Pragmatic Failure in EFL Learners’ Emails and AI Grammar Tools Feedback
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.70152/duties.v1i2.221Keywords:
AI feedback, EFL writing, Email pragmatics, Pragmatic competenceArticle Metrics
Abstract
This study investigates the pragmatic failures found in EFL learners’ academic email communication and evaluates the extent to which AI grammar tools can detect and address such failures. Drawing on theories of interlanguage pragmatics and politeness, the research identifies recurring issues in the realization of requests, apologies, and formal politeness—where learners often produce grammatically correct yet pragmatically inappropriate messages. These failures commonly stem from first-language pragmatic transfer and a lack of explicit instruction in target language norms. Adopting a mixed-methods approach, the study analyzed a corpus of 640 elicited emails from 80 EFL university students and assessed feedback from Grammarly, Quillbot, and ChatGPT using comparative qualitative and quantitative analysis. While the tools effectively corrected surface-level errors, they fell short in addressing context-sensitive pragmatic nuances such as indirectness, tone, and formality. The findings underscore the distinction between linguistic and pragmatic competence, highlight the limitations of current AI tools in fostering pragmatic awareness, and emphasize the need for explicit, context-rich instruction. This study contributes to a more integrated understanding of how human expertise and AI technologies can collaboratively support pragmatic development in digital language learning environments.
References
AbuHussein, H. F., & Badah, A. (2025). The role of AI-based writing tools on l2 writing competency: Evidence from Palestinian EFL learners. Dirasat: Human and Social Sciences, 52(5), 6566. https://doi.org/10.35516/hum.v52i5.6566
Alemi, M., & Maleknia, Z. (2023). Politeness markers in emails of non-native English speaking university students. Russian Journal of Linguistics, 27(1), 67–87. https://doi.org/10.22363/2687-0088-33334
Alfghe, A., & Mohammadzadeh, B. (2021). Realisation of the speech act of request, suggestion and apology by Libyan EFL learners. Sage Open, 11(4). https://doi.org/10.1177/21582440211050378
Algryani, A., & Al Jardani, K. S. (2023). Email literacy in higher education institutions: A case study on student-instructor email communication at Dhofar University in Oman. World Journal of English Language, 13(6), 549. https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v13n6p549
Alhusban, H. A., & Alshehri, N. (2022). “Wallah! I beg your pardon...”: A cross-cultural study of apology speech acts. Journal of Intercultural Communication, 22(1), 69–80. https://doi.org/10.36923/jicc.v22i1.28
Altakhaineh, A. R. M., Hasheish, M. A., & Hamaydeh, D. (2024). Pragmatic failures in intercultural communication: Evidence from Jordan. Psycholinguistics, 36(2), 38–62. https://doi.org/10.31470/2309-1797-2024-36-2-38-62
Bahr, A. (2024). Bridges without foundation? Why the use of AI tools in academia needs to build on ethics first. Filozofia, 79(5), 486–500. https://doi.org/10.31577/filozofia.2024.79.5.2
Brandt, A., & Hazel, S. (2025). Towards interculturally adaptive conversational AI.
Applied Linguistics Review, 16(2), 775–786. https://doi.org/10.1515/applirev-2024-0187
Creswell, J. W., & Clark, V. L. P. (2011). Choosing a mixed methods design. In Designing and Conducting Mixed Methods Research (pp. 53–106). Sage Publications, Inc.
Dentella, V., Günther, F., Murphy, E., Marcus, G., & Leivada, E. (2024). Testing AI on language comprehension tasks reveals insensitivity to underlying meaning. Scientific Reports, 14(1), 28083. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-79531-8
Diegoli, E. (2022). “Sorry for your consideration”: The (in)adequacy of English speech act labels in describing ‘apologies’ and ‘thanks’ in Japanese. Intercultural Pragmatics, 19(5), 621–645. https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2022-5004
Garcés-conejos, P., & Blitvich. (2024). Pragmatics, (Im)politeness, and intergroup communication. Cambridge University Press.
