CILS B2 study materials
CILS B2 study resources

CILS B2: Lettura: coesione, registro e ricostruzione del testo

CILS B2 · Work through your exam, one topic at a time.

All guide sections

Lettura: coesione, registro e ricostruzione del testo

What the paper asks

The reading paper normally combines three kinds of task: matching short texts (advertisements, notices, short articles) to headings, statements or situations; multiple-choice comprehension of a longer article; and reconstruction of a text from which sentences have been removed. The third task is where most marks are lost, because it tests textual grammar rather than vocabulary.

The traps

In multiple choice, the wrong options are usually true in the real world but false in this text, or they overstate («sempre», «tutti», «mai»), or they invert cause and effect. In matching tasks, two options may fit the topic; only one fits the function (a warning, an invitation, a refund policy). In reconstruction, the missing sentence must be justified by what surrounds it: a pronoun with no antecedent, a demonstrative referring backwards, or a connector that contradicts the logic are all proof that the sentence is misplaced.

Working method

Skim the whole text once for topic and register (formal notice? personal blog? newspaper report?), then read the questions and hunt for the relevant paragraph. For gap-filling, work on cohesion first: circle pronouns (questo, ne, esso), discourse markers (tuttavia, quindi, inoltre, d'altra parte, in effetti) and time expressions. A sentence beginning with Tuttavia cannot follow a sentence that agrees with it; a sentence beginning with Ne consegue che needs a premise before it.

Worked example

Gap after «Molti Comuni hanno ridotto gli orari degli sportelli.» Candidate sentence: «La conseguenza è stata un aumento delle code agli uffici centrali.» The connector conseguenza needs a preceding cause, and the noun sportelli provides the link to uffici centrali. A sentence such as «Anche i cittadini, però, hanno le loro responsabilità» would break the argument, because it introduces a contrast where the text is still drawing a conclusion. Rule of thumb: test each candidate by reading it aloud inside the gap - the logic must run without a jump.