Reading comprehension - global and detailed understanding of a written text
Reading comprehension is the first block of the Cantabria PAU Lengua Extranjera II paper. It asks you to process an authentic-style article and show both global understanding (main idea, purpose, tone, title) and detailed understanding (specific facts, paraphrases, inferences, reference). Items usually take the form of true/false statements with justification, multiple-choice questions, or short answers in your own words.
Identify the item type before answering
- Global items ask for the writer's main claim or purpose. The correct option covers the whole text; distractors describe one paragraph or a detail.
- Detailed items point to one or two lines. Locate the exact sentence, then check the relationship between subject, verb and object.
- Inference items require a logical step: the answer is implied, not quoted.
- Reference items ('this', 'such a measure', 'they') require you to trace the noun phrase back.
Justify true/false with the relevant line
For a true/false item, the justification must decide the truth of the statement. Copying a line that merely contains the same keyword is not enough. If the statement says X caused Y, your quote must show causation, not just mention both.
Worked example
Text: 'Although the council had promised to fund the repair of the harbour wall, the money was diverted to a new cycle path, leaving fishermen to raise funds themselves.' Statement: 'The council paid for the harbour wall repair.' Answer: False. 'Promised to fund' is not 'paid'; 'the money was diverted' shows the repair was not financed by the council. The fishermen had to 'raise funds themselves'. A keyword-match answer ('fund', 'harbour wall') would be wrong because it ignores the contrast marked by 'Although' and the verb 'diverted'.
Traps that cost marks
- Choosing an option because it repeats words from the text rather than because it paraphrases the meaning.
- Missing negation, quantifiers ('few', 'little', 'hardly'), modal distance ('may', 'could') or time markers ('since', 'no longer').
- In true/false, writing a justification that is true in the text but does not address the statement.
- Exceeding the word limit in short answers or copying a full sentence when the question says 'in your own words'.
- Confusing the writer's opinion with a view the writer reports and rejects.