ABSTRACT
There a number of constructions in which pro-NOs have been argued for in past research. These include: cleft constructions, comparative constructions, relative constructions of all kinds, that is, restrictive, appositive and amount (both ‘free’ and ‘headed’; see section 3.2.1. of Study 1), and a variety of constructions which, in English, exhibit infinitival subordinate clauses (tough-constructions, ready-constructions, irrealis relatives, purpose constructions and too/enough constructions). In addition, some languages also allow (predicative) NOs in main clauses, where the subject-of-predication is a null (pro) topic, which, as noted in section 3.3.2.1 of Study 1, is identified by reference to the earlier linguistic or non-linguistic context; such constructions are thus expected just in those languages which possess the type of pro-identifying mechanism in question.
