2009 HSC Notes from the Marking Centre – French
Contents
Introduction
This document has been produced for the teachers and candidates of the Stage 6 courses in French. It contains comments on candidate responses to the 2009 Higher School Certificate examinations, indicating the quality of the responses and highlighting their relative strengths and weaknesses.
This document should be read along with the relevant syllabuses, the 2009 Higher School Certificate examinations, the marking guidelines and other support documents which have been developed by the Board of Studies to assist in the teaching and learning of French.
Teachers and students are advised that, in December 2008, the Board of Studies approved changes to the examination specifications and assessment requirements for a number of courses. These changes will be implemented for the 2010 HSC cohort. Information on a course-by-course basis is available on the’s website.
General comments
Candidates need to be aware that the mark allocated to the question and the answer space (where this is provided on the examination paper) are a guide to the length of the required response. A longer response will not in itself lead to higher marks. Writing far beyond the indicated space may reduce the time available for answering other questions.
Candidates need to be familiar with the Board’s Glossary of Key Words which contains some terms commonly used in examination questions. However, candidates should also be aware that not all questions will start with or contain one of the key words from the glossary. Questions such as ‘how?’, ‘why?’ or ‘to what extent?’ may be asked or verbs may be used which are not included in the glossary, such as ‘design’, ‘translate’ or ‘list’.
Beginners – Oral examination
General comments
Responses showed evidence of thorough preparation for the types of questions asked. There was a high degree of fluency.
Accurate formation of tenses and correct use of prepositions distinguished the stronger responses.
Some frequent mispronunciations were d’habitude, dans and j’étudie. Use of être to state age was a frequent error. ‘Dans’ le weekend and ‘dans’ le mardi detracted from authenticity.
On the topic of school, many responses justified choice of subjects and gave reasons for personal preferences. In weaker responses, school subjects were often poorly pronounced or anglicised. Descriptions of family members and pastimes were often detailed and imaginative. Questions about money earned in part-time jobs, or received as pocket money, were often less well handled. The expression petit boulot was not always understood.
Candidates may ask, in French, for a question to be repeated or clarified if not understood. Lengthy pauses before seeking this help result in lost time. Stronger responses expanded on the first basic response, citing reasons, justifications and opinions. It is important for candidates to prepare by practising elaborating and giving more detail, as well as practising being grammatically accurate, especially when asked questions that require a higher order response.
Beginners – Written examination
Section I – Listening
General comments
Making notes in the Candidate’s Column helps the later recall of information and better articulation of the response.
Specific comments
Question 1
Weaker responses confused six heures with seize heures.
Question 2
Better responses identified both cycling and the countryside.
Question 3
Better responses identified the purpose of this announcement, and the meaning of sac à dos, couloir and garder.
Question 4
Better responses identified the notion of producing an album, as well as learning the techniques to make the album. Technique was sometimes interpreted as technologie, and souvenir as a present. An awareness of faux amis is recommended.
Question 5
Better responses stated that a replacement was required, not simply that someone was sick or could not work.
Question 6
Recognition of the French alphabet is essential. Numbers were well comprehended.
Question 7
Answers in multiple-choice questions need to be clearly indicated. If two choices are indicated in a single-choice answer the mark will not be awarded.
Question 8
Better responses identified that the niece had broken her leg and could not stay at the house to take care of the animals. Some also noted that the rubbish would have to be taken out.
Question 9
Better responses evaluated the situation and linked problems and solutions.
Question 10
Better responses identified the contingency for receiving the free cake. Some differentiated singular from plural forms. Deux and des were often confused in deux pistes de danse.
Question 11
Better responses detected the change of attitude in the aunt: firstly she was happy to hear from him, then felt pressured by his insistence to stay. Few understood pas du tout. In such a dialogue where feelings are mixed, making notes as positives and negatives, in the Candidate’s Notes section, would have assisted candidates to organise their answer. Sometimes tone of voice will aid candidates, eg Écoute! said brusquely, indicates annoyance.
Section II – Reading
General comments
The best answers were accurate, had included all relevant detail and did not give contradictory information. While complete answers could be formulated through direct and detailed translation in the earlier questions, the later ones required some induction and deduction supported by evidence from the text. Responses including general comments based on inferences or common sense and not based on evidence from the texts are to be avoided, as are providing the same information in two different questions. Only a few responses sustained the highest level of accuracy and precision throughout the whole reading section.
