Table B.1.

Model results for raw complex syntax scores.

	Model 1: Random intercept (unconditional means model)	Model 2: Fixed unconditional growth model	Model 4: Dialect conditioned growth
	Coefficient (SE)	Coefficient (SE)	Coefficient (SE)
Fixed effects
Mean initial status β00	8.84 (0.25)***	6.27 (0.41)***	10.92 (0.77)***
Dialect β01			−.09 (0.01)***
Mean growth rate β10		0.15 (0.02)***	.13 (0.03)***
Growth conditional on dialect β11			−2.40 × 10−4 (6.07 × 10−4)NS
	Variance component (SE)	Variance component (SE)	Variance component (SE)
Random effects
Initial status r0i	19.24 (2.30)***	19.86 (2.17)***	12.27 (1.75)***
Level-1 error εti	19.08 (1.66)***	16.46 (1.43)***	16.80 (1.45)***
Model fit statistics
−2 log-likelihood	4,843.60	4,787.10	4,621.00
AIC (smaller is better)	4,849.60	4,795.10	4,633.00
BIC (smaller is better)	4,862.30	4,812.00	4,658.40
Model notes		χ2Diff (1) = 56.50*** Significantly improved fit over Baseline Model 1	χ2Diff (2) = 166.10*** Significantly improved fit over Model 2b

^***Correlation higher than .001.