Audit a French argument: which assumption needs support?

Edited by Chris Lee · Updated · About the library

Audit a funding recommendation in French. Separate survey results, feasibility assumptions and value choices, then revise the conclusion to fit the dossier.

C2Practical guide3 min readIn the C2 notebook →

In short

Audit a recommendation by separating what the evidence shows, what the plan depends on and which goal you prioritise. Then choose a concrete response: add the available support, state a condition or narrow the conclusion. Work on the assumption that most changes the decision.

Yellow the idea to rememberBlue French to learn

Residents discuss two proposals at a neighbourhood meeting.
The meeting weighs les deux propositions before funding. Illustration: Atelier

A short dossier, then an overconfident recommendation

Dossier : Parmi les trente personnes présentes à la réunion, dix-huit préfèrent la proposition A et douze préfèrent la proposition B. Le coût des deux propositions reste à établir.

Dossier: Of the thirty people at the meeting, eighteen prefer proposal A and twelve prefer proposal B. The cost of the two proposals has yet to be established.

Brouillon : La proposition A répond aux attentes de la majorité des habitants ; elle doit donc être financée en priorité.

Draft: Proposal A meets the expectations of the majority of residents; it must therefore receive priority funding.

Three dependencies, three different questions
DependencyAudit questionSupport needed
Factual: wider populationLes personnes présentes représentent-elles les habitants ?Information about who attended and who was absent.
Value choice: priorityLa préférence majoritaire est-elle le critère retenu pour attribuer le financement ?The decision’s stated aim and criteria.
FeasibilityLes ressources disponibles permettront-elles de financer la proposition A ?A cost estimate and available resources.

The meeting result supports a preference among participants. The draft expands that group to all residents, then treats popularity as the rule for allocating money. Those are two separate moves. The unknown cost adds a third question about feasibility. Naming them separately tells you what to check next.

How do you check the assumptions in a French argument?

Si la priorité est d’aider les personnes les moins bien servies, la préférence des participants ne suffit pas à départager les propositions.

If the priority is to help the people least well served, participants’ preference is not enough to choose between the proposals.

Changing the decision criterion changes which evidence matters most. This test identifies the value choice behind the recommendation.

Choose the repair your evidence permits
What you findRevision moveFrench wording
The dossier limits the result to participants.Restore the sample.Dix-huit des trente participants préfèrent A.
The priority criterion is still being discussed.Make the choice explicit.Il reste à définir le critère de priorité.
Costs are still unknown.Keep funding conditional.Le financement doit être examiné à la lumière des coûts à établir.

Révision : Dix-huit des trente participants préfèrent A. Si le choix repose sur la préférence exprimée lors de cette réunion, ce résultat plaide en faveur de la proposition A. La décision de financement reste toutefois à examiner en fonction des coûts.

Revision: Eighteen of the thirty participants prefer A. If the choice rests on the preference expressed at this meeting, that result supports A. The funding decision still needs to be examined in the light of the costs.

Audit one recommendation in your draft

A self-review aid, not a grade. Ticks are not saved.

Question 1No account needed
What does the meeting result directly establish?

Choose one answer.

Answer and explanation

Eighteen of the thirty participants prefer A.. The dossier counts meeting participants. It supplies neither a representative resident survey nor a cost comparison.

Question 2No account needed
Which is a value criterion?

Choose one answer.

Answer and explanation

Majority preference should determine funding priority.. This selects the goal governing the decision. A count reports a fact; a priority rule says how that fact should guide action.

Question 3No account needed
What should the cost gap lead you to do?

Choose one answer.

Answer and explanation

Keep the funding decision open while costs are established.. The missing cost information affects feasibility. The recorded preferences remain useful within their stated scope.

Keep going