Suchergebnisse

ParlaMint is a multilingual set of comparable corpora containing parliamentary debates mostly starting in 2015 and extending to mid-2020, with each corpus being about 20 million words in size. The sessions in the corpora are marked as belonging to the COVID-19 period (after October 2019), or being "reference" (before that date). The corpora have extensive metadata, including aspects of the parliament; the speakers (name, gender, MP status, party affiliation, party coalition/opposition); are structured into time-stamped terms, sessions and meetings; with speeches being marked by the speaker and their role (e.g. chair, regular speaker). The speeches also contain marked-up transcriber comments, such as gaps in the transcription, interruptions, applause, etc. Note that some corpora have further information, e.g. the year of birth of the speakers, links to their Wikipedia articles, their membership in various committees, etc. The corpora are encoded according to the Parla-CLARIN TEI recommendation (https://clarin-eric.github.io/parla-clarin/), but have been validated against the compatible, but much stricter ParlaMint schemas. This entry contains the linguistically marked-up version of the corpus, while the text version is available at http://hdl.handle.net/11356/1388. The ParlaMint.ana linguistic annotation includes tokenization, sentence segmentation, lemmatisation, Universal Dependencies part-of-speech, morphological features, and syntactic dependencies, and the 4-class CoNLL-2003 named entities. Some corpora also have further linguistic annotations, such as PoS tagging or named entities according to language-specific schemes, with their corpus TEI headers giving further details on the annotation vocabularies and tools. The compressed files include the ParlaMint.ana XML TEI-encoded linguistically annotated corpus; the derived corpus in CoNLL-U with TSV speech metadata; and the vertical files (with registry file), suitable for use with CQP-based concordancers, such as CWB, noSketch Engine or KonText. Also included is the 2.0 release of the data and scripts available at the GitHub repository of the ParlaMint project.

ParlaMint 2.1 is a multilingual set of 17 comparable corpora containing parliamentary debates mostly starting in 2015 and extending to mid-2020, with each corpus being about 20 million words in size. The sessions in the corpora are marked as belonging to the COVID-19 period (from November 1st 2019), or being "reference" (before that date). The corpora have extensive metadata, including aspects of the parliament; the speakers (name, gender, MP status, party affiliation, party coalition/opposition); are structured into time-stamped terms, sessions and meetings; with speeches being marked by the speaker and their role (e.g. chair, regular speaker). The speeches also contain marked-up transcriber comments, such as gaps in the transcription, interruptions, applause, etc. Note that some corpora have further information, e.g. the year of birth of the speakers, links to their Wikipedia articles, their membership in various committees, etc. The corpora are encoded according to the Parla-CLARIN TEI recommendation (https://clarin-eric.github.io/parla-clarin/), but have been validated against the compatible, but much stricter ParlaMint schemas. This entry contains the linguistically marked-up version of the corpus, while the text version is available at http://hdl.handle.net/11356/1432. The ParlaMint.ana linguistic annotation includes tokenization, sentence segmentation, lemmatisation, Universal Dependencies part-of-speech, morphological features, and syntactic dependencies, and the 4-class CoNLL-2003 named entities. Some corpora also have further linguistic annotations, such as PoS tagging or named entities according to language-specific schemes, with their corpus TEI headers giving further details on the annotation vocabularies and tools. The compressed files include the ParlaMint.ana XML TEI-encoded linguistically annotated corpus; the derived corpus in CoNLL-U with TSV speech metadata; and the vertical files (with registry file), suitable for use with CQP-based concordancers, such as CWB, noSketch Engine or KonText. Also included is the 2.1 release of the data and scripts available at the GitHub repository of the ParlaMint project. As opposed to the previous version 2.0, this version corrects some errors in various corpora and adds the information on upper / lower house for bicameral parliaments. The vertical files have also been changed to make them easier to use in the concordancers.

ParlaMint is a multilingual set of comparable corpora containing parliamentary debates mostly starting in 2015 and extending to mid-2020, with each corpus being about 20 million words in size. The sessions in the corpora are marked as belonging to the COVID-19 period (after October 2019), or being "reference" (before that date). The corpora have extensive metadata, including aspects of the parliament; the speakers (name, gender, MP status, party affiliation, party coalition/opposition); are structured into time-stamped terms, sessions and meetings; with speeches being marked by the speaker and their role (e.g. chair, regular speaker). The speeches also contain marked-up transcriber comments, such as gaps in the transcription, interruptions, applause, etc. Note that some corpora have further information, e.g. the year of birth of the speakers, links to their Wikipedia articles, their membership in various committees, etc. The corpora are encoded according to the Parla-CLARIN TEI recommendation (https://clarin-eric.github.io/parla-clarin/), but have been validated against the compatible, but much stricter ParlaMint schemas. This entry contains the ParlaMint TEI-encoded corpora with the derived plain text version of the corpus along with TSV metadata on the speeches. Also included is the 2.0 release of the data and scripts available at the GitHub repository of the ParlaMint project. Note that there also exists the linguistically marked-up version of the corpus, which is available at http://hdl.handle.net/11356/1405.

ParlaMint 2.1 is a multilingual set of 17 comparable corpora containing parliamentary debates mostly starting in 2015 and extending to mid-2020, with each corpus being about 20 million words in size. The sessions in the corpora are marked as belonging to the COVID-19 period (after November 1st 2019), or being "reference" (before that date). The corpora have extensive metadata, including aspects of the parliament; the speakers (name, gender, MP status, party affiliation, party coalition/opposition); are structured into time-stamped terms, sessions and meetings; with speeches being marked by the speaker and their role (e.g. chair, regular speaker). The speeches also contain marked-up transcriber comments, such as gaps in the transcription, interruptions, applause, etc. Note that some corpora have further information, e.g. the year of birth of the speakers, links to their Wikipedia articles, their membership in various committees, etc. The corpora are encoded according to the Parla-CLARIN TEI recommendation (https://clarin-eric.github.io/parla-clarin/), but have been validated against the compatible, but much stricter ParlaMint schemas. This entry contains the ParlaMint TEI-encoded corpora with the derived plain text version of the corpus along with TSV metadata on the speeches. Also included is the 2.0 release of the data and scripts available at the GitHub repository of the ParlaMint project. Note that there also exists the linguistically marked-up version of the corpus, which is available at http://hdl.handle.net/11356/1431.

This is a comprehensive systematic comment of the Administrative Code with a thorough analysis of the case law. Tracked is the applying of the enacted in 2006 new Code of Administrative Procedure. There are solutions to problems related to the applicability of the law in the administrative and the judicial proceedings. Shown is the representative law of the Supreme Administrative Court, with a focus on the innovations, introduced by the new Act, which cause difficulties in its enforcement. There are also older cases by the Supreme Administrative Court, which have retained power and are applicable under the new conditions.

Introduction: Disasters caused by natural phenomena or human activity often occur in Bulgaria. Social and economic consequences of these have a significant adverse effect on its development and economic growth. Given the complexity and scope of disaster situations, it is necessary to unite the efforts of all responsible institutions and actively involve them in activities to limit human, social, economic and natural damage and losses.Aim: To study the current state of the system for protection of the population in emergency situations in Bulgaria.Materials and methods: Descriptive analysis of scientific publications and normative documents concerning the management, organization and mechanisms for protection of the population in emergency situations in Bulgaria have been used.Results: Results of the analysis of key regulatory documents in Bulgaria on the management and organization of the population protection in disaster situations are presented. The main structures and institutions in the Republic of Bulgaria, responsible and related to the protection of the population in disaster situations are indicated.Conclusion: The system of protection of the population in emergency situations in Bulgaria is strictly regulated and synchronized with the European Union policy in this respect. The state policy for protection of the population together with the developed National Programs of the Council of Ministers outline the main directions for the establishment of an effective, resourceful and technically secure national system for prevention, protection and action in disaster situations.

In the implementation of two EU co-financed 5-year programs in the period 2009-2020, it was confirmed that oral vaccination against rabies with vaccine baits was successful in eliminating the virus in terrestrial wildlife, both in foxes, jackals and raccoon dogs. In most EU countries, It has been confirmed that oral vaccination against rabies using vaccine baits containing live attenuated virus has been successful in reducing and eliminating cases of rabies the disease has already been successfully eradicated, but in some countries further efforts are needed, especially in areas near the EU's eastern borders. The purpose of this opinion is to assess the need for Bulgaria to continue the implementation of a long-term program for oral vaccination of foxes and wild canids against rabies within the next period of implementation of the national Program for prevention, surveillance, control and eradication of rabies in Bulgaria in 2022-2024. This national program is part of the European Union's (EU) policy on the eradication of rabies in wild animals. To this end, the European Commission (EC) has co-financed fox vaccination programs for many years to eliminate the risk of spreading the rabies virus to humans and other domestic animals. The results obtained so far unequivocally show that oral vaccination of foxes in Bulgaria has a very good effect, and that the medium-term goal of reducing rabies cases has been achieved. However, the rabies virus is still circulating through its sylvatic (forest) cycle in Eastern Europe and Bulgaria's neighboring and near far way countries - Russia, Ukraine, Romania, Bosnia and Herzegovina and Anatolian Turkey. To this end, it is necessary to ensure, through EU co-financed programs, a longer-term strategy, persistence and continuity of vaccination campaigns in the application of oral fox vaccination and unconditional cross-border cooperation with the Balkan countries and their competent veterinary services to achieve the ultimate goal - eradication of rabies from the territory of ...

The Bulgarian-English parallel corpus MaCoCu-bg-en 1.0 was built by crawling the ".bg" and ".бг" internet top-level domains in 2021, extending the crawl dynamically to other domains as well. All the crawling process was carried out by the MaCoCu crawler (https://github.com/macocu/MaCoCu-crawler). Websites containing documents in both target languages were identified and processed using the tool Bitextor (https://github.com/bitextor/bitextor). Considerable efforts were devoted into cleaning the extracted text to provide a high-quality parallel corpus. This was achieved by removing boilerplate and near-duplicated paragraphs and documents that are not in one of the targeted languages. Document and segment alignment as implemented in Bitextor were carried out, and BicleanerAI (https://github.com/bitextor/bicleaner-ai) and Bifixer (https://github.com/bitextor/bifixer) were used for fixing, cleaning, and deduplicating the final version of the corpus. While the TXT format consists solely of pairs of source and target segments (one or several sentences), each segment pair in the TMX format is accompanied by the following metadata: - source and target document URL; - quality score as provided by the tool BicleanerAI; - translation direction identification: the source segment in each segment pair was identified by using a probabilistic model; - personal information identification ("biroamer-entities"): segments containing personal information are flagged, so final users of the corpus can decide whether to use these segments; - language variants: the language variant of English (British or American) was identified for every segment pair on document and domain level. Notice and take down: Should you consider that our data contains material that is owned by you and should therefore not be reproduced here, please: (1) Clearly identify yourself, with detailed contact data such as an address, telephone number or email address at which you can be contacted. (2) Clearly identify the copyrighted work claimed to be infringed. (3) Clearly identify the material that is claimed to be infringing and information reasonably sufficient in order to allow us to locate the material. (4) Please write to the contact person for this resource whose email is available in the full item record. We will comply with legitimate requests by removing the affected sources from the next release of the corpus. This action has received funding from the European Union's Connecting Europe Facility 2014-2020 - CEF Telecom, under Grant Agreement No. INEA/CEF/ICT/A2020/2278341. This communication reflects only the author's view. The Agency is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information it contains.

When something or someone is being declared "the best of everything possible" this a priori and a posteriori wrong. This is not useful for that "something" or that "someone" because their natural competitors do not share that thought and they do not sleep. Nobody can stop the development, regardless of the direction, in some or other assessment criteria. Long ago the political democracy has been declared such a perfect "something". But credibility in it begins to fall exactly where it has taken strong roots. For opponents, this is a thing that has been known long ago. Now there are empirically on the subject, but there are no convincing explanations of the data. The article offers a possible interpretation of that crisis of confidence in democracy. Specific tools developed by author and called by him Scanner, were used for the analysis. The conclusions are: democratization as a process is supported by its actual effectivity, and it is cyclical; there are many different democratic models competing with each other; nowhere ever has existed uninterrupted and one-way democratic development; democratic content is most often helpless a form countering undemocratic aggression outside. The text is not a requiem for democracy, but an attempt to breathe new life into the political process and to understand the emerging new phenomena in the world understood in today's mainstream as a subversion of modernity – for example in USA (Trump (UK (Brexit (China (Xi Jinping (Russia (Putin (Philippines (DuTerte (South Africa (Zuma (Turkey (Erdogan (and many other places in the 21st century.

The article attempts to reconstruct some of the political stakes in the conceptual and methodological debates among two groups of literary critics during the 1960ies and the 1970ies in Bulgaria: the structuralists and their opponents, the so-called "Imperssionist critics". This debate seems to be a pertinent context for addressing the emergence of poststructuralism since it was the intellectual ferment, in which Julia Kristeva formed her conceptual background, before later becoming among the first poststructuralist critics of structuralism in France. Before, emigrating, Kristeva was part of the group of the "impressionist critics", who were developing ways of resisting official Marxist doctrine while retaining claims for Marxists legitimacy. They were very critical of the structuralists, who also were attempting to gain legitimacy, though by aligning with Marxism as a materialist science, a stance the "impressionists" viewed as contributing to alienation. ; Статья пытается восстановить поли- тический залог в концептуальных и методологических дискуссиях между двумя группами литературо- ведов в 1960-х и 1970-х годах в Болга- рии – между структуралистами и их противниками, так называемыми «импрессионистскими критика- ми». Эта дискуссия, по-видимому, является важным контекстом воз- никновения постструктурализма, поскольку она представляет собой интеллектуальную среду, в кото- рой Юлия Кристева первоначально сформировала свои идеи, перед тем как впоследствии стала одним из первых критиков структурализма во Франции. До эмиграции Кристева является членом группы импрес- сионистских критиков, которые пытаются разработать стратегии противостояния официальной марк- систской доктрине, не отказываясь от поиска марксистской легитим- ности. Они критикуют структура- листов, которые также стремятся к легитимности, но основываясь на настойчивости марксизма как материалистической науки – пози- ция, в которой «импрессионистские критики» видят фактор, способству- ющий отчуждению.

Informal patient payments are deeply rooted in Central and Eastern European countries. Despite the socio-political changes in the health care sectors after 1990s and the subsequent health care reforms, informal payments for health care services continue to serve patients` and physicians` interests. These payments also fill gaps in health care funding in this European region. Nevertheless, unofficial payments are not a desirable payment channel. They lack transparency and distort the efficiency and equity in health care provision. Still, the successful elimination of these payments will depend on the public attitude towards these payments. This study aims to compare public attitudes towards informal patient payments and payment experience in six Central and Eastern European: Bulgaria, Hungary, Lithuania, Poland, Romania, and Ukraine. The data have been collected in 2010 in nation-wide representative surveys using an identical standardized question- naire administrated via face-to-face interviews. We have collected about 1000 questionnaires in each country. The results show that a major group of respondents in each country expresses a negative attitude towards both informal cash payments and in-kind gifts. 208, 187, and 174 respondents paid informally for out-patient service in Ukraine, Romania, and Hungary respectively. We also analyse the relation between public attitudes and respondents` past experience with informal payments, e.g. whether they have paid informally payment for out-patient service used last year. In Bulgaria and Poland, negative attitude is mostly observed among those who have not paid informally. The existence of positive and indifferent attitudes towards informal pay- ments as reported in our study, indicates a challenge for policy makers in Central and Eastern European countries. The acceptance of government initiatives aimed at the elimination of informal payments will largely depend on the governments` ability to create a social resistance towards these payments.