Dargwa languages have two types of agreement at clause level: gender and person agreement. In the general case, person agreement is hierarchical (speech act participants prefered to 3rd persons), while gender agreement is with the absolutive (S/P) argument. Two exceptions to this pattern have been observed in some dialects: first, some auxiliary verbs have a gender agreement slot which can be controlled by both ergative and absolutive arguments; second, adverbials agreeing in gender can agree with either ergative or absolutive if they are located at clause edges. A proposed explanation of this behaviour is through effectively splitting each clause into two layers, with the top layer having its own zero absolutive position, coreferential with either the subject or the direct object of the lower layer. In this way, the general rule that gender agreement is with the absolutive can be preserved. In this paper, I argue that the data of Ashti Dargwa do not support the Backward Control theory. Peripheral adverb agreement and auxiliary gender agreement are independent phenomena, while auxiliary agreement can be explained by splitting the 3rd person based on topicality, as in proximateobviative systems. This allows us to preserve the conventional account of clause structure while framing the data of Dargwa in a wider typological context.