This chapter discusses a language component that has not received sufficient research attention, that is, pragmatics. The chapter answers socially oriented questions such as How can I make this request politely? and What’s the best way to address this person? The chapter explains how pragmatics knowledge helps learners be aware of the requirements of the larger social context surrounding the language, and understand which grammatical and lexical forms are appropriate and helpful in different social contexts. Different pragmatic knowledge is discussed, that is, sociopragmatics (i.e., knowledge about the context) and pragmalinguistics (i.e., knowledge about specific linguistic forms). In addition, the chapter discusses speech acts, such as requests and compliments, which are used to achieve goals in our daily life by using language appropriately and effectively. The chapter then explains how pragmatics is embedded in our society by discussing illocutionary force and intercultural communicative competence. Finally, the chapter explores different ways of teaching pragmatics.

This chapter examines both the roots of sociopragmatics and current understandings of the field. It starts by positioning sociopragmaticswithin pragmatics, pointing out some particular difficulties with its conception. After consideration of whether J. L. Austin’s work could be said to be an early precursor, the foundations of sociopragmatics in the work of Geoffrey N. Leech and Jenny Thomas are reviewed, including the distinction they propose between pragmalinguistics and sociopragmatics, a distinction, it is noted, that has gained traction in certain sub-fields of pragmatics (e.g. cross-cultural pragmatics). The penultimate section examines the role of context in definitions of sociopragmatics, arguing that meso-level contextual notions are key. Finally, a definition of sociopragmatics is proposed

This chapter has two broad aims: to explore the potential for a role for corrective feedback in instructional pragmatics; and to review studies of instructional pragmatics that have investigated the effectiveness of corrective feedback. The chapter starts with the observation that there has been a disinclination to correct learners’ pragmatic errors. In fact, studies of instructional pragmatics rarely refer to “errors,” which is a construct integral to feedback studies. Allowing for this difference in orientation, the chapter discusses potential issues related to correcting pragmatic errors, such as challenges in identifying errors, the feasibility of correcting pragmalinguistic versus sociopragmatic errors, and the lack of firm norms to use in correction. Next, the chapter summarizes the findings of nine studies published between 2005 and 2017 and assesses their methodological strengths and weaknesses. The review revealed that although most of the studies reported positive effects for corrective feedback, many of the studies reviewed suffered from major methodological limitations. Owing to the nature of the available evidence, the chapter advocates neither for nor against the implementation of corrective feedback in instructional pragmatics. The chapter concludes by providing guidelines for future principled investigations into the role of corrective feedback in instructional pragmatics.