This paper reinterprets Lakshmanan and Lindsey's (1998) finding in view of the research program originally implied by Bruhn-Garavito (1995) and explicitly articulated in Belikova (2008, forthcoming). Briefly, in adult L2 acquisition scenarios involving linguistically misleading classroom instruction, the chances of emergence of a non-native-like grammar are considerably enhanced as far as the Fundamental Difference Hypothesis (Bley-Vroman 1989, 1990) is concerned. Such scenarios then provide us with important test cases capable of shedding light on the ultimate effectiveness of classroom instruction and involvement of UG. Will L2ers avoid adopting rules that are incompatible with what presumably characterizes human language, even if very little positive counterevidence is present in the PLD? Lakshmanan and Lindsey (1998) report that adult advanced Russian L2ers (L1 English) have extreme difficulty acquiring the so-called Genitive of Negation. While the original study ignores classroom instruction altogether, the present paper shows that revisiting Lakshmanan and Lindsey (1998) in light of the explicit generalization Russian L2ers normally receive provides us with the exact acquisition scenario just considered. Non-acquisition is then a remarkable piece of evidence suggesting that implicit language-specific knowledge can block explicit domain-general reasoning.