This state-of-the-art paper discusses common approaches to the assessment of pragmatic competence. Two approaches have dominated the assessment practice in the field of second language (L2) pragmatics. One approach, rooted in the tradition of contrastive pragmatics, involves comparing and contrasting L2 learners' pragmalinguistic forms with those of native speakers to determine whether L2 forms approximate native speaker forms. The other approach, rooted in the tradition of performance-based assessment, involves using a rating scale to evaluate L2 pragmatic performance based on multiple criteria (e.g., clarity of intention, formality level of expressions, and interaction abilities). Focusing on the area of speech act assessment, this paper presents an overview of these two approaches, highlighting their advantages and disadvantages. By doing so, the paper intends to illustrate the interface between contrastive pragmatics and L2 pragmatics. The paper concludes with critical insights in terms of what is missing in these approaches under the current trend of globalization and intercultural communication.