THE APPARENT DISAPPOINTMENT AND SLACKENING OF ENTHUSIASTIC INTEREST IN LANGUAGE LABORATORY INSTRUCTION IS MOST PROBABLY NOT DUE TO A FUNDAMENTAL LACK OF EFFECTIVENESS, BUT TO METHODOLOGICAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL PROBLEMS YET TO BE SOLVED. MOST IMPORTANT, THE RESTRICTIVE DEPENDENCE OF LABORATORY MATERIAL ON CLASSROOM LESSONS MUST BE ABANDONED. ONLY WHEN LABORATORY INSTRUCTION IS AS INDEPENDENT AS POSSIBLE OF CLASSWORK, AND OF THE INSTRUCTOR HIMSELF, CAN IT SERVE ITS PURPOSE AS A TRULY SUPPLEMENTARY TECHNIQUE PROVIDING SYSTEMATIC INTENSIVE PRACTICE OF UNFAMILIAR MATERIAL. IN THE LANGUAGE LAB, THE PUPIL LEARNS GRAMMATICAL PRINCIPLES INDUCTIVELY, REPLACING THE "VERTICAL" LEARNING FROM PARADIGMS WITH "HORIZONTAL" LEARNING BASED ON TRANSFORMATIONAL EXERCISES, AND THE IMMEDIATE CORRECTION OR CONFIRMATION OF HIS RESPONSES OFFERS A GREAT CUMULATIVE ADVANTAGE. TO INSURE CORRECT PRONUNCIATION, AN INSTRUCTIONAL PLAN SHOULD INCLUDE (1) A SYSTEMATIC, THEORETICAL COMPARISON OF THE SOUND SYSTEMS OF THE TARGET AND NATIVE LANGUAGES, (2) SCRUTINY OF INDIVIDUAL PRONUNCIATION PROBLEMS AND THEIR TRANSFERENCE INTO SERIES OF MINIMAL PAIRS, (3) CONSTRUCTION OF HEARING AND SPEAKING EXERCISES BASED ON THESE MINIMAL PAIRS, AND (4) PREPARATION OF AN ADEQUATE NUMBER OF FLUENCY EXERCISES. THIS ARTICLE IS A REPRINT FROM "ACTA GERMANICA," VOLUME 1, 1966, PAGES 117-147. (RW)