Catalonia PAU French (Francès 2026) common mistakes
Catalonia PAU French (Francès 2026) · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
In the reading-comprehension section, the candidate lifts a full sentence from the text as the answer to a question asking them to reformulate or explain in their own words, instead of producing a paraphrase.
Under time pressure the candidate treats the text as a source of ready-made answers and copies the sentence that contains the key word, without checking whether the question asks for literal extraction or for reformulation. The habit comes from school exercises where quoting was rewarded.
What to do instead
Before writing, underline the question's operative verb (relevez, expliquez, reformulez, justifiez). If it says expliquez or reformulez, close the text, state the idea in one short sentence in your own words, then reopen the text only to verify the idea is correct. Practise by summarising each paragraph in a single sentence of no more than twelve words.
The candidate answers a true/false or multiple-choice reading item by matching a single word shared between the question and the text, ignoring that the surrounding sentence negates or qualifies it (for example 'rarement', 'ne... que', 'sauf').
Word-spotting is faster than full-sentence parsing, and negative or restrictive structures are processed late by non-native readers, so the candidate's eye lands on the content word before registering the negation.
What to do instead
Circle every negation and restriction marker (ne...pas, ne...que, sauf, hormis, rarement, à peine, loin de) in the relevant paragraph before choosing. Re-read the sentence substituting the opposite meaning; if the opposite also seems plausible, the item is testing precisely that marker and you must decide on the marker, not the keyword.
In the grammar-in-context section, the candidate chooses the tense by translating the Catalan or Spanish sentence mentally and mapping the tense one-to-one, producing forms like 'si j'aurais su' or 'quand je serai arrivé hier'.
Catalan and Spanish tense use overlaps heavily with French in the present and future but diverges in hypothetical 'si' clauses and in the sequence of tenses, and mental translation feels reliable because the sentence 'sounds right' in the L1.
What to do instead
Memorise the three fixed patterns as blocks: 'si + imparfait → conditionnel présent', 'si + plus-que-parfait → conditionnel passé', and 'quand/lorsque/dès que + futur' only for future events. Drill ten sentences per pattern until the block is produced without translation, and check every 'si' clause by asking whether the main verb is a conditional.
The candidate writes the participle in compound tenses without applying agreement, producing 'les décisions qu'il a prit' or 'elle s'est rendu compte de' versus 'elle s'est rendue compte', mixing up which verbs agree with the subject and which with the preceding direct object.
Agreement rules depend on syntactic analysis (identifying the preceding direct object, distinguishing reflexive verbs with a direct object from those with an indirect one) that candidates skip when writing quickly, and the spoken form often hides the difference.
What to do instead
Apply a two-question routine to every compound tense: (1) is the auxiliary être or a pronominal verb? then look for a preceding direct object; (2) is the auxiliary avoir? then search backwards for a direct object before the verb. Learn the short list of pronominal verbs that take an indirect object (se rendre compte, se parler, s'écrire) as fixed items.
In the vocabulary-in-context items, the candidate picks the option that is a transparent cognate with Catalan or Spanish (for example 'actual' for 'current', 'assistir' for 'attend') without checking whether the French word carries that meaning.
False friends are frequent and highly activated in bilingual speakers, and the correct-looking cognate is processed faster than the true answer, creating a strong feeling of confidence that discourages verification.
What to do instead
Keep a personal false-friends list built only from your own errors (actuel, assister, réaliser, attendre, passer, rester) with one French example sentence each. In the exam, when an option looks identical to a Catalan or Spanish word, treat it as a trap until you have substituted it into the sentence and confirmed the meaning fits.
The candidate's guided composition answers the prompt but drifts off the required genre or register, for example writing a chatty personal message when the task asks for a formal letter of complaint, or omitting the salutation and closing formulas.
Candidates focus on producing correct French sentences and treat the communicative frame as decoration, so they spend their planning time on vocabulary rather than on the conventions the task explicitly requires.
What to do instead
Spend the first two minutes writing a skeleton in the margin: genre, recipient, register (tu/vous), and the required formulas (Madame, Monsieur / Cordialement / Je vous prie d'agréer...). Tick off each required content point from the prompt before writing. Keep a memorised set of openers and closers for the two or three genres that recur.
The candidate writes the composition as one long paragraph of short, loosely connected sentences with no connectors, so the text reads as a list of facts rather than an argued or narrated text.
Under time pressure, planning is skipped and each sentence is generated independently; connectors require anticipating the logical relation between the next idea and the previous one, which is exactly what rushed writing prevents.
What to do instead
Draft a five-line plan with one logical label per line (cause, contrast, example, consequence, conclusion) and attach a connector to each label before writing prose (en effet, en revanche, par exemple, par conséquent, en définitive). Aim for at least one connector per two sentences and vary them rather than repeating 'mais' and 'aussi'.
The candidate exceeds or falls well short of the required word count, or pads the text with memorised filler phrases that do not address the prompt, because they run out of ideas halfway through.
Candidates prepare generic essay chunks instead of ideas, so when the prompt's specific topic is unfamiliar they have nothing to say and either stop early or insert irrelevant material to reach the limit.
What to do instead
Practise generating three concrete arguments plus one example each on ten recurring PAU topics (environment, technology, education, work, tourism) in advance, so the composition is assembled from content, not from filler. In the exam, count words at the planning stage: allocate roughly one paragraph per argument and check the total after the draft, adjusting content rather than adding empty formulas.
In the oral component, the candidate reads a prepared written answer aloud or recites a memorised monologue, and freezes when the examiner asks a follow-up question that departs from the script.
Preparation focuses on writing and memorising full sentences, which produces a written register spoken at reading speed, and it leaves no practice in spontaneous reformulation, which is what the interaction phase tests.
What to do instead
Prepare bullet points, never full sentences, and rehearse by recording yourself speaking from the bullets with a timer. Practise the interaction phase with a partner who asks unpredictable questions; train three repair strategies (Je veux dire que..., Comment dire..., Vous permettez que je reformule ?) so that hesitation becomes a controlled move rather than silence.
In the listening component, the candidate tries to transcribe or translate every word while the recording plays, misses the next two sentences, and then answers from a partial memory of the start of the audio.
School listening habits reward catching words rather than following meaning, and translating into the L1 consumes working memory that is needed to hold the thread of the argument.
What to do instead
Use the pause before the recording to read the questions and predict the topic and likely vocabulary. During the first listening, note only keywords and the speaker's stance; answer questions on the second listening. Train with short audios at natural speed, writing down only nouns and verbs, then reconstructing the gist without pausing the audio.