Major parameters identifying the branches of linguistic typology

QUANTITATIVE LIMITATION/NON-LIMITATION

Quantitative limitation of compared languages: a) maximal limitation (2 languages); b) Minimal limitation (open list of languages); c) limitation by a certain language type (e.g. by agglutination in Turkish and Hungarian languages); d) limitation by geographic location; e) by a certain type of linguistic universal, etc.
IV. AREAL LIMITATION
Areal limitation/non-limitation looks at the expansion of a certain linguistic phenomenon which is geographically conditioned (Centum and Satem languages, study of dialects, sub-stratum and super-stratum languages).

3. 
   ETIC/EMIC IDENTITY
   

Etic/emic identity. Etic identity means coincidence of material units.

3. 
   DEEP AND SURFACE IDENTITY
   

Deep and surface identity.
Surface structure includes all material units of a language. Surface structure units may belong to different levels of hierarchy. For example, English category of defi-niteness may be expressed by articles and demonstrative pronouns.
Deep structure is a generalized language meaning lying in the basis of compared languages. Deep structure maybe of three types: a) minimal or internal language structure; b) typological deep structure, c) maximal deep stricture.
Minimal deep structure characterizes the units of content plan of a separate lan­guage. Each language has its own categorial notions, e.g. categories of definiteness/ indefiniteness, transitiveness, etc. which constitute a deep structure of that particular language. In such category as definiteness/indefiniteness in Turkic languages is not expressed by articles, while in German, Romanic and other languages the article is very important.
Typological deep structure is characteristic to the groups of genetically or struc­turally related languages.
This deep structure may be sub-divided into two types: a) typological deep struc­ture with etic-emic organized surface, b) typological deep structure with emic orga­nized surface.
Typological deep structure is with etic-emic organized surface correlates with Genetic typology and is typical for closely related languages. Substantial or etic correspondence at the same time stipulates emic conformity. But we should say that not every language of the same genetic group can have maximal coincidence of the surface structure units. For example, modern German languages stay far from each other in material conformity. Regarding modern Turkic languages there is a lot of material/substantial conformity.
On the basis of etic-emic organization in every language family or language group special areal groups are distinguished.
An example typological deep structure with emic organized identity: typologi­cal classification based on level coincidence (agglutination, fusion, isolation).
Maximal deep structure is a common deep structure peculiar to several language types: e.g. analytism /synthetism.

3.