The best responses showed that the judicious use of dictionaries plays an important role in the quality of answers and specifically that differentiation between various grammatical items, in particular nouns, verbs and adjectives, greatly facilitates candidates’ comprehension and helps to avoid misinterpretation.
Some cultural understanding of Paris and France would have helped in responding to some questions. To show understanding, English meanings need to be given, not quotes in French.
Specific comments
Question 12
- In weaker responses j’en ai marre and ai étudié were not understood. These picked up the notion of exams but added no detail.
- Stronger responses identified all relevant detail: that Luc does not get what he wants and the reasons why, understanding j’ai besoin de, dois aller chez and arrange-toi autrement. Weaker responses did not justify why he did not get what he wanted, only identifying that he did not get the car, without providing further detail.
Question 13
- Better responses expressed what Alicia did on 12 October: shopped along the Champs-Elysées and had a fruit juice at a café; and that Alicia and Julien were watching pétanque players. Weaker answers used French words, eg bottes or chaussures and provided little detail, and were not familiar with landmarks such as les Champs Elysées, translating these literally, presumably from the dictionary.
- Better responses expressed fully why Alicia found herself alone and indicated the meaning of j’avais prévu. Weaker responses often interpreted Invalides as ‘disabled’ or interpreted faire la grasse matinée as eating fatty food or c’était vraiment bête as talking about animals.
Question 14
- Most responses gave enough details about 5,5 heures, omitted cognates in their answer or used ‘etc’.
- Better responses fully identified the main points. Weaker responses were expressed in general terms and only identified some of the main points. A significant number identified the main
- The best responses explained Valentin’s comment before comprehensively justifying their answers with information from the text. Some responses were personal responses with varying degrees of reliance on evidence from the text. Very few responses mentioned that the program was en dehors de in relation to school. Responses that supported a negative answer generally did not find enough evidence to justify their choice. Misunderstanding of été, dont led to misinterpretations. Responses indicated that this question was challenging as the question required an estimation of a reaction to Valentin’s comment placed at the end of the text and then evidence from the whole of the text to support this view.
Question 15
- Better responses identified that depopulation and loss of young people affected the economy. A large number of responses stated that Mamerce
- Many responses identified all aspects of Joel’s qualifications. Some responses tended to be general in nature without specific references to the text. Responsible de recherche de talents was not always understood as seeking talented people. Wrong tenses and lack of detail, such as why Joel was familiar with Mamerce, led to inaccurate or incomplete answers.
- Only in the very best responses did candidates explain comprehensively Joel’s suggestion and how it would address the needs of the town. Many good responses only mentioned how the suggestion would address some needs of the town without describing the suggestion. Responses indicated difficulty in interpreting how Joel’s detailed description of his suggestion
Section III – Writing in French
General comments
There were some very good responses that indicated awareness of audience, purpose and context; accurate structures were used and the word count was adhered to. Responses significantly under the recommended length very often did not meet the requirements of the task adequately. Careful reading of questions would have reduced misinterpretation. Learned responses were obvious, particularly when they did not answer the question. While the dictionary was sometimes used as a reference tool, it was also misused and the structure of the word found in the dictionary was not correctly manipulated, leading to such errors as durée d’été; je gauche; tête phones; la dernière fois je scie' mes clés! Such faulty insertion of words taken from the dictionary marred otherwise good responses.
Common mistakes included a mixture of tu and vous, the omission of de in avoir besoin de, possessive pronouns, use of infinitives instead of conjugated verbs, inappropriate tenses, and incorrect past participles such as j’ai ‘apprendu’.
Candidates are reminded to allocate time appropriately, to write what question part they are attempting, and to consider the number of words they have been asked to write.
In a number of responses it was clear that the dictionary had been used to look up every single word, resulting in incomprehensible language, eg J’espoir cet mes parents autoriser aller. Here the time factor needs to be considered: students need to come to this examination with a good knowledge of vocabulary, set phrases and idioms so that time using the dictionary is minimised.
Specific comments
Question 16
Many responses addressed all relevant points including a description of the item lost, where and when it was lost, why it was important, and how to contact the person if the item was found. Responses need to read logically, to make sense as a whole. Many engaged successfully with the email text type. Addressing the specific audience, in this instance, students and teachers, is preferable to generalised openings such as bonjour.
