Three different formal devices have been proposed within minimalism to replace Chomsky's (1993) covert movement of phrasal categories to check Case and agreement: expletive-associate relations (Brody 1995), movement of formal features (Chomsky 1995), and the operation Agree (Chomsky 2000, 2001). We propose that vehicle change effects (in the sense articulated by Fiengo and May (1994)) establish empirical grounds for distinguishing among these alternatives and argue that only the Move F approach can account for the data without enriching the theoretical apparatus.

This article investigates the interaction between resumption and movement. Lebanese Arabic distinguishes between true resumption, where a pronoun or an epithet phrase is related to an Ā -antecedent via Bind, and apparent resumption, where the pronoun or the epithet phrase is related to its Ā -antecedent via Move. Only apparent resumption displays reconstruction effects for scope and binding. As resumptives, strong pronouns and epithet phrases cannot be related to a quantificational antecedent unless they occur inside islands. We account for this Obviation Requirement as follows: (a) (true) resumption is a last resort device, (b) strong pronouns and epithet phrases in apparent resumption contexts are generated as appositive modifiers of a DP, which is fronted to an Ā -position, and (c) appositive modifiers are interpreted as independent clauses. Obviation is reduced to the inability of quantifiers to bind a pronominal element across sentential boundaries.

Aoun, Benmamoun, and Sportiche (ABS, 1994) propose an analysis of first conjunct agreement in VS sentences in Lebanese Arabic and Moroccan Arabic. On the basis of the distribution of number-sensitive items, they argue that this type of agreement is due to clausal coordination. Munn (1999) argues against ABS's account and proposes that first conjunct agreement in the Arabic dialects arises because coordination of NP subjects is semantically plural but syntactically singular. In this reply we show that Munn's alternative analysis is empirically inadequate.

We investigate the interaction of clitic left-dislocation (CLLD), wh -interrogatives, and topicalization in Lebanese Arabic. A wh -phrase or a topicalized phrase can be fronted across a CLLDed element derived by movement but not across a base-generated one. A CLLDed element cannot be fronted across another CLLDed element, a wh -phrase, or a topicalized phrase. These interception effects are accounted for only if Minimality is construed as a constraint on derivations rather than representations and if fronting of the CLLDed elements is seen to apply in the PF component. It is thus suggested that the mapping between overt Syntax and the Articulatory-Perceptual level is not trivial.