In many languages, the normal pattern of φ-agreement with an argument in a specific position (usually a subject) is disrupted when that argument is involved in an Ā-dependency. Since Ouhalla 1993, this phenomenon has been known as the antiagreement effect (henceforth antiagreement). Antiagreement is found in a wide variety of languages, but there is little consensus about the theoretical principles that underlie it.1 One prominent line of thought holds that antiagreement arises because of antilocality constraints on Ā-movement (Cheng 2006, Erlewine 2016, Schneider-Zioga 2007). The core intuition behind these accounts is that certain agreeing arguments are too local to Spec,CP to move there; this forces these arguments to extract from alternative positions, bleeding agreement.
In this squib, I examine the relationship between antilocality and antiagreement, focusing on the version of antilocality developed by Erlewine (2016). Erlewine proposes a constraint that rules out...