Madrid PAU English - Additional Foreign Language common mistakes
Madrid PAU English - Additional Foreign Language · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Reading only the title and the first two lines, then answering the true/false and multiple-choice items from general knowledge or personal opinion instead of from the text.
The text looks familiar in topic and candidates assume they already know what it says, or they are anxious about time and skip the full read; the PAU text often adds a twist or a specific stance that contradicts the stereotype.
What to do instead
Do one full fast read (2–3 minutes) before touching the questions to establish topic, purpose, author stance and text type; then mark each answer with the line number where you found the evidence, and refuse to select an option you cannot locate in the text.
Confusing the author's opinion with a fact or with a view the text merely reports and then rejects, and answering global questions (main idea, purpose, best title) with a detail instead of the overall point.
Global items require synthesising the whole text, while candidates latch onto the first strong sentence or a quoted speaker; reporting verbs and contrast markers (however, although, in fact) are skimmed over.
What to do instead
After reading, write a one-sentence summary in your own words of what the author wants the reader to conclude; check whether the text's final paragraph confirms or reverses the opening, and treat any option that matches only one paragraph as a detail distractor, not the main idea.
Matching an answer option to the text because they share the same words, without checking that the surrounding meaning is the same (the classic 'word-matching' trap).
Paraphrase is the normal mechanism of correct options, so literal repetition is usually the sign of a distractor; candidates under time pressure take the lexical shortcut.
What to do instead
Treat any option that repeats three or more words verbatim from the text as suspect and re-read the exact sentence; prefer the option that expresses the same idea in different words, and cross out options that change quantity, time, agent or certainty.
Ignoring scope words and qualifiers - all, some, always, never, only, mainly, likely, according to the text - and choosing an option that is true in the real world but not stated or is stated more absolutely than the text allows.
Candidates evaluate plausibility rather than textual support, and skim over small adverbs that decide whether an option is defensible.
What to do instead
Before choosing, underline the quantifier or modal in each option and compare it with the text's own wording; eliminate any option stronger than the source, and for 'according to the text' items reject true-but-unstated statements even if you know them to be correct.
Answering inference items with personal deduction that goes beyond the text, or failing to notice that the answer must be implied by a specific sentence rather than invented.
Inference feels like guessing, so candidates either avoid it or over-extend; they also miss irony, attitude adjectives and connectors that carry the implied meaning.
What to do instead
Locate the sentence the item points to and ask what the author must believe for that sentence to make sense; the correct inference is a short, necessary step from the text, so reject any option that needs extra outside information or a chain of two or three assumptions.
Leaving gaps blank or filling them with the first word that 'sounds right', without checking the grammatical category the gap requires.
The use-of-English section rewards system over instinct; candidates read for meaning only and never ask whether the gap needs a noun, verb form, preposition or connector.
What to do instead
For every gap, first decide the part of speech from the surrounding words (article before it, preposition after it, subject/verb agreement), then choose from that category; if two options fit grammatically, use collocation and the sentence's logic to decide, and never leave a blank - a reasoned guess costs nothing.
Choosing verb forms by ear and ignoring tense sequencing, passive vs active voice, and the rules of reported speech and conditionals.
Spanish speakers map their own tense system onto English and the two do not align, especially in past narrative, present perfect vs past simple, and after 'if' and reporting verbs.
What to do instead
Drill the specific contrasts that appear every year: past simple vs present perfect with time markers, passive transformation keeping the same tense, backshift in reported speech, and the four conditional patterns; when a sentence has two clauses, decide the time relationship between them before conjugating anything.
Writing a composition that answers only part of the prompt, or drifts into a general essay on the topic without covering the two or three points the task specifies.
Candidates prepare memorised topic essays and try to reuse them; under exam pressure they start writing before identifying what the task asks for (audience, register, required content points).
What to do instead
Spend two minutes planning: underline every element of the prompt, list one sentence per required point, and decide the register (formal letter, informal email, opinion piece). After writing, tick each prompt requirement off against your text; anything unaddressed gets a sentence added.
Producing a list of correct sentences with no linking devices, no paragraphing and no clear opening and closing, so the text reads as disconnected statements.
Attention goes entirely to avoiding grammatical errors; cohesion and organisation are never practised as separate skills, and candidates do not know the connectors appropriate to each register.
What to do instead
Impose a fixed skeleton - introduction stating the purpose, one paragraph per content point with a topic sentence, conclusion - and consciously insert a limited set of connectors (however, in addition, as a result, on the other hand) at paragraph and sentence boundaries; check that each paragraph begins with a sentence that announces its content.
Losing accuracy through first-language interference - false friends, missing subjects, wrong prepositions, article errors, and spelling carried over from Spanish - in an otherwise fluent composition.
Translation from Spanish happens silently while writing, and there is no time to proofread; these errors are systematic, not random, so they recur in every script.
What to do instead
Keep a personal list of your recurring interference errors (actual/current, assist/attend, sensible/sensitive, depend on, in/on, the with general nouns) and do a dedicated final proofread in two passes: one for verbs and agreement, one for prepositions, articles and spelling; leave three minutes for this in your time plan.