@book {Димова2000,
	title = {Увод в теорията на превода},
	year = {2000},
	pages = {122},
	publisher = {Университетско издателство {\quotedblbase}Епископ Константин Преславски{\textquotedblleft}},
	organization = {Университетско издателство {\quotedblbase}Епископ Константин Преславски{\textquotedblleft}},
	address = {Шумен},
	keywords = {Превод, теория},
	author = {Димова, Ана}
}
@book {Димова1995,
	title = {Импресионизъм и превод : Импресионистичният стил в австрийската литература и проблеми на превода},
	series = {Biblioteca Austriaca},
	year = {1995},
	note = {<p>Върху материал от прозата на Петер Алтенберг, Артур Шницлер, Йозеф Рот <span class="searchword">и</span> преводите им на български език</p>},
	pages = {287},
	publisher = {ПИК},
	organization = {ПИК},
	address = {Велико Търново},
	keywords = {Австрийска литература -- преводи на други езици, Превод, художествен -- теория},
	author = {Димова, Ана}
}
@article {Димова1983,
	title = {Модалните конструкции sein + zu + Infinitiv {\textendash} съм + за + nomen actionis},
	journal = {Съпоставително езикознание / Сопоставительное языкознание / Contrastive linguistics},
	volume = {8},
	year = {1983},
	pages = {35{\textendash}43},
	abstract = {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.},
	author = {Димова, Ана}
}
