Full-text resources of CEJSH and other databases are now available in the new Library of Science.
Visit https://bibliotekanauki.pl

Results found: 2

first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last

Search results

Search:
in the keywords:  tip
help Sort By:

help Limit search:
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
EN
Against the background of crosslinguistic research on the grammaticalization of type nouns in Germanic and Romance languages, this article examines nominal constructions with the Russian rod (‘genus’, ‘genre’, ‘kind’) and tip (‘type’). The study proposes a comprehensive typology of constructions based on their functional-structural properties and semantic characteristics. Generalization of meaning, decrease in semantic substance and compositionality, pragmaticalization and lexicalization concern mainly constructions with rod. Rod is argued to be overall more advanced on the path of desemanticization, conceivably because tip is a relatively recent borrowing and features a more specific meaning. While tip retains its taxonomic meaning in most contexts, constructions with rod are shown to fulfil more diverse functions and to be used predominantly for the purposes of hedging, textual cohesion (anaphoric reference) and indication of variety and quantification.
EN
The subject of the opinion is the Supreme Court ruling of 13.09.2018, which provides for the legal qualification of a tip – based on the Act on Income Tax from Natural Persons and the Act on the Social Insurance System. The ruling cannot be considered correct because the Supreme Court formulated a thesis on the sources of tax and contributions financing without referring to the regulations, confining itself to the intentions of the "tip provider" as a key factor influencing the rights and obligations of the payee.
PL
Przedmiotem glosy jest wyrok Sądu Najwyższego z 13.09.2018 r., w którym dokonano kwalifikacji prawnej napiwku - na płaszczyźnie ustawy o podatku dochodowym od osób fizycznych i ustawy o systemie ubezpieczeń społecznych. Orzeczenie nie może być uznane za prawidłowe, ponieważ Sąd Najwyższy sformułował tezę o źródłach finansowania podatku i składek bez odwołania się do przepisów, poprzestając na intencjach „napiwkodawcy” jako kluczowym czynniku kształtującym prawa i obowiązki płatnika.
first rewind previous Page / 1 next fast forward last
JavaScript is turned off in your web browser. Turn it on to take full advantage of this site, then refresh the page.