References
Azaryad, D. 2000. Null object constructions in Turkish. In Current Issues in Turkish Linguistics. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Turkish Linguistics, Vol. 2, Bengisu Rona (ed.). Ankara: Hitit Yayınevi.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bahan, Benjamin, Kegl, Judy, Lee, Robert G., MacLaughlin, Dawn & Neidle, Carol. 2000. The licensing of null arguments in American Sign Language. Linguistic Inquiry 31(1): 1–27. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Barbosa, Pilar, Duarte, Maria Eugenia L. & Kato, Maria Aizawa. 2005. Null Subjects in European and Brazilian Portuguese. Journal of Portuguese Linguistics 4: 11–52. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Bizarri, Camille. 2015. Russian as a pro-drop language. Annali di Ca’ Foscari. Serie Occidentale 49: 335–362. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Camacho, José A. 2013. Null Subjects. Cambridge: CUP. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Campos, Héctor. 1986. Indefinite object drop. Linguistic inquiry 17(2): 354–359.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chomsky, Noam. 1982. Some Concepts and Consequences of the Theory of Government and Binding. MIT Press: Cambridge.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chomsky, Noam. 1995. The Minimalist Program. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chomsky, Noam. 2000. Beyond Explanatory Adequacy [MIT Working Papers in Linguistics 20]. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Chomsky, Noam. 2001. Derivation by phase. In Ken Hale. A Life in Language, Michael Kenstowicz (ed.), 1–52. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Costello, Brendan. 2015. Language and modality: Effects of the use of space in the agreement system of lengua de signos espanola (Spanish Sign Language). PhD dissertation, University of Amsterdam.
Dikyuva, Hasan, Makaroğlu, H. & Arık, E. 2007. Turkish Sign Language Grammar. Ankara: Ministry of Family and Social Policies Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Dimitriadis, Alexis. 1994a. Clitics and island-insensitive object drop. In
Proceedings of FSLM 5
. Urbana-Champaign, IL.
Dimitriadis, Alexis. 1994b. Clitics and object drop in Modern Greek. In
Proceedings of SCIL 6
. MITWPL.
Farrell, Patrick. 1990. Null objects in Brazilian Portuguese. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 8(3): 325–346. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Giannakidou, Anastasia & Merchant, Jason. 1997. On the interpretation of null indefinite objects in Greek. Studies in Greek Linguistics 17: 141–155. Aristotle University, Thessaloniki.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Göksel, Aslı & Kelepir, Meltem. 2016. Observations on clausal complementation in Turkish Sign Language (TİD). In A Matter of Complexity: Subordination in Sign Languages, Annika Herrmann, Roland Pfau & Markus Steinbach (eds), 65-94. Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Glück, Susanne & Pfau, Roland. 1998. On classifying classification as a class of inflection in German Sign Language. In Console VI” Proceedings. Sixth Annual Conference of the Student Organization of Linguistics in Europe, Tina Cambier-Langeveld, Anikó Lipták & Michael Redford (eds), 59–74. Leiden: Sole.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Hankamer, Jorge & Sag Ivan, A. 1976. Deep and surface anaphora. Linguistic Inquiry 7: 391–428.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Holmberg, Anders, Nayudu, Aarti & Sheehan, Michelle. 2009. Three partial null-subject languages: A comparison of Brazilian Portuguese, Finnish and Marathi. Studia Linguistica 53(1): 59–97. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Huang, C. T. James. 1984. On the distribution and reference of empty pronouns. Linguistic Inquiry 15: 531–574.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Huang, C. T. James. 2010. Between Syntax and Semantics. London: Routledge. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kayabaşı, Demet. 2018. Null subjects in TID: Pro-drop or topic-drop? Ms, Boğaziçi University.
Kimmelman, Vadim. 2018. Null arguments in Russian Sign Language. Formal and Experimental Advances in Sign Language Theory (FEAST) 1: 27–38.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Koulidobrova, Elena. 2017. Elide me bare. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 35(2): 397–446. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Kubuş, Okan. 2008. An analysis of Turkish Sign Language (TİD) phonology and morphology. MA Thesis, Middle East Technical University, Ankara.
Liddell, Scott K. 1995. Real, surrogate, and token space: Grammatical consequences in ASL. In Language, Gesture, and Space, Karen Emmorey & Judy Reilly (eds), 19–41. Hillsdale NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lillo-Martin, Diane. 1986. Two kinds of null arguments in sign language. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 4(4): 415–444. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lillo-Martin, Diane. 1991. Universal Grammar and American Sign Language. Setting the Null Argument Parameters [Studies in Theoretical Psycholinguistics 13]. Dordrecht: Springer. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Lillo-Martin, Diane, & Meier, Richard P. 2011. On the linguistic status of ‘agreement’ in sign languages. Theoretical Linguistics 37(3-4): 95–141. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
McKee, Rachel, Schembri, Adam, McKee, David & Johnston, Trevor. 2012. Tracing down the elusive subject: Findings from research on ‘null subject’ in NZSL & AUSLAN. Paper presented at Australian Sign Language Interpreters National Conference, Melbourne, 23 August 2009.
