The issue of learners’ individual differences (IDs) has been largely overlooked in the field of second language (L2) pragmatics. In light of this gap, the present investigation explores the interplay of motivation, strategy instruction and pragmatic ability in relation to Chinese EFL learners’ email pragmatic development. It was guided by three research questions, which aimed to investigate: (RQ1) the effects of motivation on learners’ pragmatic ability prior to instruction, (RQ2) the effects of strategy instruction on learners’ pragmatic ability, and (RQ3) the effects of strategy instruction on learners’ pragmatic motivation.

A total of 188 university students (Chinese L2 learners) participated in this study. Based on their pre-test motivation score, which was obtained from a motivation questionnaire, learners were classified into two groups: a high-motivation (HM) group (n = 60) and a low-motivation (LM) group (n = 60). Their pragmatic ability was assessed through an Electronic Discourse Completion Task (e-DCT) at three time points (pre-test, post-test, and delayed post-test), specifically in the context of student-faculty email writing across three speech acts: requests, invitations and invitation-requests. Following the pre-test, learners received 12 hours of strategy-based pragmatics instruction (pragmatics strategy instruction) over one month, during which they were taught several cognitive and metacognitive strategies related to self-regulated learning of L2 pragmatics. The post-test was administered one week after the instruction, while the delayed post-test was conducted six months later. Semi-structured interviews were also conducted to explore learners’ perceptions of their own (email) pragmatic motivation.

Regarding RQ1, results revealed that motivation did not significantly influence learners’ pragmatic performance. Both the HM and LM groups displayed an equally limited pragmatic ability in email writing before instruction, characterised by great directness and minimal mitigation. It has been argued that the minimal motivational effects may be attributed to the overarching impact of proficiency, the dynamic nature of motivation, and the inherent complexity involved in pragmatic production tasks.

Regarding RQ2, findings indicated that both HM and LM learners made significant progress following instruction, and that the instructional effects were retained for up to six months. The learners significantly increased their use of conventionally indirect strategies and internal and external modification devices in their emails, while significantly decreasing the use of aggravators. As the two groups showed similar pragmatic gains, motivation was again not found to significantly influence the effectiveness of pragmatics instruction, except in the case of invitation-requests. This suggests that both highly and less motivated learners were able to initiate and regulate pragmatic learning. In other words, strategy instruction could effectively enhance learners’ pragmatic ability regardless of their initial motivation levels.

Regarding RQ3, results revealed that both learners’ general pragmatic motivation and their email-specific pragmatic motivation increased significantly following instruction, though the instructional effects were only evident in the LM group. Qualitative findings further indicated that while the learners generally acknowledged the importance of learning pragmatics, they were reluctant to take immediate steps to improve their pragmatic ability. Factors influencing this reluctance included the perceived limited applicability of L2 pragmatic skills, the lack of formal pragmatics instruction and assessment, and heavy academic workloads.

Overall, while the positive effects of strategy instruction have been well-established in this study, the role of L2 motivation still opens up a range of intriguing questions, inviting further systematic investigation. This thesis concludes with a discussion of the theoretical and pedagogical implications.