The Syntax of Givenness Ivona KucerovÃ¡

More documents

Recommendations

Info

support in favor of the assumption that G-movement is dependent on head movement. 1.4 The boundedness of G-movement In this section, I will explore the further predictions and consequences of restricting G- movement by head movement, namely, differences in locality restrictions on G-movement that depend on the movement properties of the relevant facilitating head. First of all, since head movement is clause bounded, we expect G-movement to be clause bounded as well. This is indeed correct. As we can see in the following examples, given elements can move only to the edge of their own embedded clause, even if the matrix clause introduces only new information. (37) For a long time I didn’t know what was going on with Mary. a. Ale pak mi bývalá spolužačka řekla, že Marie si vzala Petra. but then me former classmate told that Marie.Nom REFL took Petr.Acc ‘But then a former classmate of mine told me that Marie got married to Petr.’ b. Ale pak mi bývalá spolužačka řekla, že Marii potkalo velké but then me former classmate told that Marie.Acc met big štěstí. happiness ‘But then a former classmate of mine told me that Marie got extremely lucky. (She won a lottery.)’ c. #Marii mi bývalá spolužačka řekla, že potkalo velké štěstí. Marie.Acc me former classmate told that met big happiness In this respect G-movement differs from both wh-movement and contrastive focus movement, which are not clause bound, as can be seen in (38) and (39). (38) Koho, že jsi říkala, že si Marie whom.Acc that Aux-you said that REFL Marie.Nom ‘Whom did you say Marie is going to Mary?’ bude will brát? take (39) Pavla, jsem ti říkala, si bude brát Marie, ne Lucie. Pavel.Acc Aux-I you.Dat said REFL will take Marie.Nom not Lucie.Nom ‘I’ve (already) told you that it is Pavel who is going to marry Marie not Lucie.’ If G-movement were only restricted to clause boundaries, one might come up with another explanation. For example, one could argue that this follows from the fact that G-movement is A-movement (see appendix A for details)sec:AMovement. If this were the right explanation, we would not expect further locality restrictions. In contrast, if G-movement is restricted by head movement, we predict that G-movement is also not possible out of infinitival domains because the infinitive head cannot move out of the domain either. The latter prediction is borne out, as can be seen in (40). The relevant verbal head is marked by a box. 26
(40) What happened to the antique chair you got many years ago from Mary? a. Můj bývalý partner se pokusil tu židli my former partner REFL tried that chair ‘My ex-partner tried to burn the chair.’ b. Můj bývalý partner chtěl tu židli spálit . my former partner wanted that chair burn.Inf ‘My ex-partner wanted to burn the chair.’ c. Můj bývalý partner dokázal tu židli spálit . my former partner managed that chair burn.Inf ‘My ex-partner managed to burn the chair.’ d. #Tu židli můj bývalý partner dokázal spálit . that chair my former partner managed burn.Inf spálit . burn.Inf ‘My ex-partner managed to burn the chair. (OK: As to the chair, my expartner managed to burn it.)’ If we do not bind G-movement to head movement, this behavior is unexpected also because other elements, for example clitics, can climb up from the infinitival domain as in (41) with a reflexive tantum posadit se ‘sit down’. (41) a. Petr se chtěl posadit . Petr.Nom REFL wanted sit-down ‘Petr wanted to sit down.’ b. Petr se dokázal posadit Petr.Nom REFL managed sit-down ‘Petr managed to sit down.’ . If we assume that infinitives that allow clitic climbing are restructuring verbs (cf. Dotlačil 2004; Rezac 2005), then the infinitival restriction on G-movement cannot follow from presence of a phase boundary. Whatever allows the clitic to get to the main clause, should be able to get the given element out as well. 19 As we can see, however, this is not so. On the other hand, if we allow G-movement of α G to take place only if the relevant head moves as well, the difference between clitics and given material is predicted. Furthermore, we predict that if a verbal head is selected by another verbal head (an auxiliary), G-movement should be blocked as well. We find a useful minimal pair if we compare sentences in the Present or the Past tense with sentences in the Future tense. The main verb in the future tense, in contrast to other tenses where the verb moves out of VP, stays in VP and the future auxiliary is base generated in vP (Veselovská, 2004; Kučerová, 2005). As we can see in (42), (43), and (44), the difference in the different head movement properties, especially lack of head movement in the Future tense, propagates to the domain in which an element can undergo G-movement. While in (42) and (43) the verbal head is free to move and the given object can therefore G-move, in (44) the given object can only 19 Clitic climbing in Czech is a syntactic, not a phonological, process. This can be shown, for example, by the fact that different clitics in Czech climb differently. See Dotlačil 2004 for more details. 27