Meir, Irit. 2002. A cross-modality perspective on verb agreement. Natural Language and Linguistic Theory 20: 413–450. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Meir, Irit. 2012. The evolution of verb classes and verb agreement in sign languages. Theoretical Linguistics 38(1/2). 145–152. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Meir, Irit, Padden, Carol A., Aronoff, Mark & Sandler, Wendy. 2007. Body as subject. Journal of Linguistics 43(3): 531–563. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Napoli, Donna Jo, Spence, Rachel Sutton & de Quadros, Ronice Müller. 2017. Influence of predicate sense on word order in sign languages: Intensional and extensional verbs. Language 93(3): 641–670. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Neidle, Carol, Kegl, Judy, MacLaughlin, Dawn, Bahan, Benjamin & Lee, Robert. 2000. The Syntax of American Sign Language. Cambridge MA: The MIT Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Özsoy, Sumru. 1987. Null subject parameter and Turkish. In Studies on Modern Turkish: Proceedings of the Third Conference on Turkish Linguistics, Hendrik E. Boeschoten & Ludo T. Verhoeven (eds), 82–91. Tilburg: Tilburg University Press.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Öztürk, Balkız. 2001. Turkish as a non pro-drop language. In The Verb in Turkish [Linguistik Aktuell/Linguistics Today 44], Eser Erguvanlı-Taylan (ed.), 239–258. Amsterdam: John Benjamins.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Padden, Carol. 1981. Some arguments for syntactic patterning in American Sign Language. Sign Language Studies, 32(1), 239–259. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Padden, Carol. 1983. Interaction of Morphology and Syntax in American Sign Language. PhD dissertation, University of California, San Diego (Published 1988, New York NY: Garland).
Padden, Carol. 1988. Interaction of Morphology and Syntax in American Sign Language. New York NY: Garland.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pfau, Roland, Steinbach, Markus & Woll, Bencie (eds). 2012. Sign Language – An International Handbook. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Pfau, Ronald, Salzmann, Martin, & Steinbach, Markus. 2018. The syntax of sign language agreement: Common ingredients, but unusual recipe. Glossa: A Journal of General Linguistics 3(1): 107. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Quer, Josep, Cecchetto, Carlo & Donati, Caterina, Geraci, Carlo, Kelepir, Meltem, Pfau, Roland & Steinbach, Markus (eds). 2019. SignGram Blueprint. A Guide to Sign Language Grammar Writing. Berlin: De Gruyter Mouton. <[URL]> (21 July 2019).![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Raposo, Eduardo P. 1984. On the Null Object in European Portuguese, Ms, University of California, Santa Barbara.
Rizzi, Luigi. 1986. Null objects in Italian and the Theory of pro
. Linguistic Inquiry 17: 501–557.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sandler, Wendy & Lillo-Martin, Diane. 2005. Sign Language and Linguistic Universals. Cambridge: CUP.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sato, Yosuke & Kim, Chonghyuck. 2012. Radical pro drop and the role of syntactic agreement in Colloquial Singapore English. Lingua 122: 858–873. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sevinç, Ayca Muge. 2006. Grammatical Relations and Word Order in Turkish Sign Language. MA thesis, Middle East Technical University.
Sevinç, Ayca Muge & Bozşahin, Cem. 2010. Verbal categories in Turkish Sign Language (TİD). In Proceedings of the 16th International Conference on Turkish Linguistics. Wiesbaden: Harrasowitz.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Sigurðsson, Hallidór Á., & Maling, Joan. 2007. On Null Arguments. In Proceedings of the “XXXII Incontro di Grammatica Generativa”, M. C. Pic, & A. Pona (Eds.), 167–180. Edizioni dell'Orso. Firenze.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Suñer, Margarita & Yépez, Maria. 1988. Null definite objects in Quiteño. Linguistic Inquiry 19: 511–519.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Vainikka, Anne & Levy, Yonata. 1999. Empty subjects in Finnish and Hebrew. Natural Language & Linguistic Theory 17(3): 613–671. ![DOI logo](https://benjamins.com/logos/doi-logo.svg)
![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)
Van Gijn, Ingeborg & Zwitserlood, Inge. 2006. Agreement phenomena in Sign Language of the Netherlands. In Arguments and Agreement, Peter Ackema, Patrick Brandt, Maake Schoorlemmer & Fred Weerman (eds), 195–229. Oxford: OUP.![Google Scholar](https://benjamins.com/logos/google-scholar.svg)