PAU French II (Cantabria) common mistakes
PAU French II (Cantabria) · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
The candidate answers reading-comprehension questions by matching a word or phrase that appears in the text to an option, without checking whether that option actually restates the passage's meaning.
Under time pressure, lexical matching feels safe: the eye catches a familiar word in both text and option and the brain treats recognition as comprehension. Cantabria's reading texts often include distractors that recycle the text's vocabulary but invert the relationship (cause/effect, before/after, who did what), so surface matching rewards the wrong answer.
What to do instead
For each option, go back to the exact sentence and ask 'does this option say the same thing as that sentence, or does it only share words?' Underline the text span that justifies the chosen answer and cross out the option if no single span supports it. Practise by writing a one-line paraphrase of each paragraph before reading the questions, then answer from your paraphrase rather than from keyword hunting.
The candidate treats a question about the author's intention, tone or the function of an example as if it were a factual detail question, and picks an option that is factually true of the text but does not answer what was asked.
Detail questions dominate early items, so candidates fall into a 'find the true statement' habit. Inference and attitude items require a different reading stance (why is this said here?), which is rarely drilled in class, so the candidate defaults to the familiar strategy.
What to do instead
Before answering, classify the question type out loud in your head: detail, inference, purpose, or vocabulary-in-context. For purpose/tone items, locate the sentence in its paragraph and ask what it does for the argument (illustrates, contrasts, concedes, warns). Eliminate options that are true but off-task; the correct option must be licensed by the text and must answer the specific question word (why, what does the author suggest, what is the effect of).
In the grammar-in-context section, the candidate chooses verb forms by translating the Spanish sentence in their head and mapping it word for word, producing errors in tense choice, mood and agreement.
Spanish and French share enough vocabulary and structure that literal transfer feels reliable, but the tense systems diverge: Spanish preterite vs imperfect does not map cleanly onto passé composé vs imparfait, Spanish uses the subjunctive in some contexts where French uses the indicative (and vice versa), and agreement rules for participles and adjectives differ. The candidate never explicitly checks the French rule.
What to do instead
Build a contrast sheet of the five highest-frequency divergences (imparfait vs passé composé triggers such as 'chaque jour' vs 'soudain'; subjunctive after 'bien que', 'pour que', 'avant que'; agreement of 'avoir' participles with a preceding direct object; 'depuis' + present where Spanish uses a past; 'si' + imparfait for hypotheticals). For each practice item, write the rule that licenses your answer in the margin; if you cannot name the rule, flag the item and review it.
The candidate leaves pronoun and preposition choices to intuition, producing errors with y/en, relative pronouns (qui/que/dont/où), and verb+preposition combinations.
These are closed-class items with no transparent Spanish equivalent in every case: 'dont' has no single Spanish counterpart, 'en' can render 'de ello' or a partitive, and verbs like 'penser à', 's'occuper de', 'réussir à' must be memorised with their preposition. Candidates often know the meaning of the sentence and assume the grammar will follow.
What to do instead
Learn verbs in prepositional chunks from the start ('dépendre de', 'compter sur', 'tenir à', 'se méfier de') rather than as bare infinitives. Drill the replacement test: rewrite a sentence replacing 'de + noun' with 'en', 'à + noun' with 'y', and a person object with lui/leur, then check the pronoun sits before the conjugated verb. For relatives, decide the function first (subject → qui, direct object → que, object of a preposition/de → dont, place/time → où).
The candidate writes the guided composition without a clear structure, producing a single block of text with no paragraphing, no opening framing and no closing, so the examiner cannot find the required content points.
Candidates draft mentally and write linearly, treating the task as 'say things in French' rather than 'answer a prompt with a specified number of points in a specified genre'. Under exam pressure the planning step is skipped entirely.
What to do instead
Spend three minutes before writing: list the content points the prompt demands, assign each to a paragraph, and write a one-line plan per paragraph in note form. Use a recognisable frame suited to the genre (letter: greeting, reason for writing, body, closing formula; opinion piece: thesis, two arguments, concession, conclusion). Leave a blank line between paragraphs. After writing, tick each required point against your plan; a missing point costs more than a clumsy sentence.
