QCAA French Extension common mistakes
QCAA French Extension · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Summarising what the text says in general terms instead of pinpointing the specific stance, tone or implicit argument the question asks about, so answers restate content without analysing it.
Candidates read for gist and lift the topic rather than interrogating the wording; under time pressure they treat 'comprendre' as 'translate the main idea' and miss that the task rewards interpretation of intent, irony or nuance.
What to do instead
Before writing, underline the exact words in the question (e.g. 'l'attitude de l'auteur envers...', 'le sous-entendu') and locate the two or three phrases in the text that carry that stance; build each answer around a quoted fragment plus an explanation of what it implies, never a paraphrase of the whole passage.
Treating a single lexical item as a false friend and building a whole answer on the wrong meaning (e.g. reading 'actuellement' as 'actually', 'éventuellement' as 'eventually', 'assister à' as 'assist').
Candidates map French words onto the nearest-looking English word and do not verify against context; vocabulary gaps are papered over rather than checked, and the error then propagates through the entire response.
What to do instead
Keep a personal log of high-frequency faux amis and test each doubtful word against the surrounding sentence: if the substituted meaning does not fit the syntax or logic of the passage, reject it. Practise by rewriting sentences replacing the suspect word with a synonym in French to confirm the sense.
Answering the question in English, or mixing English into a French response, when the task requires production in French.
Candidates default to English when a concept is hard to express, or they insert an English term mid-sentence to avoid a lexical gap; this can stem from translating from an English plan rather than thinking in French.
What to do instead
Plan and draft in French from the outset using a short French outline (thèse, deux arguments, exemple). Where a word is missing, paraphrase in simpler French (circumlocution) rather than switching language; rehearse common circumlocution strategies before the exam.
Writing an extended response with no clear thesis or line of argument, listing points in sequence without linking them to the question.
Candidates reproduce memorised topic content or a list of observations instead of constructing an argument; they confuse quantity of ideas with quality of reasoning and do not plan before writing.
What to do instead
Spend the first five minutes producing a skeleton: a one-sentence thesis that directly answers the prompt, two or three supporting claims, and one counter-argument or nuance. Check every paragraph against the thesis and cut anything that does not advance it.
Using connectors and register inconsistently, so the response lurches between formal written French and conversational phrasing, with repetitive link words ('et', 'aussi', 'mais') doing all the work.
Candidates have a narrow repertoire of discourse markers and default to the few they know; they also imitate spoken French from listening practice when the task demands sustained written register.
What to do instead
Build a tiered connector bank (concession: 'bien que', 'certes... mais'; consequence: 'par conséquent', 'd'où'; contrast: 'en revanche', 'tandis que') and practise inserting them into model paragraphs. Deliberately vary sentence openers and avoid starting consecutive sentences with the same connector.
Making systematic grammar errors that impede meaning: tense/aspect confusion (passé composé vs imparfait), faulty agreement, and misused subjunctive after expressions of doubt or necessity.
Candidates know rules passively but have not automatised them, so under time pressure they revert to English tense logic; subjunctive triggers are memorised as isolated phrases rather than as a category.
What to do instead
Do targeted editing passes: one read-through solely for verb tense and agreement, another solely for subjunctive triggers ('il faut que', 'bien que', 'avant que'). Keep a checklist of your own recurring errors and apply it to every practice piece before submission.
Treating French-speaking cultures as a single monolith, referring only to France or to clichés (berets, baguettes, Paris) when the prompt invites discussion of la francophonie.
Candidates draw on stereotyped textbook images and lack specific knowledge of Belgium, Switzerland, Québec, West Africa, the Maghreb or the Caribbean; they generalise from one example to 'les Français'.
What to do instead
Prepare a small set of precise, factual examples from at least three francophone regions (e.g. language policy in Québec, laïcité debates in France, francophone literature from Senegal or the Antilles) and practise framing them as specific cases rather than universal claims.
Describing cultural difference from an outsider's judgemental stance, presenting French practices as odd or inferior rather than analysing them in their own context.
Candidates evaluate unfamiliar norms against their own unexamined assumptions and have not practised decentring; they mistake observation for interpretation and moralise instead of explaining.
What to do instead
Use the 'describe, explain, compare, reflect' sequence: state the practice neutrally, explain the values or history behind it, compare with your own context without ranking, then reflect on what the comparison reveals. Replace evaluative adjectives with analytical language.
Ignoring the text type and its conventions when producing a response, writing a generic essay when asked for a letter, article, speech or blog post.
Candidates focus on content and grammar and overlook audience, register and formatting conventions; they do not identify the purpose and readership implied by the task instructions.
What to do instead
Before writing, note the text type, intended reader and purpose, then apply the matching conventions (salutation and closing for a letter, headline and hook for an article, direct address for a speech). Check the finished piece against those conventions as a final step.
Misallocating time: spending too long decoding the reading passage and leaving insufficient time to plan, write and proofread the extended production.
Candidates read and re-read without a purpose, answer questions in order with no time budget, and skip proofreading because they run out of time; anxiety about comprehension drives over-investment there.
What to do instead
Set fixed time blocks in advance (e.g. reading and note-taking, then production, then a reserved proofreading block) and practise under timed conditions. During reading, answer only what the question asks and move on; treat the proofreading block as non-negotiable.