The Syntax of Givenness Ivona Kucerová
The Syntax of Givenness Ivona Kucerová The Syntax of Givenness Ivona Kucerová
. TP closed vP Marie vP t v VP again VP t V door c. TP VP TP again t V door closed vP Marie vP t v t V P We can now proceed with the derivation of the example in (25-b). As we can see in (31), no G-movement takes place before vP is completed. At this point, the verb, the adverb and the object need to G-move because they all are asymmetrically c-commanded by the new subject Mary. Again, the verb must move first, (31-b). After this movement takes place, the object and the adverb need to move. I have already anticipated that they cannot move as one constituent. The reason is that the only constituent that dominates the given elements and no new element is an X-bar projection. Since X-bar projections in Czech cannot move, the given elements must move separately. The question is whether the given elements move on nesting or crossing paths. I argue, based on the actual word order we get, that the paths must be nesting, as in (31-c). (31) a. vP Marie vP again vP v-V VP t V door 78
. TP T-v-V vP Marie vP again vP t v−V VP t V door c. TP door TP again TP T-v-V vP Marie vP t again vP t v−V VP t V t door Notice that so far there is nothing in our system that would guarantee the right order of movement of given elements. The extension condition on G-movement is not on its own sufficient. In order to account for the word order facts, I propose that if more than one given element moves in the same point of the derivation, they obey the Path Containment Condition, as defined in Pesetsky (1982). The definition of the Path Containment Condition (and the supplementary definitions) are given in (32)–(34). (32) Path Containment Condition (PCC) (Pesetsky, 1982, ex. (94), p. 309) If two paths overlap, one must contain the other. (33) Definition of Paths (Pesetsky, 1982, ex. (69), p. 289) Suppose t is an empty category locally A-bound by b. Then 79
- 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 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: cause she was interrupted by her mo
- 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
. TP<br />
closed<br />
vP<br />
Marie<br />
vP<br />
t v<br />
VP<br />
again<br />
VP<br />
t V<br />
door<br />
c. TP<br />
VP<br />
TP<br />
again t V door<br />
closed<br />
vP<br />
Marie<br />
vP<br />
t v<br />
t V P<br />
We can now proceed with the derivation <strong>of</strong> the example in (25-b). As we can see in (31),<br />
no G-movement takes place before vP is completed. At this point, the verb, the adverb and<br />
the object need to G-move because they all are asymmetrically c-commanded by the new<br />
subject Mary. Again, the verb must move first, (31-b). After this movement takes place,<br />
the object and the adverb need to move. I have already anticipated that they cannot move as<br />
one constituent. <strong>The</strong> reason is that the only constituent that dominates the given elements<br />
and no new element is an X-bar projection. Since X-bar projections in Czech cannot move,<br />
the given elements must move separately. <strong>The</strong> question is whether the given elements move<br />
on nesting or crossing paths. I argue, based on the actual word order we get, that the paths<br />
must be nesting, as in (31-c).<br />
(31) a. vP<br />
Marie<br />
vP<br />
again<br />
vP<br />
v-V<br />
VP<br />
t V<br />
door<br />
78
Change language