Gap-fill
French media gap-fill: a correction that does not settle the debate
Complete a French media correction that fixes one attendance number while keeping the separate argument about consultation open.
- B2
- 4 gaps
- Translation included
- Learn this in the B2 notebook →
In short
Name the corrected fact, then separate it from the argument that remains open. Le chiffre a été corrigé ; toutefois, le désaccord sur la consultation demeure. A corrected attendance total does not by itself settle whether the consultation was adequate.
Yellow the idea to rememberBlue French to learn
A local article originally gave the wrong number of participants at a consultation meeting. The update below changes that number. Two organisations still disagree about whether residents had enough time to prepare. Complete the update with connectors and attribution phrases that keep these two issues distinct.
| Expression | Job in this update |
|---|---|
| contrairement à | Introduces the earlier information being replaced. |
| selon | Attributes a statement to its source. |
| toutefois | Marks a remaining contrast or limitation. |
| tandis que | Presents the other party’s different position. |
Un chiffre corrigé, un débat ouvert
Rectificatif : (contrary to) ce qu’indiquait notre première version, la réunion a réuni quatre-vingts personnes, et non cinquante. Ce total est confirmé par la feuille de présence.
(according to) l’association du quartier, cette correction est nécessaire pour décrire la mobilisation. Elle ne répond (however) pas à sa critique principale : les documents auraient été transmis trop tard pour permettre une préparation suffisante.
La mairie affirme que le calendrier annoncé a été respecté, (whereas) l’association demande un délai plus long pour les prochaines réunions. La rédaction a corrigé le nombre de participants ; elle ne présente pas ce changement comme un accord entre les deux parties.
Read it in English
Correction: contrary to what our first version stated, the meeting brought together eighty people, not fifty. This total is confirmed by the attendance sheet.
According to the neighbourhood association, this correction is necessary to describe the turnout. However, it does not answer its main criticism: the documents were reportedly sent too late for sufficient preparation.
The town hall states that the announced schedule was respected, whereas the association requests more time for future meetings. The editorial team has corrected the number of participants; it does not present this change as agreement between the two parties.
Different evidence answers different questions
The attendance sheet supports the corrected total. It does not show when the background documents were sent or how much preparation time was sufficient. The association’s criticism is attributed to the association, and auraient été transmis presents its reported claim cautiously. The town hall’s assertion is also attributed. Keep those source boundaries in your summary.
Write a one-sentence update with two parts: the changed number and the outstanding disagreement. Use mais or toutefois only where the contrast is real. Avoid donc between the new total and a conclusion about fairness, because the supplied evidence does not establish that causal link.