The candidate writes long, ambitious sentences with stacked subordinate clauses and then loses control of agreement, tense sequencing and word order inside them.
Candidates believe complexity earns marks and that simple sentences look weak. In fact the marking scheme rewards accuracy and range, and a correct complex sentence earns no more than two correct simple ones while a broken one imports several errors at once.
What to do instead
Adopt a rule: one subordinate clause per sentence maximum, and only use a structure you can complete correctly (si-clause, parce que, bien que + subjunctive, relative clause). After drafting, reread each sentence and check subject-verb agreement, participle agreement, and adjective agreement separately. If a sentence has three or more verbs, split it. Range can be shown through varied vocabulary and connectors (cependant, en revanche, par conséquent) rather than through clause-stacking.
The candidate ignores register and the conventions of the requested text type, mixing tutoiement and vouvoiement, using spoken abbreviations in a formal letter, or omitting the opening and closing formulas.
Classroom French practice often centres on informal interaction, and candidates transfer the informal register they are comfortable with into a formal task. Many also do not know the standard formulas, so they improvise or omit them.
What to do instead
Memorise a small stock of formal frames: 'Madame, Monsieur,' / 'Je vous prie d'agréer, Madame, Monsieur, l'expression de mes salutations distinguées.' and informal equivalents ('Salut …, à bientôt'). Before writing, decide the relationship (formal/informal) and stick to it throughout: check every verb form and pronoun for consistency (vous vs tu, votre vs ton). In a message to a friend, contractions and 'on' are fine; in a letter of complaint they are not.
The candidate answers culture items with general knowledge about France (Paris monuments, national holidays) when the item concerns the French-speaking world beyond France or a specifically sociolinguistic point such as register, regional variation or forms of address.
Most classroom input is hexagonal French, and candidates equate 'francophone culture' with 'France'. Items about Belgium, Switzerland, Quebec, Senegal, Morocco or the Antilles, or about when to use 'tu' vs 'vous', fall outside what they have rehearsed.
What to do instead
Build a one-page map of the francophone world with one or two concrete markers per region (Belgium: 'septante/nonante', 'à tantôt'; Quebec: 'bienvenue' as 'you're welcome', Office québécois de la langue française; Senegal: Francophonie institutions, Wolof influence; Switzerland: 'quatre-vingts' vs 'huitante'). For sociolinguistics, learn the variables that decide tu/vous: age, hierarchy, degree of acquaintance, and the fact that French workplaces and shops increasingly use 'vous' by default with strangers.
The candidate uses a false friend or a Spanish calque in the composition, or repeats the same basic verb and adjective throughout, and does not check the word against the context it is used in.
Spanish-French lexical overlap is high, so 'actualmente', 'embarazada', 'largo', 'realizar', 'asistir' get transferred as 'actuallement', 'embarazada'-style inventions, 'large', 'réaliser', 'assister' with the wrong meaning. Meanwhile, limited active vocabulary pushes the candidate back onto 'faire', 'avoir', 'très', 'beaucoup'.
What to do instead
Keep a personal false-friend log with the correct French and the Spanish trap ('actuellement' = currently, not actually; 'large' = wide, not long; 'assister à' = attend, not assist). In the composition, deliberately substitute three overused items before finishing: replace one 'faire' with a precise verb, one 'très + adjective' with a stronger adjective (énorme, remarquable), and one 'beaucoup de' with 'de nombreux/de nombreuses'.
The candidate allocates time evenly or writes the composition first and answers the reading section in the last minutes, leaving items blank or rushed.
The composition feels like the hardest task and candidates want to get it out of the way, or they lose track of time on a single reading passage. Reading items are quick to answer badly and slow to answer well, so poor sequencing converts a knowledge problem into a time problem.
What to do instead
Plan the paper in blocks before starting: reading comprehension first (it warms up vocabulary), then grammar in context, then the composition with a protected block of time for planning, writing and checking. Set a hard cutoff per section (for example, no more than a third of the total time on reading) and move on when it is reached, marking any unfinished item for return. Reserve the final five minutes for the composition check (agreements, required content points, register consistency).