Question 17
Responses that demonstrated an awareness of audience, using vocabulary appropriate to the speech genre, were rewarded. Better responses presented many details about the home stay in Australia, using a variety of vocabulary and the past tense correctly. As the task required a recount of their experience, giving opinions as well enhanced the response. Appropriate use of both the perfect and imperfect tenses was needed.
Question 18
Better responses incorporated authentic expressions and language particular and relevant to the text type, presenting original ideas, with a high degree of accuracy and a wide range of vocabulary, tenses and language structures, and with little obvious use of the dictionary.
Better responses used connectors to sequence ideas and thus allow the text to flow coherently.
Some weaker responses included lists of names or places. In others, text had been copied from the Reading passages. Language that has been prepared needs to be manipulated to answer the question. Generally, weaker responses did not follow the text type, were very limited in communication, and repetitive, with significant errors in vocabulary and language structures.
Continuers – Oral examination
In the better responses, candidates discussed all possible aspects of their personal world. The responses were characterised by sophisticated, precise and appropriate vocabulary and expressions, by correct manipulation of tenses and other grammatical structures, thus communicating in a convincing, confident, thoughtful, detailed and ultimately authentic manner. The ability to interweave learned and spontaneous material in an integrated way was characteristic of better responses.
Stronger responses were also characterised by richness in breadth and depth when engaging with a fuller exploration of a topic. Breadth required talking about specific examples in greater detail. Better responses went beyond merely listing and explored further aspects of a particular event, idea or situation: aspects such as what happened, where it happened, when it happened and who was involved. A further comment on feelings about the situation added greater breadth. The best responses introduced depth as well, including explanations and justifications of ideas and opinions. Some examples of depth included making detailed comparisons to explain a preference, analysing a problem or issue, weighing up its pros and cons, in order to make a considered judgement, or arriving at a balanced opinion and clarifying details of a situation. As well as dealing with the breadth issues of what, when and where, better responses explored the how, the why and to what extent.
The linguistic tools which allowed communication in a sophisticated and authentic manner were: excellent pronunciation and intonation, outstanding fluency, confidence, authenticity, sophisticated vocabulary and expressions, facility in manipulating tenses, the use of a variety of conjunctions and a high level of grammatical accuracy and sophistication.
Weaker responses would have been enhanced by: correct pronunciation; attention to silent letters or final consonants, for example famille, semaine, meilleur, gentil, français, temps; grammatical accuracy, including verb conjugation, manipulation of tenses, at the very least, present, future, perfect, imperfect and conditional; prepositions; use of pronouns. Common errors included : j’ai beaucoup ‘des’ amis, ‘sur’ le weekend, ‘sur’ la télévision, il joue ‘le’ football, je joue ‘le’ violon, ‘j’étude français’, j’aime ‘de’ manger les fruits, je voudrais ‘de continue’ mes études. Anglicisms, such as ‘especiellement’, les ‘sujets’ detract from responses.
Continuers – Written examination
Section I – Listening and Responding
General
Answers must be written in English: no marks were given for French words or expressions. If quotes were used it was necessary to include their English meaning. Better responses gave information relevant to the question, showed global as well as detailed understanding, wrote as many qualifiers as possible, and were expressed with clarity and precision. Use of the Candidate’s Notes column assists the candidate to include all relevant points, especially when formulating a response to the higher mark questions requiring higher order thinking and greater length. A careful reading of the question, the editing and reviewing of responses to avoid contradictions within a response also leads to better responses.
Specific comments
Question 1
This was well answered on the whole, although there was some difficulty identifying Charlotte. Dîner was sometimes translated as ‘lunch’. A few responses missed the point that the phone call was about booking a restaurant.
Question 2
In the weaker responses, candidates interpreted ‘see David’ as ‘making new friends’. Entraîneur was sometimes missed. Many did not know the word apprendre and missed the important argument which was to learn to work with others.
Question 3
In the weaker responses, candidates did not grasp the concept of the job fulfilling the advertisement, thus allaying the fears of mother and daughter. Common errors were formation translated as ‘formation’, annonce as ‘announcement’ and authentique as ‘antique’. Many missed the notion of the possibility of further training and said ‘there will be’.
