of the Bulgarian and the Ukrainian languages. They are both based on colloquial speech, although they have integrated a number of elements from previous literary traditions as well. For some time the formation processes took place throughout a period characterized by the lack of a common social, political, economic and cultural centre. The circumstances allowed for considerable variability in the norms. The creation of the written literary forms was given priority in both languages. Besides the common regularities in the formation and development of literary Bulgarian and literary Ukrainian each of the languages has its own specific features, conditioned by the environment in which the respective processes were at play.

Симеонов С. Закостенели именни падежни форми, функциониращи като наречия, в българския и полския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(3):33–39.
Резюме:

In Bulgarian and Polish some petrified noun case forms occur as adverbs, formed by semantic and formal change during the process of adverbialization of Prepositional Phrases and by semantic derivation (conversion) of nominal case forms. Singular forms of nouns in the Accusative, the Instrumental and the Locative cases prevail among the adverbialized forms. The contrastive analysis shows an almost total lack of dative adverbs in Bulgarian. The „definite/indefinite“ correlation of temporal adverbs is also an important typological feature in Bulgarian.

Стамболиева М. За някои безлични конструкции в българския и английския език. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(1):12–17.
Резюме:

The paper analyses some Bulgarian and English impersonal sentences of the type: Студено е (It is cold) and Студено ми е (I am cold). A distinction is drawn between the verb съм and be as copulative verbs and independent predicates. The view maintaining that similar impersonal sentences consist of two elements and have an existential verb is refuted in the paper. The structural differences made evident through contrasting the Bulgarian and English sentences are explained by a) differences in the semantic structure of the copulative verbs across the two languages; and b) the grater ‘flexibility’ of the English word.

Резюме:

The paper considers а unique phenomenon in French terminology: metaphorical phraseological terms. By giving corresponding equivalents and comparing them, some conclusions have been drawn as regards the functional equivalents of these French terms in German and Bulgarian, including the instances of either presence or absence of metaphor in the translation equivalents. By setting the proper place and role of imagery in the material under investigation, a preliminary classification of the French metaphorical terms has been attempted.

Холиолчев Х. Методи Лилов. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(3):98–101.
Резюме:
Хохел И. Антон Попович. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(4):127–128.
Резюме:
Шанова З. Адмиратив в болгарском языке и способы его передачи на русский язык. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(6):5–9.
Резюме:

The paper discusses the nature of the context types in which the admirative is usually used in Bulgarian, along with the translation paradigm of that modal category in Russian. The category under discussion possesses pronounced emotional characteristics in Bulgarian and has no formal grammatical equivalent in Russian.

