Courrier des lecteurs : le titre dit-il ce que le texte dit ?
A 220-word letter to the local paper. Mme Fabre, 62, writes about the pedestrianisation of the town centre: « On nous annonce 40 commerces rue de la République ; j'en compte 31, dont 6 fermés. » Further on: « Je ne suis pas contre les piétons, évidemment : j'ai fait mes courses à pied pendant trente ans. Mais à mon âge, deux arrêts de bus supprimés, cela fait 900 mètres à pied, aller et retour, avec un chariot. » She ends by asking for « un seul arrêt maintenu, pas trois ». The paper's headline reads: « Une lectrice s'oppose à la piétonisation ». The exercise asks: « Que reproche Mme Fabre à la mairie ? »
1. Is the headline accurate? Justify with two elements from the text.
Read the worked answer
No - the headline is broader than what she writes.
Two textual elements:
- « Je ne suis pas contre les piétons, évidemment » - she explicitly refuses the global label the headline gives her. The évidemment reinforces that the refusal is not a rhetorical hedge.
- Her closing demand is « un seul arrêt maintenu, pas trois » - a partial, negotiated, quantified request, not a demand to cancel the scheme.
A faithful headline would be something like: « Une lectrice demande le maintien d'un arrêt de bus ».
Why this matters for the exam: papers write headlines to be striking, and the exercise is precisely built on the gap between headline and body. The rule to apply: when a text contains (a) an explicit refusal of a general label and (b) a concrete, limited demand, the correct answer is the concrete demand. A candidate who answers with the headline is answering from the page layout, not from the reading.
2. What is the argumentative function of « j'en compte 31, dont 6 fermés »?
Read the worked answer
It is counter-evidence aimed at the town hall's figure, not an expression of feeling.
- 40 commerces is the authority's number; 31 is her own count - she opposes a count to a count.
- dont 6 fermés adds a second, separate point: not only are there fewer shops, but the street is losing vitality. Two arguments in nine words.
What the candidate must not conclude: that the passage shows she is en colère or émue. The register is argumentative, and the tone is controlled (évidemment, à mon âge). Answering « elle est en colère » is the classic CE error: describing the emotion a text produces instead of the function a sentence performs.
One caveat worth writing in a good answer: 31 is her own count, unverifiable from the text. A precise answer attributes it - « selon elle, 31 commerces » - rather than presenting it as established fact. That distinction (who claims what) is what separates a B1 answer from a B2 one on this type of document.
3. Two candidates answer « Que reproche Mme Fabre à la mairie ? ». (a) « Elle est contre la piétonisation. » (b) « Elle reproche la suppression de deux arrêts de bus et des chiffres qu'elle juge faux. » Which scores, and why?
Read the worked answer
(b) scores; (a) does not.
(a) fails on three counts:
- it reproduces the headline rather than the text - the reader has substituted the title for the body;
- it contradicts the letter's « je ne suis pas contre les piétons »;
- it does not answer the verb reprocher, which requires an object of blame (what exactly is criticised), not a general stance.
(b) succeeds because it does two things:
- it names the concrete grievance - the two bus stops, i.e. the 900 m with a shopping trolley;
- it frames the figures carefully: qu'elle juge faux - she disputes the numbers, she does not prove them false. That attribution protects the answer.
General method for « Que reproche X à Y ? »:
- find the concrete nouns (stops, distance, shops), not the abstract label (pedestrianisation);
- check for an explicit disclaimer before attributing an opinion;
- when the criticism involves a number the author counted herself, mark it as her claim.
Word count is irrelevant here: (b) is barely longer than (a). Precision, not length, is what the grid rewards.