Bremen Abitur English common mistakes
Bremen Abitur English · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Writing a summary of the source text in the analysis task instead of analysing how the text works (structure, rhetoric, language, argumentation).
Candidates are trained in summary writing from earlier years and fall back on reproducing content because it feels safe; they confuse 'showing I understood the text' with 'analysing it'.
What to do instead
Before writing, draw a two-column plan: 'what the text says' versus 'how and why it does it'. Only the second column may enter the analysis. Anchor every analysis paragraph to a specific linguistic feature quoted from the text (e.g. a metaphor, a rhetorical question, a shift in register) and state its intended effect on the reader.
Producing an unstructured essay with no clear thesis, so the argument reads as a list of points rather than a line of reasoning.
Under time pressure candidates write down everything they know about the topic instead of deciding what they will argue; German essay conventions (Erörterung) are sometimes only half transferred to English.
What to do instead
Spend 5 minutes on a one-sentence thesis and a three-part outline (claim, counter-claim, synthesis or evaluation). Each body paragraph starts with a topic sentence that advances the thesis. Check after drafting that every paragraph could be deleted only at the cost of breaking the argument.
Using an inappropriate register: colloquialisms, contractions, or chatty fillers in a formal analytical or argumentative text, or conversely over-inflated vocabulary copied from a phrase list.
Candidates want to sound fluent and grab ready-made 'impressive' phrases; register awareness is rarely practised explicitly, so formal/informal choices are made by feel.
What to do instead
Keep a personal register checklist (no contractions, no 'a lot of', no 'I think' as a filler) and prefer precise simple verbs over memorised fancy ones. After writing, mark every phrase you did not generate yourself and ask whether it fits the text type and audience; replace it if you cannot justify it.
Answering the comprehension questions with long paraphrases of whole paragraphs instead of targeted answers in own words.
Candidates fear missing a point and therefore copy large chunks, which is neither concise nor proof of understanding; paraphrasing skill is under-practised.
What to do instead
Answer the question in the first sentence, then add the minimum evidence needed. Practise paraphrasing by changing structure and word class rather than swapping synonyms (e.g. turning a noun phrase into a clause). Never lift a full sentence from the text into a comprehension answer.
Ignoring the task's operative verbs and scope: analysing only one aspect when the prompt asks for two, or writing about the topic generally instead of addressing the specific question.
Operators such as 'analyse', 'compare', 'evaluate', 'discuss' and 'comment' are read quickly, and candidates map the prompt onto a familiar essay they have prepared rather than reading it precisely.
What to do instead
Underline the operator, the content words and any limiting words ('to what extent', 'with reference to lines X–Y') before planning. Restate the task in one sentence of your own and check your final text against it. Count the required aspects and tick each one off explicitly in the conclusion.
Quoting inaccurately or without integration: long block quotations, quotes without line references, or quotations that are not commented on.
Candidates quote to prove they read the text rather than to support a point, and line numbering is forgotten under time pressure.
What to do instead
Use the rule 'quote short, cite exactly, then interpret'. Embed only the words that carry the analytical point, give the line number in brackets, and follow every quotation with a sentence explaining what it reveals and why it matters for the question.
Misreading the tone, stance, or irony of a text and then building the whole analysis on that misreading.
Irony, understatement and unreliable narration are culturally coded and easy to miss, especially when vocabulary gaps push candidates toward a literal reading.
What to do instead
Before analysing, write one sentence on the speaker's attitude and find two textual signals (word choice, exaggeration, contrast, punctuation) that support it. If signals conflict, name the ambiguity rather than forcing a single reading. Practise on short opinion pieces where tone shifts within a paragraph.
Writing a 'solution' or personal opinion in the analysis task, or conversely staying purely descriptive in the comment/evaluation task.
The boundary between analysing a text and judging it is blurred; candidates either moralise early or are afraid to commit to a judgement when one is required.
What to do instead
Separate the tasks physically in your plan: analysis answers 'how does the text work', evaluation answers 'how convincing is it and why'. In the evaluation, state a clear position, support it with textual evidence plus your own reasoning, and acknowledge the strongest counter-argument.
Losing coherence through missing linking and paragraphing: abrupt jumps between ideas, no signposting, paragraphs organised by source order rather than by argument.
Planning time is cut to write more, so structure emerges while writing; cohesive devices are known passively but not actively used.
What to do instead
Write the topic sentence of each paragraph first as a skeleton, check the sequence makes an argument, then fill in. Use a small set of connectives deliberately (however, therefore, by contrast, moreover) and make sure each paragraph's last sentence links to the next.
Running out of time because too long is spent reading and planning, leaving the final task rushed or unfinished, and skipping proofreading.
Candidates allocate time evenly across tasks although the writing tasks carry most of the marks, and they underestimate reading time for a demanding text.
What to do instead
Fix a written time budget before the exam (e.g. reading and notes, comprehension, analysis, comment, 5–10 minutes proofreading) and stick to it with a watch. If time runs short, finish the current task in note form rather than abandoning it, and reserve the last minutes for checking tense, agreement and spelling of frequent errors.