View Item 

Show simple item record

The Effect Of Delayed Comparison In The Language Laboratory On Phoneme Discrimination And Pronunciation Accuracy

dc.contributor.authorSisson, Cyrus R.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2013-06-18T18:32:22Z
dc.date.available2013-06-18T18:32:22Z
dc.date.issued1970-06en_US
dc.identifier.citationSisson, Cyrus R. (1970). "The Effect Of Delayed Comparison In The Language Laboratory On Phoneme Discrimination And Pronunciation Accuracy." Language Learning 20(1). <http://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/98178>en_US
dc.identifier.issn0023-8333en_US
dc.identifier.issn1467-9922en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/98178
dc.publisherBlackwell Publishing Ltden_US
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.en_US
dc.titleThe Effect Of Delayed Comparison In The Language Laboratory On Phoneme Discrimination And Pronunciation Accuracyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelLinguisticsen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelSocial Sciencesen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumThe University of Michiganen_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/98178/1/j.1467-1770.1970.tb00046.x.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1467-1770.1970.tb00046.xen_US
dc.identifier.sourceLanguage Learningen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMathieu, G. 1961. Recommendations on the learning which should occur in the language laboratory and in the classroom Publications of the Language Laboratory, Series Preprints and Reprints, 5. 58 – 95. Ann Arbor: College of Literature, Science and the Arts, The University of Michigan.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLocke, W. N. 1960. To record or not. Modern Language Journal 44. 278 – 9.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLorge, S. W. 1963. Report of study on foreign‐language laboratories in secondary schools. Audio-Visual Communication Review 11. 70.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLorge, S. W. 1964. Language laboratory research studies in New York City high schools: A discussion of the program and the findings. Modern Language Journal 48. 409 – 19.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLorge, S. W. 1965. Comments on language laboratory research: A critique. Modern Language Journal 49. 369 – 70.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMathieu, G. 1960. A brief guide to sound labmanship. Modern Language Journal 44. 123 – 6.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMathieu, G. 1963. Editorial comment on Keating's “A study of the effectiveness of language laboratories. ML Abstracts, 11. 2.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMorton, F. R. 1961. The language laboratory as a teaching machine. Publications of the Language Laboratory, Series Preprints and Reprints 1. 1 – 24. Ann Arbor: College of Literature, Science and the Arts, The University of Michigan.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMueller, T. 1958. Perception in foreign language learning. Modern Language Journal 42. 167 – 71.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOtto, F. 1969. The teacher in the Pennsylvania Project. Modern Language Journal 53. 411 – 20.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePorter, J. J., and S. F. Porter 1964. A critique of the Keating Report. Modern Language Journal 48. 195 – 7.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSmith, P. D., and E. Berger 1968. An assessment of three foreign language teaching strategies utilizing three language laboratory systems, Final Report, Project No. 5–0683, Grant No. OE‐7‐48‐9013‐272, U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, Office of Education.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStack, E. M. 1963. The Keating Report: The case of the missing subtitle. The ETL Newsletter 4. 1 – 7.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceStack, E. M. 1964. The Keating Report–a symposium. Laboratories: The effectiveness controversy. Modern Language Journal 48. 189 – 94.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceValette, R. M. 1969. The Pennsylvania Project, its conclusions and its implications. Modern Language Journal 53. 396 – 404.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceWatkins, J. M. 1960. The library system and the language laboratory. French Review 34. 60 – 6.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAleamoni, L. M., and R. E. Spencer 1969. An evaluation of the Pennsylvania Foreign Language Project. Modern Language Journal 53. 421 – 8.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAnderson, E. W. 1964. Review and criticism. Modern Language Journal 48. 197 – 206.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBernard, E. G., and S. W. Lorge 195962. The use of the language laboratory in the teaching of French in secondary schools. Research supported by the New York State Education Department.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBernard, E. G., and S. W. Lorge 196263. The relative effectiveness of four types of language laboratory experience. Research supported in part by the New York State Education Department.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBottiglia, W. F., (ed.) 1957. Report of the committee on the philosophy of the language laboratory. The Language Classroom Reports of the Working Committees, Northeast Conference on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. Cambridge, Mass.: M.I.T.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCatford, J. C., (ed.) 1968. Studies in Language and Language Behavior, VI. Ann Arbor: Center for Research on Language and Language Behavior, The University of Michigan, Contract OEC‐3‐6‐061784‐0508.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceClark, J. L. D. 1969. The Pennsylvania Project and the “audio‐lingual vs. traditional” question. Modern Language Journal 53. 388 – 96.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCompanys, E. 1968. Problèmes psychopédagogiques des laboratoires de langues: Première partie. In Catford 1968. 279 – 400.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCompanys, E. Electronic aids for teaching languages. Unpublished paper.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEdling, J. V., et al. 1963. Reports on the Keating Report. American School and University 36. 33 – 8.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFlaxman, S. L., (ed.) 1961. Modern language teaching in school and college. Reports of the Working Committees, Northeast Conference on the Teaching of Foreign Languages. New York: New York University.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGaarder, A. B., and J. C. Hutchinson 1963. Brief analysis of the Keating Report. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Office of Education.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGreen, J. R. 1965. Language laboratory research: A critique. Modern Language Journal 49. 367 – 9.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGrittner, F. 1964. The shortcomings of language laboratory findings in the IAR research bulletin. Modern Language Journal 48. 207 – 10.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHamilton, S. 1970. On the conversation class. French Review 43. 474 – 9.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHayes, A. S. 1963. Language laboratory facilities: Technical guide for the selection, purchase, use, and maintenance. New Media for Instruction 4. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHocking, E. 1964. Language laboratory and language learning. Department of Audiovisual Instruction, National Education Association of the United States, Monograph No. 2.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHocking, E. 1969. The laboratory in perspective: Teachers, strategies, outcomes. Modern Language Journal, 53. 404 – 10.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKeating, R. F. 1963. A study of the effectiveness of language laboratories. New York: The Institute of Administrative Research, Teachers College, Columbia University.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKieser, W. E. 1964. Hints on the teaching of modern languages. Canadian Modern Language Review, Summer.31–5.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLado, R. 1957. Test of aural perception in English for Latin‐American students. Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLado, R. 1964. Language teaching. New York: McGraw‐Hill.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLocke, W. N. 1965. The future of language laboratories. Modern Language Journal 49. 294 – 304.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
j.1467-1770.1970.tb00046.x.pdf
Size:
1.053MB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.