Talk:Bulgarian grammar

	This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Bulgaria Mid‑importance Bulgaria portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Bulgaria, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Bulgaria on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks. Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

I think the merger is a bad idea. This article should only contain some general information, and it's good as it is now (I'd even say it's already too big). More importantly, the article "Bulgarian grammar", just like the recently incorporated section on adverbs in "Bulgarian language" is nothing but a translation - by a very laborious enthusiast - of Borimir Kr'stev's "Gramatika za vsichki", published in Sofia, 1992. First of all, I suspect that violates copyright. Secondly, I think wikipedia should contain some intelligently summarized information and not entire grammars or handbooks. Thirdly, I don't think Borimir Kr'stevs grammar is that good, partly because it's intended for Bulgarians and neither for foreigners, nor for linguists. It includes many unnecessary details and much of the info isn't well summarized or is intended to teach Bulgarians basic grammar. Finally, that would only be satisfactory if also the other sections (phonetics etc.) were merged in the same way (as in the article on the Russian language).

A separate complete Bulgarian online grammar would be useful, but I guess its place would be in Wikibooks or somewhere else.

--85.187.203.123 21:58, 8 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Article clean-up

Please leave comments and/or discuss major removal of the article contents.--I already forgot 06:27, 23 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Clean up this mess please

Can someone fix this article? It's an absolute mess. It has:

• fragments in broken English
• unnecessary text in bold and italics
• confusing wording
• orginial reserach like "people often say"
• unnecessary IPA transcription mixed with romanization (in the description of the accusative Bulgarian words are transcribed in IPA, but in the description of the vocative they're just romanized? What for even?)
• weird and inconsistent text formatting

"these, however, are only declined when they refer to men" Do you mean "people"? Or is it used specifically when referring to men, as opposed to women? Why is it italics? aaaaaaa — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.147.36.55 (talk) 14:42, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Agreeing here. A passer-by might be tempted to point you in the direction of WP:SOFIXIT, but I don't see any point in trying to make improvements to the existing text, as what is needed here is a very thorough rewrite from scratch. – Uanfala (talk) 18:58, 2 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I'm a bit confused

Just wanting to ask, why is it said that bulgaria only uses 2 grammatical cases but have examples of bulgarian words using grammatical cases apart from the 2? Are the words not commonly spoken enough to be counted as a grammatical case? 01VIKI01 (talk) 18:26, 23 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agreement

Is the article really correct in stating that "A Bulgarian adjective agrees in gender, number and definiteness"? AFAIK, the plural forms do not decline for gender, and definiteness is only marked on one of the words (and therefore there is no agreement). The following sentence, which I found in a A Concise Bulgarian Grammar by John Leafgren seems to describe the reality better: "Bulgarian adjectives agree with the nouns they modify in number (singular vs. plural) and, in the singular, also in gender (masculine vs. feminine vs. neuter)." I am not being certain enough to make the change myself, but I invite anyone actually speaking Bulgarian to do so if they agree. Thank you. Blahma (talk) 12:17, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]