The Syntax of Givenness Ivona Kucerová

derivations are syntactically well-formed. Such a condition is not strictly speaking a part of
the evaluation component, but it is a necessary precondition for a derivation to be considered
for evaluation. The reason why the constraint belongs here, however, is that licensing
of G-movement happens only at the interface.
(72) SYNTAX:
the reference set may contain only grammatically well-formed structures
Then we need to guarantee that the relevant presupposition would be maximized. This
requirement consists of the interaction of two separate requirements: (i) mark everything
given as presupposed (make sure that each given element would give rise to the desired
presupposition), and (ii) avoid marking new elements as presupposed (avoid Presupposition
failure). I will call this constraint INTERPRETATION.
(73) INTERPRETATION:
a. a given element must be marked as presupposed (either lexically or by a G-
operator) [≈ Maximize Presupposition]
b. a new element cannot be marked as presupposed [≈ Presupposition Failure]
We are now in a position to evaluate the system in place and see whether it can account
for the facts we have considered so far. Let’s start with a simple case of a ditransitive
construction in which everything is given except for the indirect object. Since in Czech
a direct object follows an indirect object, it is enough if the direct object moves above
the indirect object. The desired interpretation is given in (74). The boxes correspond
to elements that we want to be interpreted as given; the structure is presented in the basic
Czech word order. The relevant reference set is given in (75). I list here and in the following
examples only a few candidates that are most relevant for the evaluation. The first candidate
is a derivation in which no G-movement takes place and no G-operator is inserted, (75-a).
The second candidate is a derivation with a G-operator inserted above the indirect object but
with no G-movement, (75-b). The third candidate is a derivation with local G-movement of
the indirect object and a G-operator adjoined immediately below the moved object, (75-c).
The last candidate differs from the previous candidate in that G-movement is not local, but
instead the movement is cyclic and crosses several given elements, (75-d).
(74) Desired interpretation:
Peter gave to-Mary book .
‘Peter gave the book to Mary.’
(75) Reference set of (74):
a. No G-operator and no movement:
Peter gave to-Mary book
b. G-operator and no movement:
Peter gave G to-Mary book
theoretic system. I am using the notion of constraints as a technical tool for explicit evaluation of derivations.
In the end of the day we will see that for a structure to be felicitous in the relevant context no constraint may
be violated.
110