Andalusia PAU Latin II common mistakes
Andalusia PAU Latin II · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Translating the ablative absolute as if it were a plain prepositional phrase or a finite clause joined by 'y', e.g. rendering 'Urbe capta, milites discesserunt' as 'la ciudad fue capturada y los soldados se marcharon'.
Candidates recognise the participle but not the construction as a unit, so they give the participle its own subject and verb instead of subordinating it to the main clause. Spanish has no direct equivalent, which pushes students toward a literal word-by-word rendering.
What to do instead
Before translating, bracket every participle + noun pair that has no governing preposition and no finite verb; label it 'ablativo absoluto' and convert it with 'al + infinitivo' ('al ser tomada la ciudad'), 'una vez + participio', or a causal/temporal clause ('como la ciudad hubiera sido tomada'). Drill a fixed list of ten such sentences until the conversion is automatic.
Leaving passive periphrastic and gerundive constructions as a bare future ('los enemigos serán vencidos') when the text means obligation ('los enemigos deben ser vencidos' / 'hay que vencer a los enemigos').
The -ndus ending looks like a future participle to a candidate who has memorised endings without function; the dative of agent that usually accompanies it is then misread as an indirect object.
What to do instead
Whenever you see -nd- plus a form of esse, scan for a dative of agent in the same clause; if present, translate with 'deber + infinitivo' or 'hay que'. Keep a two-column card: future participle (-turus) vs gerundive (-ndus), each with one model sentence.
Mistaking the case of a noun because its ending is ambiguous (e.g. reading 'regi' as nominative plural instead of dative singular, or 'urbem' as accusative when the syntax requires ablative), producing a translation with the wrong subject or object.
Students translate left-to-right and assign cases by the first plausible ending rather than by clause structure; Spanish word order is flexible enough that a wrong assignment can still yield a grammatical-sounding but wrong sentence.
What to do instead
Adopt a strict two-pass method: first pass marks every noun/adjective by declension and possible cases without translating; second pass assigns one case per word using agreement, preposition, and verb valency, and checks that every clause has exactly one subject.
Analysing a form only by its morphology and not by its syntactic function in the sentence, e.g. writing 'puero: dativo singular' when in the text it is an ablative of agent governed by 'a'.
The analysis question is treated as a paradigm recitation exercise; candidates answer what the form could be rather than what it is here, and they omit the governing word.
What to do instead
Always write the analysis in three parts: (1) possible morphological readings, (2) the reading selected, (3) the syntactic function plus the word that governs it ('ablativo de agente dependiente de a + verbo pasivo'). If part 3 is missing, the answer is incomplete.
Declining to identify subjunctive mood and its subordination type, translating 'cum venisset' as indicative 'cuando vino' and 'ut' clauses as if they were purpose or result at random.
Mood is often signalled by a vowel change that is visually small (-e- vs -i-), and the candidate has not internalised the sequence-of-tense rules that make a pluperfect subjunctive in a cum clause translate as a prior action.
What to do instead
Memorise the diagnostic endings for each conjugation (present -m/-s/-t/-mus/-tis/-nt with the theme vowel; imperfect -rem/-res/-ret; perfect -erim/-eris; pluperfect -issem) and practise translating ten 'cum' clauses where only the mood distinguishes narrative-cum from causal-cum.
Giving a single dictionary gloss for a polysemous word and ignoring the context, e.g. translating 'res' always as 'cosa', 'ratio' always as 'razón', or 'imperium' as 'imperio' without deciding between 'poder', 'mando' and 'territorio'.
Candidates memorise one Spanish equivalent per Latin headword from vocabulary lists and never build a sense inventory; they also fear that choosing a non-literal sense is 'wrong'.
What to do instead
For the ten highest-frequency abstract nouns (res, ratio, imperium, vis, animus, causa, gratia, mos, opus, signum) build a card with three contextual senses and one Latin citation each; in the exam, choose the sense that makes the surrounding clause coherent and justify it in one line.
Ignoring semantic fields and connotation in the commentary, describing 'virtus', 'pietas' or 'fides' as simple translations ('valor', 'piedad', 'fe') without noting the Roman value system they encode.
The lexical commentary is treated as a glossary task rather than a cultural one; students do not connect vocabulary to the civic and religious concepts studied in the culture domain.
What to do instead
Prepare a short list of Roman value-terms with a one-sentence definition of the concept and a note on how the Spanish translation shifts it (e.g. pietas is not Christian 'piedad' but duty toward gods, family and state). Use this list explicitly in every commentary you write.
Writing a 'commentary' that is a plot summary plus a list of rhetorical figures, with no thesis about the author's purpose and no reference to the Latin wording.
The question usually asks for 'comentario' without a prescribed structure, so candidates reproduce the content they remember from class and add figure-spotting as decoration.
What to do instead
Use a fixed four-part scaffold: (1) situate the passage in genre, author, work and context in two sentences; (2) state a thesis about what the passage is doing; (3) support it with two or three quoted Latin words or constructions and their effect; (4) close with how the passage fits the work's theme. Quote the Latin at least twice.
Attributing a passage to the wrong genre or period, e.g. calling Cicero's speeches 'historiography', placing Seneca the Younger in the Augustan age, or treating Plautus as a writer of prose.
Authors are studied as isolated names in a syllabus rather than as a timeline, and the exam expects a short identification that candidates answer from vague memory.
What to do instead
Build a one-page timeline with four columns: author, date (approximate), genre, one hallmark work and one defining stylistic feature. Recite it until you can place any of the standard authors within a century and a genre without hesitation.
Confusing Greek-derived and Latin-derived etymologies or inventing a Latin etymon for a Spanish word, e.g. deriving 'problema' from a Latin *problema without noting the Greek origin, or claiming 'trabajo' comes from a Latin word it does not.
Candidates rely on surface similarity between Spanish and Latin and have not learned the regular phonetic changes (F- > h-, -CT- > -ch-, -PL- > -ll-, vowel syncope) that let you test a derivation.
What to do instead
Learn the six or seven regular sound-change rules and apply them as a test: if the derivation is right, the changes should be predictable. For each word in your list, record the etymon with its quantity and note whether the word entered Spanish by popular or learned transmission.
Answering culture questions with modern analogies or film-derived images instead of specific institutions, e.g. describing the Roman Senate as a parliament, or the cursus honorum as an election campaign.
Students absorb Roman history from popular media and general knowledge, which supplies vivid but inaccurate schemas that feel sufficient under exam pressure.
What to do instead
For each institution on the syllabus (Senate, consulship, tribunate, censorship, provincial government, army, familia, religion) write a five-line factual card with dates and powers, and test yourself by explaining the difference from the modern analogue in one sentence.