non-corrective approach to pronunciation

the aim of this study has been to find answers for the following questions: 1. what is the effect of immediate correction on students pronunciation errors? 2. what would be the effect of teaching the more rgular patterns of english pronunciation? 3. is there any significant difference between the two methods of dealing with pronuciation errore, i. e., correction and the teaching of the regular patterns? accordingly the following hypotheses were proposed: (i) immediate correction of errors does not have any improving effect on learners mispronunciations. (ii) teaching of the more regular patterns of english pronunciation does not have any improving effect either. (iii) there is no significant difference berween the two methods of handling the pronunciation errors, the correction method and the teaching of the rules method. based on the research questions, two groups of high-school seniors were selected with 30 subjects in each group. the instruments used for the study a pre-test and a post-test. the other instrument used was some lists of words which the subjects were to read aloud one by one in five sessions. the subjects in one group were corrected fir their pronunciation errore, while the other group was taught the regular patterns of the english pronunciation. the statisical procedure used was the t-test formula. the results showed that there was no significant difference between the means of the pre-test and the post-test scores, concerning the first hypothesis. (the t value exceeded none of the levels of significance) concerning the second hypothesis, however, the t value exceeded the t critical values at both alpha levels, thus rejecting the second hypothesis. the third hypothesis was also rejected in favor of group b, the group whose subjects were taught the patterns of pronunciation. the t value in the third hypothesis was also significantly higher than the t critical valuse at both of significant.