9.10 A synthèse de documents — Epoché
What you will be able to write A synthèse de documents of about 220 to 250 words on three texts: a title, an introduction, two organised parts and a conclusion. A synthesis that compares the documents by idea rather than summarising them one after the other. Reformulation: saying what a document says in your own words, without quoting and without giving your opinion. A draft you can check with an AI assistant for faithfulness to the sources and for the length. Sentences from this lesson, before the explanation. Read the French aloud; all of them come back below. French English Nous avons une grande famille avec six enfants à nourrir. [1] We have a big family with six children to feed. Comment allons-nous nourrir tous ces gens ? [2] How will we feed all these people? Tu as des difficultés avec cette langue. [3] You have difficulties with this language. Je lis un article intéressant sur la protection de l'environnement. [4] I'm reading an interesting article about environment protection. Il a étudié des documents historiques pour résoudre cette énigme. [5] He looked into historical documents to solve the mystery. Tout le monde rit, mais personne ne m'explique ce qui s'est passé. [6] Everyone's laughing, but no one will explain to me what happened. Notre technique était mauvaise. [7] Our technique was wrong. C'est pour ta protection. [8] This is for your protection. Prerequisites : 9.9 — this lesson follows 9.9 Writing . The abstracts of 10.9 Argument trained you to find the main idea of an academic text quickly; the academic French of 5.25 Vocabulary gives you the verbs of reporting. The synthesis of documents is the first exercise of the written examination of the DALF C1: candidates read two or three documents on the same theme, about a thousand words in all, and write a synthesis of about 220 words, followed by an argumentative essay on the same theme like the one you wrote in 9.9 Writing . The synthesis is a strict exercise with rules of its own. It is also a skill used every day in French professional life, in notes, reports and briefings. The three documents of this lesson are real: abstracts of recent articles deposited in the French open archive HAL, all published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 licence. They are printed in full in this lesson, except for the third, of which only the first four paragraphs are given. Read them before you read the model. Sources of the documents: Document 1: Emmanuelle Kesse-Guyot, Du champ à l'assiette vers une alimentation durable , Environnement, Risques & Santé , 25, 4, 2026, pp. 309–314, https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-05703153v1. Licence CC BY 4.0. Abstract unchanged except for two corrected spellings of the plural végétaux . Document 2: Xavier Reboud, Pierre Labarthe, Damien Tremeau-Busson, Damien Rousseliere, Hervé Durand and Christian Lannou, Agroéquipements, protection des cultures et réduction des pesticides , Innovations Agronomiques , 114, 2026, pp. 47–59, https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-05745724v1. Licence CC BY 4.0. Abstract unchanged. Document 3: Guy Richard, Jean-Michel Salles and Michel Colombier, Pourquoi la transition écologique est-elle si difficile à gouverner ? , The Conversation France , 2026, https://hal.inrae.fr/hal-05738319v1. Licence CC BY 4.0. The first four paragraphs of the abstract, unchanged. Model A model synthesis written for this lesson, about 230 words. Title. Changer d'alimentation et d'agriculture : une transition difficile Introduction. Comment transformer nos manières de produire et de nous nourrir face à la crise écologique ? Trois documents récents abordent cette question : un article sur l'alimentation durable (document 1), une étude sur les équipements agricoles et la réduction des pesticides (document 2), et un article sur les difficultés de gouverner la transition écologique (document 3). Part I. Les trois textes s'accordent d'abord sur l'urgence du changement. Selon le document 1, les systèmes alimentaires produisent un tiers des émissions de gaz à effet de serre et consomment la plus grande partie de l'eau douce. Le document 3 constate de son côté que les politiques actuelles restent insuffisantes. Le document 2 rappelle enfin que l'agriculture doit utiliser moins de pesticides sans perdre en productivité. Part II. Mais les documents insistent aussi sur la complexité des solutions. Pour le document 1, une alimentation plus végétale n'est possible que si elle reste accessible, nutritive et respectueuse du contexte culturel. Le document 2 montre que les nouvelles technologies ne suffisent pas : leur efficacité dépend de la formation des agriculteurs et de l'action collective. Enfin, le document 3 souligne que le manque de volonté politique n'explique pas tout : la nature même des transformations exige de nouvelles façons de gouverner. Conclusion. Ainsi, les trois documents montrent que la transition écologique ne dépend pas d'une seule solution, mais d'un changement à la fois technique, social et politique. Notice the title, which states the theme and the angle; the introduction, which asks a question and presents each document in a few words; the two parts, one on what the documents share and one on what they add, each part drawing on all three documents; the absence of quotations and of any personal opinion; and the short conclusion that answers the question of the introduction. The plan Part What it does · about 230 words Title your own title, which shows the theme and the angle Introduction the common question, and each document presented in a few words · about 50 words Part I a first idea, with what each document says about it · about 80 words Part II a second idea, often a difference or a complication · about 80 words Conclusion one or two sentences that answer the question, with no opinion · about 20 words The rules. The examiners check four things. No personal opinion: the synthesis reports, it does not judge. No quotation: reformulate everything in your own words, apart from a few technical terms.