Certainly lack of gender has nothing to do with the structure of the society. These are just the kind of generalizations that people love to make because they sound so smart.

Gender is a burden of language which really irritates me. It forces the speaker to take a stance on something which is not the issue. Suppose I talk to my doctor in the phone and want to report the discussion in any of these gender languages: I sooner or later have to mention the sex of the doctor. Even if I manage to avoid pronouns, in some languages the verb forms unveil these things. Or if I see my friend´s baby in the vagon dressed in green there is no way not to confess that I can´t remember if it was a girl or boy...the problems are numerous.

Another thing is what has been pulling Turkish language into a greater level of simplicity in this issue and many others. Aren´t there any relics of gender in the history of literary language? Didn´t the Arabs try to import masculine and feminine into Turkish as they brought so many words and even an alien orthography which you later gave up?

For once we agree from the beginning, si++. (Usually we agree in the end.) Gender is a very clumsy unit of grammar. It just seems to be so that some languages serve in their sentences more information than is needed while others hardly serve the minimum and you have to guess the rest.

An interesting thought and I tend to believe it. It is like a strategy that the ancient speakers have chosen: to carry with them only those things which are needed. Once you drop the 3rd person pronoun there is not much place to hang useless luxuries like gender marks. Just like pro-drop leads to dropping of other things also.

At the same time some other cavemen behind impassable seas and mountains decided they will carry some more  -  with the cost of getting a bit tired. And abundance became their strategy.

Gel-diğ-i-ni gördü.

Coming saw.

He/she saw you/him/her/it come.

This qoute from wikipedia needs to be corrected.

Hmm, "You" (as per gel-diğ-i-ni) is incorrect but other than that it´s OK.

geldiğini = your/him/her/its coming

Your underlined stuff is wrong (and you are not consistent why not "his" as per your rationale for example):

see one (me/you/it/her/him/you/them) infinitive

is a known structure. Consult your English grammar book

He saw me coming

He saw you coming

He saw him/her/it coming

He saw us coming

He saw you coming

He saw them coming

Hiç kimse geldiğini görmedi -no one saw you/ (him,her,its ) coming.

You can know which is to be deduced from the context.  The other ones are easily recognizable:

Its full conjugation is given below: 

geldiğimi - me coming

geldiğini - your coming

geldiğini - him,her,its coming

geldiğimizi - our coming

geldiğinizi - your coming (plural)

geldiklerini - their coming

As for "gördü" .. there is nothing dropped there.. As you mentioned in your post above, 3rd person sing. (and often 3rd person plural for things, animals) has no personal ending..

You don´t sound as if you have understood what pro-drop means.

gördüm

gördün

gördü

gördük

gördünüz

gördüler

As a result, you can´t drop a thing that doesn´t exist.

Firstly,I am not saying my English is good.

Secondly, I am not saying Turkish is not a pro-drop language.

Thirdly, I am saying your example (quoted from wikipedia) is wrong.

Here is the example in wikipedia:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pro-drop_language

In the example there is both subject (m in gördüm) and object pronoun (-n- in geldiğini). 

But you changed the example dropping 1st person sing. -m and it became 3rd person sing. (without personal ending) Why? 

I am asking again, why?

I was talking about 3rd singular person that´s why! (See post #12)

Because something in the example in wikipedia seemed to be wrong?

Did you think dropping -m and making the verb 3rd person sing. would make it correct?

But you missed this -n- in geldiğini.. 

Just because Turkish 3rd per.sing. is free from personal ending, doesn´t mean Turkish is a "pro-drop" language.

I didn´t say anything like that. It´s you who says it. Clearly you have some conclusion based on the change I did on the wikipedia example. I think you should know what pro-drop language means first.

The following part is quoted from the same page: 

English is considered a non-pro-drop language. Nonetheless, subject pronouns are almost always dropped in commands (e.g., Come here); and in informal speech, pronouns and other words, especially copulas and auxiliaries, may sometimes be dropped, especially from the beginnings of sentences:

• [Have] you ever been there? or [Have you] ever been there?
• [I´m] going to the store. [Do] [you] want to come [with me]?
• Seen on signs: [I am/We are] out to lunch; [I/we will be] back at 1:00 P.M.
• What do you think [of it]? – I like [it]! (only in some dialects)

Relative pronouns are often dropped from restrictive clauses:

• The person [whom] I saw was older.

It seems English which is considered a non-pro-drop language does that thing better an more often than Turkish!

Only the 4th example (they say "only in some dialects" ) is the same as in Turkish.

(onun hakkında) Ne düşünüyorsun? - (onu) beğendim (what do you think? - I like)

If I were you I would use this example..

I am saying again the example you gave is wrong as there is nothing dropped from it. 

...

It must be you who "...doesn´t sound as if you have understood what pro-drop means."

No further comment for this. What you have written so far tells who´s who.

Come on scalpel. This is called in Turkish:

Bir bardak suda fırtına çıkarmak/koparmak.

It´s strange that you come with your (false) conclusions just because I removed a personal suffix on wikipedia example.