HooverJ. R.StorkelH. L.RiceM. L. (2012). The interface between neighborhood density and optional infinitives: Normal development and specific language impairment. Journal of Child Language, 39(4), 835–862.
2.
HowlandC.BakerE.MunroN.McLeodS. (2019). Realization of grammatical morphemes by children with phonological impairment. Clinical Linguistics & Phonetics, 33(1–2), 20–41.
3.
MarchmanV. A. (1997). Children’s productivity in the English past tense: The role of frequency, phonology, and neighborhood structure. Cognitive Science, 21, 283–304.
4.
MarchmanV. A.WulfeckB.Ellis WeismerS. (1994). Morphological productivity in children with normal language and SLI: A study of the English past tense. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 42(1), 206–219.
5.
OettingJ. B.HorohovJ. E. (1997). Past-tense marking by children with and without specific language impairment. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 40(1), 62–74.
6.
RiceM. L.WexlerK.HershbergerS. (1998). Tense over time: The longitudinal course of tense acquisition in children with specific language impairment. Journal of Speech Language Hearing Research, 41(6), 1412–1431.
7.
SottoC. D.RedleE.BandaranayakeD.Neils-StrunjasJ.CreagheadN. A. (2014). Fricatives at 18 months as a measure for predicting vocabulary and grammar at 24 and 30 months. Journal of Communication Disorders, 49, 1–12.
8.
TomasE.DemuthK.Smith-LockK. M.PetoczP. (2015). Phonological and morphophonological effects on grammatical development in children with specific language impairment. International Journal of Language & Communication Disorders, 50(4), 516–528.
9.
TylerA. A.LewisK. E.HaskillA.TolbertL. C. (2002). Efficacy and cross-domain effects of a morphosyntax and a phonology intervention. Language Speech and Hearing Services in School, 33(1), 52–66.
10.
TylerA. A.LewisK. E.HaskillA.TolbertL. C. (2003). Outcomes of different speech and language goal attack strategies. Journal of Speech Language and Hearing Research, 46(5), 1077–1094.