1.1 Research background

Having studied the present topic over the past 4 years,we have found that many researchers and scholars（Liu Shaozhong,1997; Wang Chuming,2003; Liu Runqin＆Liu Si,2005; Liu Jianda,2007; Dai Weidong,2008;Zhang Chong,2010; Kuang Fangtao,2010; Huang Yuanshen,2010; Judd,1999; Swender ＆ Duncan,1999; Rose ＆ Kasper,2001; Kasper ＆ Rose,2002; Barron,2003; Swaffar,Kramsch,＆ Schulz,2006; Soler ＆ Martinez-Flor,2008; Hwang,2009; et al.）both at home and abroad believe,to a large extent,that pragmatic competence,as one of the two core components in language or communicative competence,not only runs a close parallel to linguistic competence,but also takes the top level of second or foreign language（L2/FL）learners' communicative competence.The role of pragmatic competence in conceptualizing communicative competence and in mastering a L2/FL language exhibits a clear contrast to its practice and effect in actual L2/FL language education.With the strong tradition of memorization and test-driven language education,what the Chinese EFL teaching has been ig noring is pragmatic competence,which greatly affects the improvement and attainment of the students' English proficiency.Compared with linguistic competence,it is not that much easier to teach and learn pragmatic competence,especially in EFL context because EFL is inherently lacking in linguistic environment.Also,it is very difficult to define and describe the meaning and components of pragmatic competence（Barron,2003; Zou Weicheng,2010,cited in Chang Haichao,2010）,so that the topic we choose in this research is a hard nut to crack,but a must in second or foreign language education.The research intends to find out the current inadequacy of interpreting pragmatic competence and explore a valid approach or model for the constructs of pragmatic competence in theory and practice.Additional motivations for doing this research are as follows：

（1）There is a common saying in China that EFL teaching“consumes too much time,but produces little effect”.The same idea can be also found in study-abroad literature.Researchers（Swender ＆ Duncan,1999; Swaffar,Kramsch,Schulz,et al.2006）maintained in recent studies of applied linguistics and second language acquisition（SLA）that,since educators and practitioners fail to fully recognize the meaning and the nature of communicative competence,even after over 10 years of instruction in school,student language proficiency in the commonly taught Indo-European languages remains generally at the ACTEL（American Council on the Teaching of Foreign Languages）Proficiency Guide-lines level of Intermediate-level Mid to Intermediate High.In China,many researchers and scholars（Wang Chuming,2003; Liu Runqin ＆ Liu Si,2005; Dai Weidong,2008; Zhang Chong,2010; Kuang Fangtao,2010; Huang Yuanshen,2010; et al.）agree that,although most students have been learning English for many years,their English proficiency could not satisfy basic requirements,and remains generally at the lower or intermediate level,the reason for which is that EFL teaching has been long focusing on linguistic competence as the learning objective in fluenced by the traditional pedagogic concept and examination-driven instruction.On the other hand,even if teachers and practitioners know there is a demand for improving students' language use ability,the instructional objectives are obscure and abstract except for linguistic or grammatical knowledge.Kuang Fangtao（2010）claims that：

English language teaching is a complex system in which the key issue is to make a specific and operative teaching objective.If there is no such objective,EFL teaching will be extremely blind and arbitrary so that it can hardly achieve the expected goal.The aim of English language teaching is not only to impart linguistic knowledge to students but to develop their effective communicative competence in various situations.We may venture to say that the challenge to current Chinese foreign language teaching lies in how we identify communicative competence as the specific and operative instructional object.

（2）Since the notion of communicative competence proposed by Hymes（1972）in reaction to Chomsky's linguistic competence has been introduced into L2/FL language teaching and testing by Canale and Swain in 1980,it has been considered as the learning objective,research goal and central topic in applied linguistics and second language acquisition（Yu Liming ＆ Yuan Pinghua,2004）.Interestingly,linguists and applied linguists at home and abroad have been interpreting the connotation and constructs of communicative competence,and making contributions to the provision of various interpretive models for the past over 30 years.The problem is that there have been endless controversies over its interpretation,and even some misunderstandings or inadequacies of its definition and application in the actual language teaching（Swaffar,Kramsch,Schulz,et al.2006）.A brief literature review will show that the underlying cause for these controversies and misunderstandings of communicative competence is due to the incomplete and dif ferent interpretations of pragmatic competence which is one of two core components of communicative competence.

