00715nas a2200121   4500008004100000245016200041210012600203300001400329490000700343520015600350100003100506856005600537       1990                        eng d00aФункционални еквиваленти на българското сегашно време при превода му на френски език0 aФункционални еквиваленти на българското сегашно време при превод  a218–2220 v153 aThe wide variety of French translation correspondences of the Bulgarian present tense includes not only the basic indicative tenses but other moods too1 aМихов, Николай  uhttp://www.scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/mihov199001311nas a2200121   4500008004100000245020700041210012800248300001400376490001000390520070200400100003101102856005601133       1989                        eng d00aСемантично-синтактична характеристика на френските подчинени темпорални изречения с футурална съотнесеност0 aСемантичносинтактична характеристика на френските подчинени темп  a108–1150 vХІV3 aOn the basis of the independent binary opposition between subordinate tensed clauses with a semantic-morphological future reference, in which the meaning of futurity is expressed by future tenses, on the one hand, and the subordinate tensed clauses with only a semantic future reference conveyed by present tense verb forms, on the other hand, an analysis is made of the basic meanings of the most typical subordinating conjunctions (quand, lorsque, tant que, pendant que) and mostly of the alternation of verb tenses and moods on a comparative basis with Bulgarian. The great variety of forms in French is shown in contrast to their low variability in Bulgarian subordinate tense predicate units.1 aМихов, Николай  uhttp://www.scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/mihov198900409nas a2200133   4500008004100000245005100041210005100092300000800143490000700151653001100158653001900169100003100188856005600219       1988                        eng d00aЛетен езиков курс в Париж0 aЛетен езиков курс в Париж  a1270 v1310aEvents10aХроника1 aМихов, Николай  uhttp://www.scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/mihov198801182nas a2200121   4500008004100000245015100041210012600192300001100318490000700329520063700336100003100973856005601004       1987                        eng d00aДезактуализиращата същност на плусквамперфекта във френския и българския език0 aДезактуализиращата същност на плусквамперфекта във френския и бъ  a9–190 v123 aThe paper deals with some characteristics of the French plus-que-parfait in contrast with Bulgarian. After analysing the morphological similarities and differences of the corresponding tenses in the contrasted languages, the author dwells on a specific, though limited in use, function of the plus-que-parfait to set up a secondary narrative line. Its tendency to merge with the aorist is considered as closely related to and dependent on the merger of the aorist and passé composé observed in the spoken language. The translation problems arising from the incongruence of the contrasted language systems have also been discussed.1 aМихов, Николай  uhttp://www.scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/mihov198701478nas a2200121   4500008004100000245017900041210012500220300001200345490000600357520090600363100003101269856005601300       1983                        eng d00aБъдеще предварително време като елемент от темпоралната система на френския и българския език0 aБъдеще предварително време като елемент от темпоралната система   a35–510 v83 aThe 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.1 aМихов, Николай  uhttp://www.scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/mihov198301669nas a2200121   4500008004100000245015200041210012600193300001200319490000600331520112200337100003101459856005701490       1983                        eng d00aОбобщително-актуализиращата същност на перфекта във френския и българския език0 aОбобщителноактуализиращата същност на перфекта във френския и бъ  a33–410 v83 aThe 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.1 aМихов, Николай  uhttp://www.scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/mihov1983a01229nas a2200121   4500008004100000245009700041210009500138300001200233490000600245520076900251100003101020856005601051       1980                        eng d00aСъществителните със суфикс -ция в българския език.0 aСъществителните със суфикс ция в българския език  a20–290 vV3 aThe paper considers the characteristic features of the adaptation process which occurs in Bulgarian in borrowing French and international nouns with the suffix -tiоn. An important stage in this respect is the substitution of the foreign suffix by the Bulgarian morpheme -иране and the formation, as a result of it, of two classes of lexemes which have the same root but different suffixes, and are opposed by their relation to the expression of verbal action. In some words ending in -tiоn, the verbal action is insufficiently expressed; in other nouns it is completely lacking. Unlike them, substantives with the deverbative suffix -иране always express a high degree of verbal action; therefore, the class they form may be termed secondary or dynamic1 aМихов, Николай  uhttp://www.scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/mihov198000772nas a2200121   4500008004100000245018800041210012600229300001200355490000600367520019000373100003100563856005600594       1979                        eng d00aБългарското модално минало несвършено време и неговите функционални еквиваленти във френския език0 aБългарското модално минало несвършено време и неговите функциона  a30–410 v43 aThe varying semantic and syntactic characteristics of the Bulgarian imperfect in various predicative units have been used to distinguish two basic types: the modal and temporal variants1 aМихов, Николай  uhttp://www.scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/mihov197900636nas a2200121   4500008004100000245019300041210012100234300001400355490000900369520004900378100003100427856005600458       1977                        eng d00aГраматическата категория „време“ във френски и български език {(La catégorie grammaticale de temps en fran{\c c}ais et en bulgare)}0 aГраматическата категория време във френски и български език La c  a104–1430 vІІ3 aLa comparaison englobe deux plans principaux1 aМихов, Николай  uhttp://www.scripta-bulgarica.eu/bg/biblio/mihov1977