Recent work has argued for derivational expansion of the search space of ɸ-probes as a result of the cyclic interaction of Merge and Agree (cyclic Agree). Empirical evidence for such effects has come from the interaction of Agree with external Merge, but these accounts make the additional predictions that such interactions should also arise from the interaction of Agree with movement. In this paper, we argue based on evidence from Hindi-Urdu that movement may feed cyclic Agree in the same way as external Merge, bearing out this key prediction. The central empirical generalizations that we argue for are that (i) A-scrambling of an object over a subject may feed agreement in certain configurations, (ii) there is nonetheless a preference for agreement with the structurally lower subject, and (iii) \(\overline {\text{A}}\)-scrambling of the object never feeds agreement. We develop a cyclic-Agree analysis that provides a principled explanation of these generalizations. Crucial to this explanation are that (i) search space is dynamic and interacts with movement, (ii) there is a preference for agreement with elements c-commanded by the head that hosts the probe (first-cycle Agree), and (iii) ɸ-probes project as part of the label, but not past the immediate projection line of the head.

由于 Merge 和 Agree（循环 Agree）的循环相互作用，最近的工作主张对 ɸ-probes 的搜索空间进行衍生扩展。这种影响的经验证据来自同意与外部合并的相互作用，但这些说明做出了额外的预测，即这种相互作用也应该来自同意与运动的相互作用。在本文中，我们根据印地语-乌尔都语的证据论证，运动可能以与外部合并相同的方式提供循环同意，从而证实了这一关键预测。我们主张的中心经验概括是（i）对象对主体的 A 加扰可能会在某些配置中提供一致性，（ii）仍然倾向于与结构较低的主体达成一致，以及（iii）\ (\overline {\text{A}}\)- 对对象的加扰永远不会达成一致。我们开发了一个循环同意分析，为这些概括提供了原则性的解释。这种解释的关键是（i）搜索空间是动态的并且与运动相互作用，（ii）倾向于与托管探针的头部所命令的元素（第一周期同意）达成一致，以及（iii） ɸ-探针作为标签的一部分投影，但不超过头部的直接投影线。