The Syntax of Givenness Ivona Kucerová

(51) Reference set for Maximize Presupposition evaluation
For the purposes of Maximize Presupposition, the reference set, toward which
Maximize presupposition is evaluated, consists of all derivations
a. that are based on the same numeration and free insertion of a G-operator, and
b. that make the same assertion.
I assume that the G-operator is not part of the numeration but it is a syncategoramatic operator
which the semantic module can introduce without violating inclusiveness (for example,
Chomsky (2000)). A crucial part of the proposal is that the semantic module has the capacity
to license an otherwise illicit structure but only if there is no other way to achieve the
desired interpretation (see also Fox (2000)). In our case, the illicit operation under discussion
is G-movement. We have derived the fact that G-movement is allowed only if it affects
the semantic interpretation. Now we can define the relevant condition more precisely.
(52) Economy condition on G-movement:
The only structure that is allowed is the structure that has the smallest number of
G-movements and leads to the relevant interpretation (i.e., assertion and presupposition).
The new condition on G-movement has several welcome consequences. First of all, we
no longer need to distinguish between movement of a head for givenness and movement
of a head which facilitates G-movement. Under the current definition, the only thing that
matters is whether the resulting structure allows insertion of a G-operator in a position that
would not be available otherwise. Whether the movement affects a new or a given element
is irrelevant. To see this, consider the following example and its derivation.
(53) a. What about Petr?
b. Petra || vítá Marie.
Petr.Acc welcomes Marie.Nom
‘Marie welcomes Petr.’
Assuming that a T projection does not need to be inserted in the present tense, 14 the derivation
proceeds as in (54). First, the given object moves over the verb, as in (54-a). Then
the verb moves to v. Now the object needs to move again, (54-b). Notice that it is not
possible to mark the object by a G-operator within VP: since VP is not of an atomic type,
the operator would necessarily affect structurally higher material (the verb and the subject;
the elements in the scope of a G-operator are marked by a box). After the object moves to
vP, the subject is merged, (54-c). In principle the derivation might be able to stop here. The
problem is that, in this configuration, there is no position into which a G-operator could be
inserted without marking the subject as given as well (which would lead to Presupposition
failure). Thus, there is no choice other than to continue the derivation: the verb moves to
T, the object moves to Spec,TP and a G-operator can finally be inserted in a position which
satisfies Maximize presupposition without leading to Presupposition failure, (54-d).
14 I assume a grammar in which a functional projection is projected only if it is associated with overt
material or if it is selected by a higher head. Cf. for example Wurmbrand (2006, To appear).
102