Page 1 and 2: The Syntax of Givenness by Ivona Ku
Page 3 and 4: Acknowledgments Two things were dif
Page 5 and 6: A.4 A note on base generation . . .
Page 7 and 8: (2) a. SVO: Chlapec našel lízátk
Page 9 and 10: accent on the auxiliary did in (4-a
Page 11 and 12: Pitch (Hz) 500 400 300 200 100 0 ch
Page 13 and 14: (6) Petr řídil včera rychle auto
Page 15 and 16: phrases are required to undergo G-m
Page 17 and 18: . A entails (α,U) where (α,U) is
Page 19 and 20: (23) What can be understood as new?
Page 21 and 22: (28) Derivation of [Subject]-G verb
Page 23 and 24: functionalist tradition there has b
Page 25: c. ?P v-V vP Subject vP v-V VP V Ob
Page 29 and 30: movement is possible. (47) a. Why d
Page 31 and 32: TP Aux vP money vP gave VP t money
Page 33 and 34: TP Aux TP T vP t Aux VP money VP gi
Page 35 and 36: c. #Jeho viděla Marie na nádraž
Page 37 and 38: (63) a. #Diskuse proběhla bez věd
Page 39 and 40: (70) a. #Žáky a učitelku to pře
Page 41 and 42: Chapter 2 G-movement In chapter 1,
Page 43 and 44: asic word order cases we expect wor
Page 45 and 46: (9) a. What happened? b. #[Vlak př
Page 47 and 48: . ?P DO vP subject vP v VP V VP IO
Page 49 and 50: . vP subject vP v VP V ?P DO VP IO
Page 51 and 52: . Marie [ vP včera dala [ V P rych
Page 53 and 54: vP Marie vP yesterday vP gave VP qu
Page 55 and 56: list reading. No such requirement e
Page 57 and 58: poskytovat jídlo. provide food.Acc
Page 59 and 60: a. X X X Z X X α b. X α X X X Z X
Page 61 and 62: existing Agree relation in case it
Page 63 and 64: 2.4 Summary In this chapter, I have
Page 65 and 66: 3.1 Deriving the verb partition In
Page 67 and 68: We will see in the next section how
Page 69 and 70: e. vP subject vP DO vP v VP v V DO
Page 71 and 72: If more than one given element may
Page 73 and 74: c. TP VP book give to-Peter t book
Page 75 and 76: (20) a. Marie otevřela zase dveře
Page 77 and 78:
cause she was interrupted by her mo
Page 79 and 80:
. TP T-v-V vP Marie vP again vP t v
Page 81 and 82:
move again, (38-b). When the given
Page 83 and 84:
Since the subject is new, the deriv
Page 85 and 86:
stituent containing several given e
Page 87 and 88:
4.1 Where we stand In the previous
Page 89 and 90:
differently. As we have seen in (2)
Page 91 and 92:
on the semantic component, more pre
Page 93 and 94:
4.2 Marking givenness by an operato
Page 95 and 96:
a. What happens with all the money
Page 97 and 98:
‘Martin was loved again.’ The c
Page 99 and 100:
Furthermore, I assume that if there
Page 101 and 102:
lexical head. In a way, we want the
Page 103 and 104:
(54) a. VP Petr VP V t Petr b. vP P
Page 105 and 106:
c. TP VP book give to-Peter t book
Page 107 and 108:
In the same way that there can be t
Page 109 and 110:
(70) st terminating point object e,
Page 111 and 112:
c. G-operator and local G-movement:
Page 113 and 114:
Mary managed chair G to-burn d. G-o
Page 115 and 116:
well. Recall that there are two rel
Page 117 and 118:
There is simply no way the G-operat
Page 119 and 120:
(97) a. And what will he read and t
Page 121 and 122:
In this case, the given part is ‘
Page 123 and 124:
To sum up, we now have in place a f
Page 125 and 126:
Generic indefinites behave slightly
Page 127 and 128:
. #Porsche má kamarád mojí ženy
Page 129 and 130:
The position of the sentential stre
Page 131 and 132:
is whether English givenness is rea
Page 133 and 134:
Appendix A G-movement is A-movement
Page 135 and 136:
. Svoji kočku má ráda Marie. her
Page 137 and 138:
with movement of a pronoun over a c
Page 139 and 140:
Petr’s friends.Acc saw Marie.Nom
Page 141 and 142:
A.5 Summary To conclude, we have se
Page 143 and 144:
Biskup, Petr. In preparation. The p
Page 145 and 146:
Dotlačil, Jakub. 2004. The syntax
Page 147 and 148:
Junghanns, Uwe. 1999. Generative Be
Page 149 and 150:
Neeleman, Ad, and Tanya Reinhart. 1
Page 151 and 152:
Selkirk, Elizabeth O. 1995. Sentenc
Page 153:
Zikánová, Šárka. 2006. Slovosle
show all

The Syntax of Givenness Ivona KucerovÃ¡

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?