Writing
What the writing section asks
You write short texts in Estonian: a message, an informal email or letter, a short narrative, or a simple opinion. Actual tasks may specify content points and a length; follow their published instructions rather than a universal word-count claim. Assessors look at task completion, range and accuracy of vocabulary and grammar, and register.
Core rules
- Answer every bullet point. If the task says 'say where, when and with whom', each point needs a clear sentence.
- Match register. Use sina 'you' (singular, informal) with a friend; use teie 'you' (plural/polite) with an adult stranger or an institution. Keep it consistent: Ära unusta... (informal) vs Ärge unustage... (polite).
- Open and close naturally: Tere! / Lugupeetud proua! and Parimate soovidega / Lugupidamisega.
- Estonian has no future tense. Use the present and a time expression: Homme lähen kinno 'Tomorrow I'll go to the cinema'; Laupäeval toimub pidu 'The party takes place on Saturday'.
- Use time and place cases correctly: laupäeval 'on Saturday', kell viis 'at five', kinos 'in the cinema', kinno 'to the cinema'.
- Link sentences with ja, kuid, sest, seepärast, näiteks; avoid starting every sentence with Ma.
Worked example
Task: write an email to a friend inviting them to a film on Saturday and asking them to bring a friend. Draft sentence: „Tere, Jaan! Laupäeval läheme kinno. Tuleb hea film. Kas sa tuled ka? Võta sõber kaasa!“ Reasoning: läheme is present tense used for a planned future event; laupäeval is the adessive time form; Kas introduces the yes/no question Kas sa tuled ka?; sa is the subject and tuled follows it; Võta is the imperative of võtma. All content points are covered in four short sentences.
Traps that cost marks
- Writing under the word limit or padding with repeated sentences.
- Copying the task wording instead of producing your own sentence.
- Mixing sina and teie forms in one text.
- Forgetting the question mark in yes/no questions or using English punctuation.
- Using a nominative object after a negative: Ma ei osta pileti → Ma ei osta piletit.
Develop an argument rather than a template
An advanced or native-language response needs a position that answers the actual question, reasons that explain why it is defensible and evidence appropriate to the claim. A familiar example may show a possibility without proving a universal rule. Explain the connection instead of relying on a confident phrase or a quotation’s prestige.
Plan paragraphs by argumentative function, not by a fixed requirement that every content point must occupy one paragraph. Introduce a real objection fairly, identify the criteria used to weigh it and formulate a qualified conclusion. A condition can make the conclusion more accurate rather than weaker. Do not invent numbers to make a judgment sound objective.
When synthesizing sources, distinguish their statements from your own proposal. Paraphrase accurately and cite or identify the source as the actual task requires. If two materials use different populations or time frames, explain that difference before combining the evidence. Formal vocabulary alone does not repair a missing logical link.
Revise in separate passes: task and position, structure and evidence, then language, spelling and punctuation. Estonian case government and the distinction between -ma and -da forms deserve contextual checking, but grammatical review should support the intended meaning rather than replace it. Full composition practice and feedback remain necessary; multiple-choice judgments and an English explanation do not establish native-level written performance.