When we couple the cyclic expansion of a probe’s domain assumed in Cyclic Agree ( Rezac 2003 , 2004 , Béjar and Rezac 2009 ) with the lack of formal distinction between heads, intermediate projections, and phrases emphasized in Bare Phrase Structure ( Chomsky 1995a , b ), an interesting prediction arises. Maximal projections should be able to probe through the same mechanisms that allow intermediate projections to probe in familiar cases of Cyclic Agree. I argue that this prediction is borne out. I analyze agreeing adjunct C in Amahuaca (Panoan; Peru) as a maximal projection that probes its c-command domain in second-cycle Agree. This account derives C’s simultaneous sensitivity to DPs within its own clause and in the clause to which it adjoins. Therefore, I conclude that Amahuaca provides evidence that maximal projections can be probes. The account also yields insight into the syntax of switch-reference in Panoan and beyond.

The Final-over-Final Condition (FOFC) rules out head-final projections that immediately dominate head-initial projections. Syntactically inert particles are known to show (apparent) exceptions to FOFC. However, Biberauer (2017) argues that seemingly FOFC-violating particles comply with a version of FOFC that is relativized to heads within an extended projection ( Biberauer, Holmberg, and Roberts 2014 ). I present novel data from Amahuaca (Panoan; Peru) in which FOFC is violated by tense-aspect-mood particles within the verbal extended projection. I argue that this FOFC violation cannot be explained by the mechanisms proposed by Biberauer (2017) . Instead, a view of FOFC grounded in restrictions on rightward dependencies ( Cecchetto 2013 , Zeijlstra 2016 ) predicts the type of exception found in Amahuaca.