Question 4
In the weaker responses, some candidates heard or as eau and alluded to an environmental issue or the problem of deforestation. Many did not differentiate zoo and zone, guerre and gare, and some did not pick up the negatives ne…plus, ne...personne.
Question 6
In the weaker responses, more candidates based their answers on general knowledge rather than the text. Some incorrect responses mentioned drink driving and being over the limit. A few did not answer the second part of the question. No marks were awarded to a few responses which gave a reasonable amount of information but did not develop each item. A few ticked only one box. Many took pour ma part as requiring information about family members. Others translated faire partie de notre culture as ‘party culture’.
Question 7
The best responses explored the similarities and differences between Estelle and Elodie, giving clear examples, and provided the notion that Elodie, as an actress, had to be outgoing, but really she preferred the quiet life. Weaker responses noted information without comparing the two characters. The words aucun mal à me faire des amis was sometimes misinterpreted as not wanting to hurt or being bad to her friends.
Question 8
In the weaker responses, candidates confused the notions of subjectivity and objectivity, partiality and impartiality. Candidates are reminded of the importance of checking the information they write in the candidates’ columns to ensure that all relevant information is included in responses.
Section II – Reading and Responding
Part A
General
Candidates are advised to read the questions before reading the passage, in order to focus their minds on what it is likely to be about. It is useful to highlight key words in the questions, particularly those allocated 4 to 6 marks, to ensure that all elements of the question are addressed.
When giving supporting evidence from the text, quotes in French are not sufficient. Candidates must show clearly their understanding of the French so translation or paraphrase is what is required. While many good responses had a global approach, in the best responses candidates supported a generalisation with specific examples from the text.
Outcome 3.6 is one of six outcomes that can be assessed. It cannot be assumed that it will be assessed in the same way each year. Many responses included language analysis when this was not required by the question.
Use of the dictionary is recommended when a word is not familiar. It is most important to select the meaning that fits the context and not necessarily the first word that appears.
Weaker responses often included a great deal of irrelevant material and needless repetition. It is possible to stay within the lines provided and score full marks.
There was often confusion of the sex of the characters in the texts. Not all names ending in –e are feminine.
Question 9
- Most responses identified both problems. Some translated s’occuper as ‘to take care of’ instead of, its meaning here, ‘to keep busy’. Mention of both ‘to entertain’ and ‘to occupy’ was required. In weaker responses, candidates summarised the content of the advertisement but did not address the question.
- In the better responses, candidates explained how the holiday had changed Andre’s life, and supported their response with evidence
- In the better responses, candidates clearly and succinctly linked Andre’s experiences to each claim and then explained, with evidence from the email, how the advertisement lived up to these claims. The claims were clearly presented in dot-point format in the text but weaker responses referred solely to André’s experiences and did not relate these to the claims. The weakest responses gave either a superficial explanation, such as concentrating on Andre’s loss of shyness and gain in confidence, or referred to language features, tone and structure. It was surprising that some referred to les Pyrénées as André’s friend. A number translated autonome as ‘confident’ and did not understand randonnées.
Question 10
- In the better responses, candidates identified that the Paradiso disco, which was closing down, was the only place for the young
- Generally this was well answered. There were a significant number of points readily identified although there were some errors with numbers, some responses saying that Josette was 30, or that she had lived in Beaumont for 13 years. The best answers identified Josette’s conservatism, intolerance and racism, supporting this observation with evidence from the text
- In some weaker responses, candidates referred to Beaumont after the violent incident, without mentioning that it was an area of Sensible and ancienne were mistranslated with English cognates. Awareness of faux amis is a useful reading tool.
- This question required more than translation from the text or the perspective of the candidate on the events. The best responses presented and differentiated the concerns of all three residents and justified whether they were or were not entirely valid, as in Josette’s case, by
Part B
General
Since reading comprehension is as important as writing in answering this question, the stimulus text should be read with care. Key points need to be identified and the most important ones developed in depth. Some did not read the introduction carefully and wrote an email or a letter instead of a blog. In the better responses, the tone and level of language used were appropriate to the themes and the text type required.
Specific comments
Question 11
In some weaker responses, candidates treated irrelevant ideas in some depth instead of developing the main points. They talked about themselves and referred to what they felt and did instead of addressing the issues raised in Bruno’s blog. A number misinterpreted et qu’est-ce que je trouve … comme cadeau d’anniversaire as meaning that Bruno was worried about not getting birthday presents. The idea that Bruno was faced with too many options was sometimes taken as referring to Bruno’s indecision about a career. The weakest responses touched on one or two of the points outlined above and generally included irrelevant material.
