For Bjorkman and Zeijlstra (2019) , Agree consists of two operations: checking and valuation. Checking involves (a) probing, always upward from an uninterpretable feature [ u F] to an interpretable feature [ i F] c-commanding it, and (b) [ i F]’s checking [ u F]. Valuation generally happens downward, with the valuer c-commanding the valuee. Upward valuation, in which the probe c-commands the goal, is exceptional and only occurs if downward valuation has failed. In this reply, we argue that this approach is not supported empirically. We present data from Matengo, German, Serbo-Croatian, Sambaa, Liko, and Nez Perce, arguing that upward valuation must be available more generally than Bjorkman and Zeijlstra suggest.

A movement asymmetry arises in some languages that are otherwise symmetrical for both A- and Ā-movement in the double object construction, including Norwegian, North-West British English, and a range of Bantu languages including Zulu and Lubukusu: a Theme object can be Ā-moved out of a Recipient (Goal) passive, but not vice versa. Our explanation of this asymmetry is based on phase theory— more specifically, a stricter version of the Phase Impenetrability Condition proposed by Chomsky (2001) . The effect is that, in a Theme passive, a Recipient object destined for the C-domain gets trapped within the lower V-related phase by movement of the Theme. The same effect is observed in Italian, a language in which only Theme passives are possible. A similar effect is also found in some Bantu languages in connection with object marking/agreement: object agreement with the Theme in a Recipient passive is possible, but not vice versa. We show that this, too, can be understood within the theory that we articulate.