（3）Along with the in-depth identification of pragmatic competence as the other side of language（Paradis,1998）,it is unanimously believed that pragmatic competence is an indispensable part of language proficiency and its inclusion in language teaching plays an important role in facilitating L2/FL learners' communicative competence（Judd,1999; Liu Runqin ＆ Liu Si,2005; Liu Jianda,2007; Dai Weidong,2008; Hwang,2009）.Judd（1999:152）claims that it is considered almost axiomatic that those who are acquiring a second language need to gain mastery over the sociolinguistic and pragmatic rules of the target language.Hwang（2009:37-38）also insists that：

Pragmatic competence is vital to EFL as a tool for understanding what people mean and what they intend,and for being able to correctly interpret incoming information; in other words,reading and listening comprehension for EFL students may be much more essential than near-native production of English.If East Asian classrooms continue to ignore pragmatics and how English is used in the real world,the region's fervor for English instruction will still be‘much ado about nothing,' as it has been for decades.

Although researchers and teachers notice the importance of learners' communicative competence in L2/FL teaching,they do not fully recognize the crucial role of training pragmatic competence in improving communicative competence（Liu Runqin ＆ Liu Si,2005）.Increasing pragmatic awareness and pragmatic competence is the main task of second or foreign language education.

（4）Pragmatic competence is regarded as a bond that helps realize the communicative flow.It not only relates to every level of verbal communication,but also affects the top level of communicative competence achievement（Zhang Shaojie,2003; Liu Runqin＆Liu Si,2005; Soler＆Martinez-Flor,2008; Chang Haichao,2010）.Liu Runqin and Liu Si（2005）hold that pragmatic competence is as important as linguistic competence in the beginning,but more important than linguistic competence at the advanced stage in English learning.Consistent with this point of view,Hwang（2009:37）claims that：

Pragmatic competence in English needs to be well developed for comprehension purposes,even if becoming like a‘native speaker' is not desirable.Otherwise,ESL or EFL learners will end up not comprehending or at least misinterpreting their L2.

There is no question that pragmatic competence plays a critical role not only in the developmemt of learners' communicative competence but also in the ultimate attainment of the target language proficiency in second or foreign language education.

（5）From the perspective of pragmatic teaching and learning,EFL instruction is more difficult than ESL instruction.The focus of L2/FL pragmatic development is on language use in context,and it is very clear that EFL,which is taught outside of English-speaking countries and which does not involve daily contact with the language,is inherently at a disadvantage as compared to ESL（Hwang,2009:22）.Language acquisition and use is contextdependent,and as Wang Chuming（2003a,2003b）concludes,it is due to lack of context that Chinese learners have much more difficulty in learning English,and that they continue to speak mute English and Chinglish while having learnt it for many years.Since the biggest stumbling block of developing the learners' pragmatic competence in EFL settings is lack of attention to pragmatic features in foreign language classes,and learners do not have the adequate accessibility of authentic target language input,it should be admitted that pragmatic acquisition and development is one of the greatest chal lenges that EFL teaching and learning face,have faced,and will face.

（6）The last,but not the least,motivation is the development of cognitive linguistics that provides new perspectives for the study of pragmatic competence.Researchers（Kecskes,2006; Kecskes and Zhang,2009; Ran Yongping and Zhang Xinhong,2007; Sun Ya,2008; et al.）believe that pragmatics and cognition have an inherent connection,and cognitive theories and approaches to the research of language use will enrich and complement the theories of pragmatics.Whether it is in the theoretical aspect or the methodological aspect,cognitive linguistics is a pragmatically-oriented discipline of linguistics.Ran Yongping states that（2007:4）,philosophy lays the conceptual foundation to pragmatics,and the development of cognitive sciences offers different perspectives to pragmatics,which will play an important role in the future study of pragmatics.

We argue that the motivations displayed above and the existing issues in Chinese EFL teaching have proved it imperative and necessary for us to undertake the present research.We believe that pragmatic acquisition and development is a hard nut to crack but a must for EFL instruction.To cultivate the EFL learners' communicative ability,to raise their fluency in the target language,and to develop the native-like L2/FL proficiency,educators and practitioners should lay a particular emphasis on the development of pragmatic competence.As this is an imperative issue that Chinese EFL teaching needs to deal with to date,we should provide a clear picture of pragmatic competence and components,with which effective ways and approaches are found for learners' pragmatic acquisition and development in Chinese EFL teaching context.

Therefore,we have chosen to work with pragmatic competence as our research theme because it seems to us that it is the vortex around which many controversies in language teaching have swirled.Furthermore,pragmatic competence,as a subsystem of language,has attracted much attention of lin guists and applied linguists ever since its Hymes-inspired inception and Swain and Canale's introduction of communicative competence to language teaching.All in all,we have chosen to explore pragmatic competence because we have always been been intrigued by this issue and the paradoxes in the enquiry of the area.It is,at one and the same time,a common issue in communication,and one that can be characterized by its difficult description and interpretation.The study of pragmatic competence is both loved and loathed.