@book {Андрейчин2006, title = {Български тълковен речник}, year = {2006}, publisher = {Наука и изкуство}, organization = {Наука и изкуство}, edition = {4}, address = {София}, author = {Андрейчин, Любомир and Георгиев, Любен and Илчев, Стефан and Костов, Никола and Леков, Иван and Стойков, Стойко and Тодоров, Цветан}, editor = {Попов, Димитър} } @book {Андрейчин1993, title = {Български тълковен речник}, year = {1993}, note = {

Виж и [ibib]Андрейчин2006[/ibib]

}, pages = {1078}, publisher = {БАН}, organization = {БАН}, address = {София}, author = {Андрейчин, Любомир and Георгиев, Л and Илчев, Стефан and Костов, Н. and Леков, Иван and Стойков, Стойко and Тодоров, Цветан} } @book {Леков1992, title = {Родолюбивий благоразумний народе българский : Възрожденски предговори : 1806 - 1865}, volume = {Книга първа}, year = {1992}, publisher = {Университетско издателство "Св. Климент Охридски"}, organization = {Университетско издателство "Св. Климент Охридски"}, address = {София}, author = {Леков, Дочо} } @book {Леков1982, title = {Литература. Общество. Култура}, year = {1982}, publisher = {Народна просвета}, organization = {Народна просвета}, address = {София}, author = {Леков, Дочо} } @article {Леков1978, title = {Към по-приемлива анализа и постройка на опитите за съпоставителни и типологични изследвания в славянското езикознание}, journal = {Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics}, volume = {3}, year = {1978}, pages = {3{\textendash}13}, abstract = {

Through distribution and stratification, the author aims at a more accurate characterization of the various methods (contrastive and typological in particular) used in Slavonic language studies. The study has been prompted by the existing inconsistency in their formulation which is, to a certain extent, understandable. The starting point is the continuity and mutual complementation of all methods of study used so far. The relative difference between these methods stems from their attitude towards the presumed parent language prototype of the phenomena which is valid only for the comparative method. The Slavonic languages, being genealogically related, display a number of structures (zones and objects) which can be studied not only comparatively but also contrastively and typologically. Thus, for example, a number of contrastive studies of languages in contact during the post- Proto-Slavonic period, such as the Byelorussian and Russian akan{\textquoteright}e, the Polish mazurzenie etc. differ from the typological interpretation of phenomena such as the system of obligatory՛ open syllables in the Proto-Slavonic period, the appearance of the genus virile in some Slavonic languages, the Bulgarian citational forms, etc. A potential relationship and interdependence are assumed to exist between descriptive, comparative and historical linguistics. The reliability of the contrastive method is enhanced by соmparison, while it sometimes loses validity if the historical principle is neglected. The typological method is becoming increasingly reliable since it applies to the essential parameters and universal categories of language and facilitates its dynamic characterology.

}, keywords = {Contrastive Studies, съпоставителни изследвания}, author = {Леков, Иван} } @inbook {Леков1977, title = {Система от основни закономерности в характерологията на славянските езици}, booktitle = {Закономерности на развитието на славянските езици}, year = {1977}, pages = {7 {\textendash} 36}, publisher = {БАН}, organization = {БАН}, address = {София}, author = {Леков, Иван}, editor = {Леков, Иван} } @article {Леков1976, title = {Съпоставителният анализ на белоруския и българския език в рамките на родствените отношения между двата езика}, journal = {Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics}, volume = {1}, year = {1976}, pages = {149{\textendash}160}, abstract = {

Contrastive analysis is becoming increasingly popular, although it has been used in the past, especially in combination with the comparative-historical approach. Byelorussian and Bulgarian have received little attention in this respect. The article raises some general problems of the comparison between the two genetically related languages. Byelorussian is a typical inflecting North Slavic language while Bulgarian is predominantly analytical. The first has been subject to bilingual contacts and convergence to the east and west, while the second, to multilingual Balkan influences. For the first, phonetic contact and syntactic separation have been more important, versus Bulgarian grammatical isolation. The differentiation of the two languages is largely based on socio-linguistic factors. Some tentative forecasts for future developments are also offered.

}, keywords = {Contrastive Studies, съпоставителни изследвания}, author = {Леков, Иван} } @article {Леков1976a, title = {Явна и {\quotedblbase}скрита{\textquotedblleft} глаголна съпоставителна проблематика на полския и българския език}, journal = {Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics}, volume = {1}, year = {1976}, pages = {65{\textendash}82}, abstract = {

Explicit{\textquotedblleft} and {\quotedblbase}implicit{\textquotedblleft} problems in the study of the verb in Polish and Bulgarian are the topic of the present article. Some of the general conclusions reached are as follows. The comparative development of the two genetically related languages is one of differentiation. The growing distance is due to developments of both conjugation and declension. Two types of factors are at work, sociolinguistic and structural-linguistic. In the sphere of the verb Polish shows a combination of inflection, agglutination and analyticity. There are hardly any traces of agglutination in Bulgarian. New hybrid, contextually determined forms, based on verbal components, is appearing in Polish as a result of agglutination.

}, keywords = {Contrastive Studies, съпоставителни изследвания}, author = {Леков, Иван} } @book {Леков1941, title = {Характеристика на общите черти в български и източнославянски}, year = {1941}, publisher = {Държавна печатница}, organization = {Държавна печатница}, address = {София}, author = {Леков, Иван} }