Some more imaginative responses included not only a treatment in depth of three key points, but the skilful inclusion of references to other ideas in the stimulus. In the better responses, candidates were more concise and included a range of expressions and a variety of tenses. Such candidates also used sophisticated language including imperatives expressing reassurance, for example Tiens bon! or Ne baisse pas les bras! Some of the more sophisticated and authentic expressions used included Il semble que tout aille à la dérive and Je me rends compte de tous les problèmes auxquels il faut faire face. In a significant number of responses, rhetorical questions were used effectively.
In the weaker responses, candidates digressed from the main ideas and wrote in too much detail about, for example, the stress of preparing for the bac, celebrating their own eighteenth or twenty-first birthday, taking a gap year or details about their own part-time job. There was inappropriate use of some idioms, for example Après la pluie, le beau temps.
The use of tu or vous was accepted provided that these were used correctly. It was expected that tu be used with more informal language and a lighter tone, and vous with a more serious treatment of issues and a more respectful tone. Unfortunately, in a significant number of responses, both tu and vous were used. Candidates appeared to experience particular difficulty in combining the correct subject pronoun with the appropriate possessive adjectives.
Better responses were characterised by the use of a varied range of vocabulary and expressions together with a good control of tenses. A number of candidates demonstrated a convincing knowledge of special expressions and colloquial phrases. More advanced structures used in the better responses included the correct use of the subjunctive, as well as the imperfect plus the conditional in hypothetical expressions.
Some responses were marred by poor knowledge of verbs and incorrect spelling of basic vocabulary, for example boulot. In a significant number of responses the present tense was used poorly. Other errors included incorrect usage of reflexive verbs and imperatives, inadequate knowledge of possessive adjectives and poor use of object pronouns. Weaker responses also reflected poor dictionary skills: difficulty in distinguishing between different parts of speech was evident, in particular, between a noun and a verb, for example Vous voulez ‘courrier électronique moi’. Weaker responses often relied on literal translations and English syntax, for example ‘Tu sens mauvais’ and ‘J’étais faux’.
Candidates should give themselves enough time to edit responses as carefully as possible. A overly long response often means insufficient time to correct errors.
Section III – Writing in French
General comments
Frequently, extensive knowledge of French was displayed but in digressions which contributed nothing to the overall result: insertion of irrelevant rote-learned passages into a response or manipulation of the question to fit a prepared answer were not well rewarded. It is advisable to keep going back to the question while writing to check that the response continues to be relevant to that question.
The higher mark range was not awarded where only one or two tenses were demonstrated, or where information was not presented in a coherent and structured way. Better responses always demonstrated a careful manipulation of content in order to demonstrate control of a variety of sentence structures, appropriate idioms and a broad range of vocabulary and tenses.
A checklist for eliminating the most common grammatical mistakes would include the mixing of tu and vous forms, adjectival agreements, tense conjugations, subject/verb agreements, use of the definite and indefinite articles, confusion of singular with plural, anglicisms, phonetic spelling of familiar words, time clauses and accents. Simple mistakes detracted from otherwise competent and entertaining scripts.
Grammatical errors persisted but were often inconsistent, for example an initially correct expression or gender repeated wrongly, or a construct used well at first then rewritten incorrectly. There were frequent gender errors for some very common words like problème and famille. Among other common grammatical mistakes were the conjugation of regular verbs like choisir, confusion between the imperfect and the conditional, reflexive verb usage, position of pronouns, the use of emphatic pronouns, prepositional verbs, confusion between savoir and connaître, regarder and voir, misuse of the verb manquer, anglicisms, inaccuracy of idiomatic phrases, faux-amis, accents and incorrect gender agreements for adjectives and past participles, à and en for cities and countries, the use of c’est instead of ces or ses, et instead of est, and mais where mes was intended.
A misuse of the dictionary was obvious in many cases where, for example, no distinction was made between a noun, adjective or verb, or between context and register of the item chosen.
Specific comments
Question
A small number of responses went way over the recommended word limit, with some candidates writing up to 400 words, an unwise use of examination time for so few marks.
The best responses specifically addressed the task using well selected information. Every paragraph, given the brevity of the 50–100 word allocation, must contribute to fulfilling the requirements of the question.
