The Syntax of Givenness Ivona Kucerová

In the same way that there can be two separate G-operators, there can be two domains
of G-movement. Thus, for example, there is no problem with having separate G-operators
and separate G-movement in a matrix and in an embedded clause, as can be seen in (63).
In this sentence, the given elements Petr and Marie are objects in two different clauses and
they G-move within their clause, resulting in two independent partitions between given and
new.
(63) a. Do you know anything about Petr and Marie?
b. Náhodou jsem slyšel, že Petrovi
accidentally Aux.1sg heard that Petr.Dat
Marii || zaměstnali v ABB.
Marie.Acc employed.1pl in ABB
|| říkala
told
nějaká
some
paní,
lady
že
that
‘I accidentally heard that some lady told Petr that Marie got employed in the
ABB.’
Similarly, in infinitival structures, some of the structurally higher elements can be given as
well, or they can undergo G-movement, as in (64).
(64) a. Do you know what Mary did with her famous boat?
b. Marie || se pokusila lod’ || prodat.
Marie REFL tried boat to-sell
‘Marie tried to sell the boat (but no one wanted to buy it).’
c. Marii || nařídil soud lod’ || prodat.
Marie.Dat ordered court.Nom boat.Acc sell
‘(You won’t believe it but) a court ordered Marie to sell the boat.’
We can iterate the insertion of the G-operator even further, as in (65). In this case, one
operator must be adjoined within the DP coordination (only one conjunct is given, not the
whole coordination) and another operator is adjoined within the VP (below boat).
(65) a. Do you know what Mary is planning to do with her broken boat?
b. Marie || a nějaký automechanik budou lod’ || v létě opravovat.
Marie and some car mechanic will boat in summer repair
‘Marie and some car mechanic will repair the boat in the summer.’
To summarize, we now have an informal way to characterize cases in which G-movement
is licensed and we have a semantic operator which allows us to mark more than one G-
element as presupposed. In the next section, I will develop a formal system which allows
us to compare structures with respect to Maximize presupposition in a more precise way.
Before we get to the next section notice that we have derived the size of a domain of
G-movement independently of head movement. The question is whether we still need the
restriction on head movement or not. Also, it is not clear whether we can independently
derive the fact that G-movement is very local.
It looks like the head movement restriction only doubles the locality restriction imposed
by the G-operator. Is this really true? Recall that the domain of G-movement varies in the
107