ConductScienceConductScience
Morpheme #9 of 14Brown's Stage IV26–48 months

Regular Past -ed

Regular past tense -ed is the ninth of Brown's 14 morphemes, marking past on regular verbs and reaching mastery between 26 and 48 months.

At a glance

Acquisition order
#9 of 14 (Brown 1973)
Symbol / form
-ed
Brown's stage
IV
Typical age of mastery
26–48 months

Mastery is defined as correct use in 90% of obligatory contexts across three consecutive language samples (Brown 1973). Individual variation is wide — these ranges describe typically developing English-speaking children and should be cross-referenced against the primary literature before clinical use.

What this morpheme is

Regular past -ed is the bound suffix that marks past tense on regular English verbs ("walked", "jumped", "wanted"). It has three phonological allomorphs — /t/, /d/, and /əd/ — and full mastery requires the child to control all three. Brown placed it ninth in his order because, despite the child being able to produce a small number of irregular past forms much earlier, the productive rule for regular -ed is not extracted and applied consistently until late Stage IV. The morpheme is one of the most studied in the developmental literature because it sits at the centre of the debate over whether children learn morphology by extracting symbolic rules or by analogy from the lexicon.

Acquisition trajectory

The acquisition of regular -ed is slower and noisier than its plural -s sibling, even though the two morphemes share the same allomorph structure. Children produce a small number of regular past forms sporadically from late Stage II onward, often on a few high-frequency verbs ("walked", "played"), and reach 90% mastery in obligatory contexts by approximately 48 months in typical development. Once the rule is extracted, overgeneralisation to irregular verbs becomes the dominant error pattern — "goed", "eated", "falled" — and the U-shaped pattern persists for many months before the child sorts out which verbs follow the regular rule and which do not. The /t/ allomorph after voiceless consonants is acquired first, /d/ after voiced consonants follows, and the syllabic /əd/ after /t/ and /d/ is the slowest to mature. Children with DLD show much later mastery and a flatter rather than U-shaped trajectory.

Examples in obligatory context

These are the kinds of child utterances a clinician would code as a correct production of -ed when scoring a language sample.

  • “I walked to school.”
  • “She jumped over it.”
  • “He played outside.”
  • “I wanted a cookie.”
  • “The dog barked.”
  • “We painted the fence.”

Common errors during the acquisition window

  • Bare stem in obligatory past context: "I walk to school yesterday"
  • Overgeneralisation to irregulars: "goed", "eated", "breaked"
  • Failure to control the syllabic /əd/ allomorph: "I want a cookie" for "I wanted a cookie"
  • Use of present progressive in past context: "I walking to school yesterday"

Many of these errors are developmentally normal during the acquisition window. The clinical signal is persistence past the typical age of mastery, not the presence of any single error in early production.

Clinical relevance and scoring

Regular past -ed is one of the most reliable single markers of DLD in English-speaking school-age children. The Rice and Wexler extended-optional-infinitive account predicts — and the data confirm — that children with DLD show prolonged bare-stem use in obligatory past-tense contexts, with mastery delayed by years rather than months relative to typically developing peers. A 5-year-old who is producing "I walk to school yesterday" in connected speech is showing the canonical clinical marker. Score regular past -ed in a language sample by identifying every obligatory past-tense context with a regular verb and coding for correct production, bare stem, or other substitution. Pair the score with the irregular past tense score for a complete tense-marking profile. Report errors of bare-stem omission and overgeneralisation separately because they have different developmental significance.

“If you only score one morpheme in a school-age screening, score this one. Bare-stem regular past in connected speech at age 5 is the closest thing the 14 give us to a single-item DLD marker.”
The single most diagnostic morpheme

Free tools for scoring this morpheme

MLU Calculator

Paste a language sample and get Mean Length of Utterance in morphemes and words, total utterances, total morphemes, and the matching Brown's stage. Implements Brown (1973) morpheme counting rules and runs entirely in your browser.

Open tool

Brown's Stages Lookup

Interactive reference for Brown's (1973) five stages of grammatical development. Look up a stage by child age or MLU, see the MLU range, acquired morphemes, example utterances, and clinical milestones for each stage.

Open tool

DSS Calculator

Free Developmental Sentence Scoring (DSS) calculator for speech-language pathologists. Paste 50 sentences, tap weighted points across the eight Lee (1974) grammatical categories — Indefinite Pronouns, Personal Pronouns, Main Verbs, Secondary Verbs, Negatives, Conjunctions, Interrogative Reversals, Wh-Questions — plus the all-correct sentence point, and the calculator returns the live DSS with a per-category breakdown. Mobile-friendly tap-through grid, client-side, no sign-up.

Open tool

Related morphemes

#5 · Stage II

Irregular Past Tense

Irregular past-tense verbs ("went", "ate", "broke") are the fifth of Brown's 14 morphemes, mastered between 25 and 46 months in typical development.

#10 · Stage IV

Regular Third-Person Singular -s

Regular third-person singular -s is the tenth of Brown's 14 morphemes, marking present-tense agreement and reaching mastery between 26 and 46 months.

#11 · Stage V

Irregular Third-Person Singular

Irregular third-person singular forms (does, has) are the eleventh of Brown's 14 morphemes, mastered between 28 and 50 months.

References

  1. Brown, R. (1973). A First Language: The Early Stages. Harvard University Press, pp. 254–271.
  2. Rice, M. L., & Wexler, K. (1996). Toward tense as a clinical marker of specific language impairment in English-speaking children. JSLHR, 39(6), 1239–1257.
  3. Marcus, G. F., et al. (1992). Overregularization in language acquisition. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, 57(4), 1–182.