Most conclusions to both note and postcard were well done: À+ at the end of the note and Tu me manques to conclude the card, both confirm fidelity to the text types. However, the reported speech required in (a) highlighted some linguistic inflexibility and produced numerous errors, particularly in pronoun usage, which marred many responses.
Question 13
In the weaker responses to (a), some candidates addressed the break-up without giving advice. In (b), some talked about a scholarship or exchange opportunity without introducing the field of study, the fact that it was overseas or the notions of choice and difficulty.
Many candidates misused the word une érudition instead of bourse d’étude to translate ‘scholarship’. Many did not translate words like ‘overseas’, ‘to apply’, ‘to break up’, ‘to argue’ properly.
English influence was also evident at times with the poor translation of ‘to make a decision’, ‘the right choice’, ‘at the end of the day’, ‘have fun’.
Better responses included a variety of sentence structures and tenses: si clauses, the subjunctive, use of the imperfect to describe how the friend’s relationship used to be, use of the imperative and the conditional to give advice, appropriate idioms and expressions, such as laisser tomber and poser un lapin and a broad range of relevant vocabulary.
Weaker responses lacked coherence and structure. Some responses were far too long, others were left unfinished. Some candidates included lengthy pre-learned introduction that did not address the question. Candidates are reminded that it is not necessary to write an extensively long response to achieve the top mark. Many clear and succinct responses were awarded full marks and proved that quality prevails over quantity. It was evident that many who wrote in excess of the prescribed limit did not allow themselves sufficient time to proofread their work.
Extension – Oral examination
General
In the better responses, candidates included a convincing introduction and conclusion, and developed a well-structured, logical and coherent argument supported by a range of relevant examples treated in depth. They articulated their thoughts in a sophisticated manner matched by a high level of linguistic competence, with few inaccuracies. In developing a valid argument the elements are: deconstruction of the question to address the key points, tailoring examples to that argument, a logical sequence of ideas, matching ideas with sophisticated and mostly accurate language, synthesising the argument into a convincing conclusion. Heavy reliance on pre-learned material affected spontaneity and a poor relationship of content to the topic. Responses that were overly long lacked structure and were repetitive.
Specific comments
Question
Better responses included excellent examples of how art is an expression of society as a whole or spoke about artists as iconoclasts, giving examples of how artists and art had changed the world.
Question 2
Better responses gave a definition of what was meant by ‘group’ in this context. Most argued that although sacrifices were needed in order to belong to the group, the ultimate benefits made these sacrifices worthwhile. Weaker responses referred only to faire partie du groupe and did not address the notion of sacrifice.
Question 3
Better responses linked the concept of national identity to the environment and demonstrated that, despite the harsh conditions, Australians maintain a fierce love of their environment. Many misinterpreted this question by focusing on environment rather than attachment. Even though environmental issues were linked in some good responses, this was not generally the case. Many did not address the implications of malgré and the paradox that this implies.
Extension –Written examination
Section I – Response to Prescribed Text
Part A
General comments
In general, a sound understanding of the settings, events, characters and their portrayal, and the issues was evident in many perceptive interpretations and analyses. However, a number of responses were general in nature and did not support and justify statements by referring to specific examples from the given extract. It is most important to address the requirements of the questions, and to read the questions carefully to ensure that all elements of the question are covered. The mark allocation for each question gives an indication of the amount of detail required in a response, remembering that quality not quantity is important. To show understanding of quotations in a question they need to be either paraphrased or translated. When justifying a point of view, copying quotations or large tracts from the extract is not useful.
Specific comments
Question 1
- In the weaker responses, candidates misunderstood ce dernier as ‘the last’, assuming it referred to Ugolin as the last remaining member of the Soubeyran family able to carry on the name. Better responses recognised that ‘the latter’ was a reference to the father of Ugolin, César’s last mentioned brother in the preceding list of deceased brothers. Candidates are reminded to use their reading time judiciously and not rush into the first question, since closer reading of the extract would have clarified that it could not have been referring to Ugolin as after ce dernier it continues to explain qui lui avait laissé Ugolin.
- Better responses not only compared how well, that is to what extent, the two quotes describing Ugolin matched or did not match in terms of their juxtaposition, but suprême espoir was Pagnol’s voice in an ironic, mocking or humorously sardonic tone.
- The question required reference to the whole stimulus text. Detailed content, appropriate analysis and reference to the land were required rather than just descriptions of the land in general terms. Responses that did not include supporting evidence from the given text to justify an interpretation were not awarded marks. Some responses referred only to the use of descriptive language to reflect the role of the land in people’s lives and included four examples of descriptive language. As a consequence, responses that did not carefully examine the whole extract given did not always adequately explain how the references to land reflected its role in people’s lives. Better responses included a variety of references and quotes and explained them in terms of how and why
- The question specified reference to the issue of ‘motivations’ in the given extract as well as in the novel as a whole. The best responses drew upon a range of references from the given extract and from throughout the novel in a coherent, logical manner to support ideas and justify their analysis. Candidates are reminded not to become fixated on just one or two points in a question worth six marks. Better responses clearly identified Ugolin’s motivations as being multifaceted and ranged across Ugolin’s motivations throughout the novel. Better responses analysed the extract in depth, justifying an opinion with relevant examples. Even though there were many instances of Ugolin’s motivations in the given text and the wording of the question required at least two references from
Part B
Specific comments
Question 2 – Jean de Florette
Candidates were required to show an understanding of Manon’s character and her view of her family’s experiences after their arrival in the village through her letter written to the villagers and to be published in the local newspaper. An understanding of the significance of the quote and an ability to integrate this understanding as a guiding force behind the writing was pivotal for a successful response. Better responses found a believable voice for Manon, thus bringing authenticity to the writing. Anger, condemnation, sadness, despair, desire for justice, bitterness and loss were popular but forgiveness, hope, tenderness, a desire to bring about a better future or a sense of growth and renewal were also used effectively. A number of the best responses also included a sense of lyricism or poetry as they evoked through Manon the qualities of her father Jean Cadoret or depicted her relationship with the land or her beloved Baptistine. In this regard, direct reference to specific moments and events characterised many successful responses.
Better responses employed language economically and correctly with good control of grammar and syntax.
Less successful responses lacked some or all of the qualities of purpose, voice and linguistic competence. In not tying in the quote to help create the context, some of these responses tended to revert to straight description of a series of chronological events with no clear sense of purpose, or adopted the style of a composition lacking a clear, believable voice. Where candidates had defined context and purpose their responses sometimes lacked the linguistic resources to answer the question effectively and the result was stilted and simplistic in tone.
A close knowledge of the novel was often missing in the less successful responses where candidates resorted to generalisation or, in misunderstanding the text, arrived at wrong conclusions. In some responses, Jean was not digging a well but rather looking for a spring, Ugolin was seen as a helpful and basically good character or Manon was always away in the countryside and left her father to his own devices.
Section II – Writing in French
General comments
Better responses contained a clearly structured argument, a breadth of ideas supported through the development of strong examples and not just a listing of ideas, plus a high level of grammatical accuracy. Candidates need to be careful not to overuse, or incorrectly use, the subjunctive and to use their dictionaries to avoid basic errors with agreement of adjectives, the gender of nouns and the correct use of accents. Some responses were very brief and therefore did not contain sufficient development of ideas.
Question 3
Responses were often very interesting, and gave relevant examples such as the great dreams of Nelson Mandela, Martin Luther King, or the suffragette movement, developing these ideas in depth through a well-structured argument. Some candidates saw this question as an opportunity for a philosophical discussion about the importance of dreams, without giving the depth required of a really good response. Some candidates misread the question as mes plus grands rêves not les plus grands rêves which did not necessarily allow for much depth.
Question 4
Better responses gave a considered argument on both sides of the question, the importance of both the economy and the environment. Candidates often focused their arguments on the current economic and environmental crises. Weaker responses contained a listing of suggestions for saving the environment which did not necessarily allow for the development of depth. It was obvious that there was a good knowledge of vocabulary and expressions relating to the environment but better responses related this specifically to the question. By addressing the audience at the beginning and end, involving the audience through the use of rhetorical questions and sometimes even slogans, some candidates were able to engage well with their imaginary audience. However, messieurs and mesdames were often misspelt. Some common errors were found in the use of la croissance de la temperature instead of la montée or l’augmentation, the use of ‘issue’ instead of problème. Citation was often used instead of affirmation or constation, as was les humains instead of les êtres humains.
2010037
NSW Government