Content clause
clause elaborated by a main clause
In grammar, a content clause is a dependent clause that provides content implied or commented upon by an independent clause. The term was coined by Danish linguist Otto Jespersen. Content clauses have also traditionally been called noun clauses or nominal clauses, but current linguistics tends to view those names as misnomers and prefers content clause.
English
In English, there are two main kinds of content clauses: declarative content clauses (or that-clauses), which correspond to declarative sentences, and interrogative content clauses, which correspond to interrogative sentences.
Declarative content clauses
Declarative content clauses can have a number of different grammatical roles. They often serve as direct objects of verbs of reporting, cognition, perception, and so on. In this use, the conjunction that may head the clause, but is often omitted:
He told her (that) she was smart.
She thought (that) he was friendly.
I hear (that) they've started dating.
They wish (that) they had met earlier.
“Content clause” enters the record as clause elaborated by a main clause. Crown Archives preserves that source wording while asking what Content, clause and elaborated can confirm, complicate or overturn.
Why this record matters
“Content clause” is worth following because a concise public description often conceals a longer documentary argument. Here, Content, clause and elaborated provides the most credible route into that argument.
Named sources, stable identifiers and responsible institutions provide the strongest route from overview to verifiable evidence. The source revision retrieved here is dated Jun 12, 2025. The linked authority identifier is Q1459189. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.
A concise general-reference account can conceal disagreements about scope, terminology or the weight assigned to individual sources. The source lead contains qualifying language; that uncertainty should survive quotation, summary and reuse. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Use the entry as an orientation point, then follow its citations and revision history. Names, dates and institutional relationships should be checked against the original record.
- Subject orientation
- Search vocabulary
- Locating named sources
The closest primary source, responsible institution and strongest cited specialist reference.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Content clause”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Content clause primary sources, Content clause archive and Content research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Content clause”?
- Which cited source is closest to the event, object or claim?
- Which institution is responsible for the underlying evidence?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Content clause” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.