Teaching Pragmatic Competence: Strategies fo Error Correction in Language Instruction
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.71078/z9pamw14Keywords:
pragmatic competence, error correction, language instruction, intercultural communication, metapragmatic strategy, teacher feedbackAbstract
This integractive literature review aims to improve the quality of language teaching through the systematic analysis of error correction strategies releted to pragmatic competence. In current language teaching practice, progmatic competence often does not receive sufficiente attention, as priority is given to correcting grammatical and lexical errors. However, saccess of oral communication is not based solely on linguistic structures, it requires the appropriate use of speech acts within their social and cultural contexts. In this article, the authors review 20 academic articles published between 2020 and 2025 in the Scopus and Web of Science databases. Based on these studies, pragmatic errors correction strategies, including direct, indirect, and metapragmatic approaches, are examined comparatively. At first, the collected literatures were coded through critical analysis, and then the common trends and contradictions that take place in the corrective strategies of teachers were identified. The results of the study showed that the methodological models currently in use have limitation in their adaptation to multicultural contexts. In this regard, the article presents a pedagogical structure based on intercultural flexibility to improve the quality of pragmatic learning. The proposed structure is recommended for use in language courses and multilingual educational institutions and can be used to improve teacher training programs. Based on the shortcomings identified in this study regarding correction and feedback, the authors propose the Culture-Adaptive Pragmatic Correction Frame (CAPCF) model that adapts to the culture. The model considers pragmatic error correction to situational diagnostic context, learner factors, and coping strategies and is seen as culturally based decision-making.
References
Alcón, E., Josep, S., Pitarch, G., Soler, E. A., & Guzman, J. (2010). The Effect of Instruction on Learners’ Pragmatic Awareness: a Focus on Refusals. International Journal of English Studies, 10(1), 65–80. https://doi.org/10.6018/IJES/2010/1/113981
Bachman, L. F. (1990). Fundamental considerations in language testing. Oxford university press.
Bardovi-Harlig, K., Dörnyei, Z., & Dornyei, Z. (1998). Do Language Learners Recognize Pragmatic Violations? Pragmatic versus Grammatical Awareness in Instructed L2 Learning. TESOL Quarterly, 32(2), 233. https://doi.org/10.2307/3587583
Barron, A. (n.d.). Developing pragmatic competence in a study abroad context. https://doi.org/10.48548/pubdata-161
Braun, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Taylor & Francis, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706QP063OA
Canale, M., & Swain, M. (1980). Theoretical bases of commuicative approaches to second language teaching and testing. https://www.sid.ir/paper/534264/en
Diez-Itza, E., Marrero-Aguiar, V., Auza, A., & Aguilar-Mediavilla, E. (2025). New trends in typical and atypical language acquisition. Frontiersin.Org E Diez-Itza, V Marrero-Aguiar, A Auza, E Aguilar-MediavillaFrontiers in Psychology, 2025•frontiersin.Org, 16. https://doi.org/10.3389/FPSYG.2025.1573869/FULL
Ellis, R., Loewen, S. (2006). Implicit and explicit corrective feedback and the acquisition of L2 grammar. Cambridge.OrgR Ellis, S Loewen, R ErlamStudies in Second Language Acquisition, 2006•cambridge.Org. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263106060141
Hasan, N. A. (n.d.). Empowering Pragmatic Competence in ELT: Leveraging Digital Intercultural Communication through Moderated Online Communities and Cross-Cultural. Ijassh.Org, 19(19), 65–77. Retrieved December 22, 2025, from https://ijassh.org/admin1/upload/06%20Niaam%20Ali%20Hasan%2001317.pdf
Ishihara, N. (2024). Fostering a translingual framework in teacher education focused on pragmatics: Identity and the multilingual turn in pragmatics pedagogy. System, 125, 103457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2024.103457
Ishihara, N., & Cohen, A. D. (2014). Teaching and Learning Pragmatics: Where Language and Culture Meet, 1–370. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315833842
Loewen, S., & Philp, J. (2006). Recasts in the adult English L2 classroom: Characteristics, explicitness, and effectiveness. Modern Language Journal, 90(4), 536–556. https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1540-4781.2006.00465.X
Lyster, R., & Ranta, L. (1997). CORRECTIVE FEEDBACK AND LEARNER UPTAKE: Negotiation of Form inCommunicative Classrooms. Studies in Second Language Acquisition, 19(1), 37–66. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263197001034
Rose, K., & Kasper, G. (2001). Pragmatics in language teaching. https://www.academia.edu/download/19382096/bookreviews.pdf
Taguchi, N. (2015a). “Contextually” speaking: A survey of pragmatic learning abroad, in class, and online. System, 48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.system.2014.09.001
Taguchi, N. (2015b). Instructed pragmatics at a glance: Where instructional studies were, are, and should be going. Language Teaching, 48(1), 1–50. https://doi.org/doi:10.1017/S0261444814000263
Taguchi, N. (2015c). Instructed pragmatics at a glance: Where instructional studies were, are, and should be going. In Language Teaching (Vol. 48, Number 1). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0261444814000263
Torraco, R. J. (2016). Writing Integrative Literature Reviews. Human Resource Development Review, 15(4), 404–428. https://doi.org/10.1177/1534484316671606
Yates, L., Davies, L. M. L., Buzacott, L., Doecke, B., Mead, P., & Sawyer, W. (2019). School English, literature and the knowledge-base question. Curriculum Journal, 30(1), 51–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2018.1543603
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Ш.Т. Жанысбекова (Автор)

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.