Hammouri, D. M., & Al-Khanji, R. R. (2023). Pragmatic competence in learner English: The case of Jordanian EFL learners. Theory and Practice in Language Studies, 13(4), 1076–1086. https://doi.org/10.17507/tpls.1304.30
Haristiani, N., & Christinawati, D. (2024). Interlanguage pragmatic competence of university students: An error analysis of apology speech act strategies in Japanese learners. International Journal of Language Education, 8(1). https://doi.org/10.26858/ijole.v8i1.60904
Kale, U., Herrera, M., & Nagy, A. (2021). Examining pragmatic failure and other language-related risks in global aviation. Aircraft Engineering and Aerospace Technology, 93(8), 1313–1322. https://doi.org/10.1108/AEAT-03-2021-0081
Kentmen, H., Debreli, E., & Yavuz, M. A. (2023). Assessing tertiary Turkish EFL learners’ pragmatic competence regarding speech acts and conversational implicatures. Sustainability, 15(4), 3800. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15043800
Krajka, J., & Olszak, I. (2024). “AI, will you help?” How learners use Artificial Intelligence when writing. XLinguae, 17(1), 34–48. https://doi.org/10.18355/XL.2024.17.01.03
Letmathe, P., & Noll, E. (2024). Analysis of email management strategies and their effects on email management performance. Omega, 124, 103002. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.omega.2023.103002
Liang, J., Huang, F., & Teo, T. (2024). Understanding Chinese university EFL learners’ perceptions of AI in English writing. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning and Teaching, 14(1), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.4018/IJCALLT.358918
Lim, H., Cosley, D., & Fussell, S. R. (2022). Understanding cross-lingual pragmatic misunderstandings in email communication. Proceedings of the ACM on Human- Computer Interaction, 6(CSCW1), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1145/3512976
Marcet, E., & Sasamoto, R. (2023). Examining interlanguage pragmatics from a relevance-theoretic perspective: Challenges in L2 production. Intercultural Pragmatics, 20(4), 405–427. https://doi.org/10.1515/ip-2023-4003
Mizumoto, A., Shintani, N., Sasaki, M., & Teng, M. F. (2024). Testing the viability of ChatGPT as a companion in L2 writing accuracy assessment. Research Methods in Applied Linguistics, 3(2), 100116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rmal.2024.100116
Nicholas, A., Blake, J., Mozgovoy, M., & Perkins, J. (2023). Investigating pragmatic failure in L2 English email writing among Japanese university EFL learners. Register Studies, 5(1), 23–51. https://doi.org/10.1075/rs.20016.nic
Nishant, R., Schneckenberg, D., & Ravishankar, M. (2024). The formal rationality of artificial intelligence-based algorithms and the problem of bias. Journal of Information Technology, 39(1), 19–40. https://doi.org/10.1177/02683962231176842
Nursanti, E., Andriyanti, E., & Wijaya, I. A. (2023). (Im)politeness employed by multilingual Indonesian EFL learners in argumentative conversations. Studies in English Language and Education, 10(2), 1000–1021. https://doi.org/10.24815/siele.v10i2.26033
Panther, K. (2022). Introduction to cognitive pragmatics. John Benjamins B.V.
Qin, W., Jia, R., & Ren, W. (2024). pragmatic competence in an email writing task: Influences of situation, L1 background, and L2 proficiency. Written Communication, 41(4), 726–755. https://doi.org/10.1177/07410883241263543
Roberts, J., Baker, M., & Andrew, J. (2024). Artificial intelligence and qualitative research: The promise and perils of large language model (LLM) ‘assistance.’ Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 99(February), 102722. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpa.2024.102722
Rodríguez Velasco, D. (2022). ‘Dear Dr John Smith. I refuse to obey this mark. That’s mean. So, can you give me a higher mark?’ International Review of Pragmatics, 15(1), 3–31. https://doi.org/10.1163/18773109-01401001
Safont, P. (2024). Multilingual cyberpragmatics in instructional settings. Exploring gender and age effects in Catalan, Spanish and English email requests. International Journal of Multilingualism, 21(3), 1494–1516. https://doi.org/10.1080/14790718.2023.2187811
Saleem, T., Anjum, U., & Tahir, S. (2021). The sociopragmatic and pragmalinguistic strategies in l2 pragmatic competence: A case of Pakistani ESL learners. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research, 50(2), 185–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/17475759.2021.1877176
Sharma, M., Devi, M., Dangoria, R., & Jain, V. (2022). Literature enhances communication skills: A comprehensive review. World Journal of English Language, 12(3), 157. https://doi.org/10.5430/wjel.v12n3p157
Thomas, J. A. (1995). Meaning in interaction: An introduction to pragmatics. Routledge.
Troiani, G., Du Bois, J. W., & Filchenko, A. (2024). Corpus as a slice of life: Representing naturally occurring language and its speakers. Research in Corpus Linguistics, 12(2), 174–202. https://doi.org/10.32714/ricl.12.02.08
Williyan, A., Fitriati, S. W., Pratama, H., & Sakhiyya, Z. (2024). AI as co-creator: Exploring Indonesian EFL teachers’ collaboration with AI in content development. Teaching English With Technology, 2024(2). https://doi.org/10.56297/vaca6841/LRDX3699/RZOH5366
Yuan, Y., Li, H., & Sawaengdist, A. (2024). The impact of ChatGPT on learners in English academic writing: Opportunities and challenges in education. Language Learning in Higher Education, 14(1), 41–56. https://doi.org/10.1515/cercles-2023- 0006
Zhao, X. (2023). Leveraging artificial intelligence (AI) technology for English writing: Introducing Wordtune as a digital writing assistant for EFL writers. RELC Journal, 54(3), 890–894. https://doi.org/10.1177/00336882221094089
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Nur Ifadloh, Ameen Saliman Abdullahi, Rani Aryanti Rukmana
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Copyright for this article is held by the authors under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0). The article may be used, shared, and adapted for any purpose with proper attribution and distribution under the same license. Full license details: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/
