[Aksu-Koç, A.A. (1994). Development of linguistic forms: Turkish. In R.A. Berman & D.I. Slobin (Eds.), Relating Events in Narrative: A Crosslinguistic and Developmental Study (pp. 329-392). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.]Search in Google Scholar
[Aksu-Koç, A.A. & Slobin, D.I. (1985). Acqusition of Turkish. In D.I. Slobin (Ed.), The Crosslinguistic Study of Language Acqusition. Vol. 1: The Data (pp. 839-878). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.]Search in Google Scholar
[Comrie, B. (1989). Language Universals and Linguistic Typology. Oxford, UK: Blackwell.]Search in Google Scholar
[Dahl, Ö. (2008). Animacy and egophoricity: Grammar, ontology and phylogeny. Lingua, 118 (2), 141-150.10.1016/j.lingua.2007.02.008]Search in Google Scholar
[Dahl, Ö. & Fraufud, K. (1996). Animacy in grammar and discourse. In T. Fretheim & J.K. Gundel (Eds.), Reference and Referent Accessibility (pp. 47-66). Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.]Search in Google Scholar
[Dryer, M.S. (1991). SVO Languages and the OV/VO Typology. Journal of Linguistics, 27 (2), 443-482.10.1017/S0022226700012743]Search in Google Scholar
[Dryer, M.S. (1992). The Greenbergian word order correlations. Language, 68 (1), 81-138.]Search in Google Scholar
[Dryer, M.S. (2005). Order of subject, object, and verb. In M. Haspelmath, M.S.]Search in Google Scholar
[Dryer, D. Gil, & B. Comrie (Eds.), The World Qtlas of Language Structures (pp. 330-333). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Dryer, M.S. (2013). Against the six-way order typology, again. Studies in Language, 37 (2), 267-301.10.1075/sl.37.2.02dry]Search in Google Scholar
[Erguvanli, E.E. (1984). The Function of Word Order in Turkish. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Gell-Mann, M. & Ruhlen, M. (2011). The origin and evolution of word order. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 108 (42), 17290-17295.10.1073/pnas.1113716108]Search in Google Scholar
[Givon, T. (1983). Topic Continuity in Discourse: A Quantitative Crosslinguistic Study. Philadelphia, PA: John Benjamins.10.1075/tsl.3]Search in Google Scholar
[Goldin-Meadow, S., So, W., Ozyurek, A., & Mylander, C. (2008). The natural order of events: How speakers of different languages represent events nonverbally. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 105 (27), 9163-9168.10.1073/pnas.0710060105]Search in Google Scholar
[Göksel, A. (2013). Free word order and anchors of the clause. SOAS Working Papers in Linguistics, 16, 3-25.]Search in Google Scholar
[Greenberg, J.H. (1963). Some universals of grammar with particular reference to the order of meaningful elements. In J.H. Greenberg (Ed.), Universals of Grammar (pp. 73-113). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Hawkins, J. A. (2004). Efficiency and Complexity in Grammars. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199252695.001.0001]Search in Google Scholar
[İşsever, S. (2003). Information structure in Turkish: The word order-prosody interface. Lingua, 113 (11), 1025-1053.10.1016/S0024-3841(03)00012-3]Search in Google Scholar
[Kılıçaslan, Y. (2004). Syntax of information structure in Turkish. Linguistics, 42 (4), 717-765.]Search in Google Scholar
[Küntay, A. & Slobin, D.I. (2002). Putting interaction back into child language: Examples from Turkish. Psychology of Language and Communication, 6 (1), 5-14.]Search in Google Scholar
[LaPolla, R.J. & Poa, D. (2006). Describing word order. In F. Ameka, A. Dench, & N. Evans (Eds.), Catching Language: The Standing Challenge of Grammar Writing (pp. 269-295). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.]Search in Google Scholar
[Lehmann, W. (1978). English: A characteristic SVO language. In W. Lehmann (Ed.), Syntactic Typology: Studies in the Phenomenology of Language (pp.169-222). Austin, TX: University of Texas Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Leeson, L. & Saeed, J.I. (2012). Word order. In R. Pfau, M. Steinbach, & B. Woll (Eds.), Sign Language: An International Handbook (pp. 245-264). Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter.]Search in Google Scholar
[Newmeyer, F. (2004). Against a parameter-setting approach to typological variation. Linguistic Variation Yearbook, 4 (1), 181-234.10.1075/livy.4.06new]Search in Google Scholar
[Newmeyer, F. (2005). Possible and Probable Languages: A General Perspective on Linguistic Typology. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.10.1093/acprof:oso/9780199274338.001.0001]Search in Google Scholar
[Özge, U. & Bozsahin, C. (2010). Intonation in the grammar of Turkish. Lingua, 120 (1), 132-175.10.1016/j.lingua.2009.05.001]Search in Google Scholar
[Ransom, E.N. (1977). Definiteness, Animacy, and NP Ordering. In E.N. Ransom, Proceedings of the 3rd Annual Meeting of the Berkeley Linguistics (pp. 418-429). Berkeley, CA.10.3765/bls.v3i0.2243]Search in Google Scholar
[Silverstein, M. (1976). Hierarchy of Features and Ergativity. In R.M.W. Dixon (Ed.), Grammatical Categories in Australian Languages (pp. 112-171). Canberra: Australian National University.]Search in Google Scholar
[Sinnemäki, K. (2010). Word order in zero-marking languages. Studies in Language, 34 (4), 869-912.10.1075/sl.34.4.04sin]Search in Google Scholar
[Slobin, D.I. (1982). Universal and particular in the acquisition of language. In E. Wanner & L.R. Gleitman (Eds.), Language Acquisition: The State of the Art (pp. 128-172). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Sprouse, J. (2007). A program for experimental syntax: Finding the relationship between acceptability and grammatical knowledge. Doctoral dissertation, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.]Search in Google Scholar
[Vennemann, T. (1976). Categorial grammar and the order of meaningful elements. In A. Juilland (Ed.), Linguistic Studies Offered to Joseph Greenberg on the Occasion of his Sixtieth Birthday (pp. 615-634). Saratoga, CA: Anma Libri.]Search in Google Scholar
