Over-length, under-ordered: the landlord email
Writing paper, 60 minutes. Task 1 is a formal email of 120–150 words. Prompt: you rent a flat in Msida; the heating has not worked for three days; write to your landlord, Herr Borg - (1) describe the problem and say how long it has lasted, (2) say you have already phoned the caretaker twice and nobody came, (3) ask for an appointment and ask whether the rent can be reduced for the month. Fatima writes 235 words. All three points appear, but point (1) is buried in the third paragraph, after two paragraphs about her exams. She writes “Ich bin sehr ärgerlich” and “Wenn das nicht bald repariert wird, werde ich die Miete nicht mehr zahlen.” She closes with “Bis bald, Fatima”. Grammar: main clauses secure, perfect tense largely correct, four case errors after prepositions, two verb-final errors, spelling and punctuation clean. The department must report a band per criterion and decide how much the over-length matters.
1. Band each criterion with evidence from the script, and explain why strong grammar does not lift the overall result.
Read the worked answer
- Content/task: all three points present, so not a content failure. But the reader cannot act until paragraph three, and “die Miete nicht mehr zahlen” is not a request but a threat. If the scheme rewards “the reader would respond appropriately”, drop one band here. Otherwise full marks for coverage.
- Range: complex sentences with subordination and connectors, some topic lexis (Heizung, Termin, Hausverwaltung), but little formal complaint register (Mietminderung, Fristsetzung, ich möchte Sie bitten). Solid mid-band.
- Accuracy: six errors in 235 words, roughly one per 40 words, mostly non-impeding. That is good, but four of them are case after preposition - a core B1 structure, not an exotic one. Upper-mid, not top.
- Coherence and register: paragraphs exist but the ordering is wrong (the problem is not in the first paragraph of a complaint); Bis bald clashes with Sehr geehrter Herr Borg. Mid-band.
The point to explain to the class: the task is a complaint with a purpose, so accuracy cannot compensate for a letter that buries the problem and escalates. Grammar is a criterion, not the currency.
2. How should the 235-word length be treated, and what is the real cost of the extra 85 words?
Read the worked answer
Two separate questions, and they are often confused.
- Is there a direct deduction for length? Only if the department has published one. Candidates cannot be penalised by a rule they never saw, and inventing a length penalty at the desk is indefensible. In most schemes the word count is guidance.
- What does the excess actually cost? Three things, all of which appear through existing criteria rather than a length line: (i) time taken from Task 2 - a real, measurable cost across the paper; (ii) dilution of focus, which is exactly why point (1) ended up in paragraph three - the coherence criterion already captures this; (iii) more surface exposed to error, which shows up in accuracy without any special rule.
So the mark should record the damage where it is already visible and add nothing for length itself.
Practical fix to teach: one bullet = one paragraph, and 20 minutes time-boxed for Task 1. Plan on the question paper as three keywords, not as prose.
3. Rewrite the two risky sentences at B1 and justify each choice in terms of German formal-complaint conventions.
Read the worked answer
Original: “Ich bin sehr ärgerlich.” Rewrite: “Leider ist die Heizung seit drei Tagen ohne Funktion, und ich möchte Sie bitten, das Problem so schnell wie möglich zu beheben.” Reasoning: a German formal complaint states the facts and then the request. Feelings are not fatal but they personalise the letter and displace the request. Leider carries the disapproval without the emotion, and ich möchte Sie bitten keeps the distance that Sie has already established.
Original: “Wenn das nicht bald repariert wird, werde ich die Miete nicht mehr zahlen.” Rewrite: “Ich möchte daher um eine Mietminderung für diesen Monat bitten und um einen Termin in den nächsten Tagen.” Reasoning: withholding rent is a legal act with conditions attached, and as a threat it reads as escalation rather than a request - it also risks looking as if the candidate does not know the genre. Naming Mietminderung keeps the content point from the prompt, and a deadline (Ich bitte um eine Rückmeldung bis Freitag) does the work the threat was attempting, inside the register.
Also: close with Mit freundlichen Grüßen - Bis bald is the du-register leaking into a Sie-letter and undoes the opening salutation.