Boba I. Constantine-Cyril, Moravia and Bulgaria in the Chronicle of the Priest of Dioclea. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1985;9(1):59–72.
Резюме:
Huntley D. Luke 24.11 and the Old Bulgarian Perfective Imperfect. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1985;9(2):122–123.
Резюме:
Резюме:
Thomson FJ. The Old Bulgarian Translation of the Homilies of Ephraem Syrus. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1985;9(1):124–130.
Резюме:
Večerka R. Tschechische Terminologie der ältesten slawischen Schriftsprache. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1985;9(1):102–103.
Резюме:
Резюме:
Резюме:
Резюме:
Резюме:
Резюме:
Минчев Г. Книжовен паметник и ритуален език. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1985;9(4):91–102.
Резюме:
Минчева А. Никодимово евангелие. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1985;9(4):30–44.
Резюме:
Резюме:
Пуцко В. О портретном изображении попа Добрейша. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1985;9(3):65–73.
Резюме:
Смирнов СВ. Петр Иванович Прейс. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1985;9(2):41–55.
Резюме:
Резюме:
Резюме:
Хоргоши Й. Съдбата на праславянските носови гласни. Palaeobulgarica / Старобългаристика. 1985;9(4):112–114.
Резюме:
Вечерка Р, Чейко М. Арнощ Лампрехт (1919– 1985). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(6):50–52.
Резюме:
Полянски К. Адам Хайнц. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(3):108–109.
Резюме:
Холиолчев Х. Методи Лилов. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(3):98–101.
Резюме:
Хохел И. Антон Попович. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(4):127–128.
Резюме:
Богданов Б. Библиография на трудовете на Георги Михайлов. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(3):92–94.
Резюме:
Бучуковска А. Библиография на трудовете на Текла Сугарева. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(6):43.
Резюме:
Данчева М. Библиография на трудовете на Борис Симеонов. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(5):107–115.
Резюме:
Кюлев И. Библиография на трудовете на Методи Лилов. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(3):101–108.
Резюме:
Милойкова Р. Съдържание на годишнина X (1985) на списание Съпоставително езикознание. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(6):70–75.
Резюме:
Милойкова Р. Съдържание на годишнина I–X (1976–1985) на списание Съпоставително езикознание. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(6):76–118.
Резюме:
Митова К. Годишен преглед на преводната продукция ’84. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(5):127.
Резюме:
Ненковска Р. Библиография на трудовете на Иван Дуриданов. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(3):110–128.
Резюме:
Хрусанова В. Съпоставително изследване на български с други езици. Библиография за 1984 година. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(6):53–69.
Резюме:
Хрусанова В. Български езиковедски дисертации (1983 година). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(5):128–130.
Резюме:
Балтова Ю. Първи международен симпозиум по съпоставително изучаване на славянското словообразуване. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(5):122–123.
Резюме:
Банова С. Юбилейна научна сесия в Института за чуждестранни студенти „Г. А. Насър“. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(4):126–127.
Резюме:
Вапорджиев В. Четвърта конференция по български език и литература. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(1):123–124.
Резюме:
Василева Р. Научна сесия на Дружеството на преподавателите по чужд език и литература в България. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(1):121–123.
Резюме:
Данчев А. Societas Linguistica Europaеa. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(2):121–123.
Резюме:
Данчев А. Петнадесети световен конгрес no ономастика. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(1):124–125.
Резюме:
Димитрова Л. Втора национална конференция с mеждународно участие Наукометрия и лингвистика на научен текст. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(2):126.
Резюме:
Димитрова С. Конференция по съпоставителна граматика на славянските езици в Познан. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(4):122–123.
Резюме:
Желязкова Т. Шеста научно-методическа конференция Съпоставително езикознание и чуждоезиково обучение. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(1):117–120.
Резюме:
Илиева-Балтова П. Седми световен конгрес по приложна лингвистика. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(5):123–126.
Резюме:
Карастойчева Ц. Първа национална конференция по социолингвистика. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(6):46–48.
Резюме:
Карастойчева Ц. Трета чехословашка конференция по проблемите на сленга и аргото. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(2):127–128.
Резюме:
Качала Я. Конференция по теоретичните въпроси на марксисткото езикознание. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(1):126–127.
Резюме:
Милойкова Р. Двадесет и втори летен семинар по български език и култура за чуждестранни българисти и слависти. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(1):116– 117.
Резюме:
Мишева А. Конференция на Международната комисия по фонетика и фонология при Международния комитет на славистите. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;Х(4):123–124.
Резюме:
Младенова О. Златна докторска диплома на Виенския университет за акад. Владимир Георгиев. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(1):128.
Резюме:
Недкова Р. Национална младежка школа Актуални проблеми на обучението и възпитанието на чуждестранните учащи. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(2):123–126.
Резюме:
Николаев Б. Втори колоквиум по български език с международно участие. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(1):115–116.
Резюме:
Резюме:
Периклиев В. COLING ’84. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(4):124–126.
Резюме:
Редакционна CL. Проблематика десятого международного съезда славистов (София, 1988 г.). Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(6):48–50.
Резюме:
Тренков К. Двадесет и девети ваканционен курс по полски език и култура. Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics. 1985;10(1):127–128.
Резюме:
Попов Г. Авторските подписи на Климент Охридски. Антени. 1985;49(777):16.
Публикация в съкратен вариант на доклада, изнесен на Четвъртия международен колоквиум по старобългаристика, София, август 1985
Резюме: