Bulgarian to Swedish: negation moves with the clause, while verbs lose person endings
A subordinate Swedish clause places inte differently
Bulgarian commonly places не before a finite verb. Swedish inte cannot be placed by copying that source position mechanically: Swedish main and subordinate clauses have different word-order patterns. Identify whether the Bulgarian negative belongs to the main assertion or to a dependent clause before rebuilding the target.
The Institute for the Languages of Finland explains the standard subordinate pattern in which a sentence adverb such as inte comes before the finite verb. A negative clause introduced by att therefore needs its own arrangement. Translating a Bulgarian statement inside a report or expression of belief is not the same operation as translating that statement on its own.
The institute also documents limited main-clause order inside some subordinate clauses with a strongly asserted factual character, especially in informal language. This does not license placing inte anywhere. For clear formal output, use the standard subordinate pattern, and avoid mistaking every conversational exception for a rule that applies to all Bulgarian dependent clauses.
Swedish finite verbs do not repeat Bulgarian person and number
Bulgarian finite verbs indicate person and number. Modern Swedish finite verbs do not agree with their subject in that way, as its UD grammar describes. The same visible target verb form can therefore accompany different subjects without an agreement error. What matters is whether the correct subject remains expressed or recoverable in the Swedish construction.
A Bulgarian source can leave an independent pronoun unexpressed while the verb identifies the speaker. That does not mean Swedish can simply copy the omission and rely on an equivalent personal ending. Recover the source actor before assembling the Swedish clause; the target verb will not necessarily distinguish I from you or we through its form.
This is separate from adjective agreement. Swedish adjectives can agree with their noun in gender, number and definiteness even though the finite verb does not agree in person. Do not remove target adjective variation because the verb stayed unchanged, or demand a new verb ending because the Bulgarian subject changed from one person to several.
An infinitive and a copula each have construction-specific uses
Bulgarian uses finite да complements instead of an infinitive. Swedish has the marker att, but modal and aspectual verbs can combine with a bare infinitive. The UD reference gives måste, must, and kunde, could, among such verbs. An output without att after a suitable modal is not automatically missing a translation of Bulgarian да.
Preserve the relationship between the modal and the action: obligation and ability are different meanings. If the Bulgarian source identifies a second performer in the dependent clause, that information cannot be discarded merely to fit a shorter infinitive construction. The actor relationship determines whether the reduction is appropriate.
For nonverbal descriptions, Swedish vara means be, while existential clauses commonly use finnas. A Bulgarian clause identifying what something is and one saying that something exists or is available need different readings. Selecting the same familiar target copula for both may preserve a rough gloss while losing the practical distinction between describing an item and telling someone that an item is there.
Language references