The Syntax of Givenness Ivona Kucerová
The Syntax of Givenness Ivona Kucerová The Syntax of Givenness Ivona Kucerová
α G can G-move out of XP only if X 0 moves out of XP as well. Thus, I argue that the head movement condition understood as a form of parasitic relation (instead of new feature evaluation, use an already existing feature set) is a way to create a landing site in case there is no externally merged probe available. In other words, while in the case of feature-driven movement, there is probe P that creates a new sisterhood relation (P lands itself as the landing site), in case of G-movement, there is no Probe and re-merge is possible only if an existing feature-matching set is reused. A consequence of this assumption is that a given element α must be remerged within the same projection to which α’s head moves. We can thus strengthen the condition on the head movement, as in (33). (33) Head movement restriction on G-movement [final]: a. α G can G-move out of XP only if X 0 moves out of XP as well. b. If α G G-moved out of XP, α G may G-move to YP only if X 0 moves to YP as well. Another consequence of the feature matching requirement is that G-movement can take place after any merge because it is not dependent on introducing new features into the derivation. There is no need for G-movement to be feature driven. 14 Furthermore, since head movement is very local, G-movement must be local as well. Notice that there are three distinct configurations when G-movement of α can arise: (i) the head of α is in its base generated position, as in (34); (ii) the head of α has undergone G- movement, as in (35); (iii) the head of α underwent an independently motivated movement, as in (36). (34) Case (i): the sister of α is in its base generated position: X α X X α (35) Case (ii): the sister of α undergoes G-movement: 14 I will spell-out how exactly G-movement is driven in chapter 4. For the current discussion it is immaterial whether G-movement is feature driven or is not. Notice though that if G-movement is not feature driven, the proposal is still compatible with the phasal theory of Chomsky (2004b, 2005). Chomsky proposes that a feature-driven operation may take place only at the phasal level because it is only the phasal head that introduces the relevant feature(s) into the derivation. If G-movement is not feature driven, there is no reason to wait for the phase to be completed. G-movement may take place at any point. 58
a. X X X Z X X α b. X α X X X Z X X α (36) Case (iii): the sister of α undergoes feature-driven movement: a. X X Y Y Z Z X X α b. X α X X Y Y Z Z X X α We have already seen examples of all three configurations. Case (i) is a case of an object moving locally around an infinitive, as in (37). Case (ii) corresponds to an OVS order if 59
- 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 and 26: c. ?P v-V vP Subject vP v-V VP V Ob
- Page 27 and 28: (40) What happened to the antique c
- 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: poskytovat jídlo. provide food.Acc
- 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
a. X<br />
X<br />
X<br />
Z<br />
X<br />
X<br />
α<br />
b. X<br />
α<br />
X<br />
X<br />
X<br />
Z<br />
X<br />
X<br />
α<br />
(36) Case (iii): the sister <strong>of</strong> α undergoes feature-driven movement:<br />
a. X<br />
X<br />
Y<br />
Y<br />
Z<br />
Z<br />
X<br />
X<br />
α<br />
b. X<br />
α<br />
X<br />
X<br />
Y<br />
Y<br />
Z<br />
Z<br />
X<br />
X<br />
α<br />
We have already seen examples <strong>of</strong> all three configurations. Case (i) is a case <strong>of</strong> an object<br />
moving locally around an infinitive, as in (37). Case (ii) corresponds to an OVS order if<br />
59
Change language