Volume 60, Issue 4 e70063
RESEARCH REPORT

Sentential Complement Clause Sentence Constructions of Early School-Age Children With and Without Developmental Language Disorder

Ian Morton

Corresponding Author

Ian Morton

Department of Communication Disorders, California State University, Los Angeles, California, USA

Correspondence: Ian Morton ([email protected])

Search for more papers by this author
Violet Tirado

Violet Tirado

Department of Communication Disorders, California State University, Los Angeles, California, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Erica M. Ellis

Erica M. Ellis

Department of Communication Disorders, California State University, Los Angeles, California, USA

Search for more papers by this author
Lan-Anh Pham

Lan-Anh Pham

Department of Communication Disorders, California State University, Los Angeles, California, USA

Search for more papers by this author
First published: 09 June 2025

ABSTRACT

Introduction

It is well documented that preschoolers with DLD produce first instances of sentential complement clause sentences later than same-age peers with typical language. However, it remains unknown whether children with DLD are limited in their production of a variety of sentential complement clause sentences.

Aims

Using a sentence imitation task, we investigated whether preschoolers with DLD present with deficits in the production of sentential complement clause sentences with matrix clauses that are semantically and syntactically varied. We contrasted these sentences with sentential complement clause sentences that contain matrix clauses that are semantically and syntactically limited. We refer to these matrix clauses as true matrix clauses and formulaic matrix clauses, respectively.

Methods and Procedures

Twenty-eight 5-year-old children (DLD, n = 14) participated in this study. The experimental task was a 50-item sentence imitation task. Five complement clause verbs (CCVs)—think, know, guess, bet, remember—were used in sentential complement clause sentences containing either formulaic matrix clauses or true matrix clauses.

Outcomes and Results

Although children with DLD presented with lower proficiency in all sentential complement clause sentences, children with DLD did not show significantly greater difficulty with sentences containing true matrix clauses than sentences containing formulaic matrix clauses.

Conclusions and Implications

Sentential complement clause sentences pose a significant challenge for children with DLD.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

What is already known on this subject
  • Previous research reveals that children with DLD present with deficits in imitating later-developing complex syntax constructions, such as relative clause sentences containing multiple propositions. It is unknown whether these deficits extend to other complex syntax types containing multiple propositions, such as sentential complement clause sentences.
What this paper adds
  • Our study found that children with DLD did not present with salient deficits in sentential complement clause sentences containing multiple propositions. However, children with DLD may present with deficits in the production of a variety of sentential complement clause sentences.
What are the clinical implications of this study?
  • Our findings suggest that children with DLD struggle with all sentential complement clause sentence types. We discuss the importance of selecting appropriate complex syntax structures when planning complex syntax intervention.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Data Availability Statement

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author. The data are not publicly available due to privacy or ethical restrictions.

The full text of this article hosted at iucr.org is unavailable due to technical difficulties.