, conversely, claims that the acquisition of a second language is largely determined by the structure of an earlier acquired language" (Klein, 1986, p. 25). Structures of the second language which are identical or similar to those of the first language are said to be readily assimilable: this is positive transfer.
The negative transfer (interference) resulting from attempts at acquiring contrasting structures, on the other hand, renders acquisition difficult and leads to errors. Gass (1979), Jordens (1977), Rutherford (1982) and others supported the prediction that transfer occurs when the perceived similarity between the two languages is great and when the structures involved are unmarked.
Structural-behaviorist theory, such as gave rise to the Audiolingual method, viewed learning as a process of habit development to be inculcated by varying contingencies of reinforcement. Thus was structural theory "invoked to justify the use of contrastive analysis" (McLaughlin, 1987, p. 7).
The Chomskyan generative grammar approach assumed that the first-language learner comes to the acquisition task with innate, specifically linguistic knowledge, or Universal Grammar. It claimed that the brain has a "set of properties, conditions, or whatever, that constitute the 'initial' state of the language learner, hence the basis on which language develops" (Chomsky, 1980, p. 69). Universal Grammar postulated that second language learning occurs as learners encounter more evidence from the second language, and fix the parameters of the new grammar. During the initial stages of acquisition, the interlanguage is likely to show the effect of the first-language parameters and hence marked forms may appear before unmarked ones. "Universal Grammar theory offers an alternative to contrastive analysis in that the theory postulates a set of deep principles common to all languages and fundamental to both first and second-language acquisition" (McLaughlin, 1987...