Why is this wrong?

Thanks Mark. 

I suspect Easter is considered here as a single time point event, not as a event with a ‘duration’ (as it would often be considered in Australia at least, because of the holidays associated with it). Hence, pendant would not fit, whereas pour can be used to mean ‘for’, and in this exercise, it is also to indicate that ‘car’ doesn’t fit either.

Mark, have you got a link for context ? On what is here, this seems to be a case of “for Easter” not “during Easter”.  Especially as “pour” is used for “future intended” events when referring to ‘duration’.

Hi Maarten, I am looking at the lesson on depuis, pendant and pour and see that pour is used for future events but I am also seeing for pendant.. and do not see why it cannot apply here.. and I am struggling with this!

Note that these cases all express a duration with a clear beginning and end. Whether they take place in the past, present, or future, they are considered as enclosed in a specific timeframe. 

Am trying the exercise 

Practise how to express "for" in French (depuis/pendant/car/pour) with this Fill-in-the-Blanks kwiz exercise

Sorry, didn’t see the end of the message ! Will look a bit harder now.

Maybe Pâques is not expressing a duration but a period within which and pendant would imply that you were doing it for the whole period?.. and it is not a clear duration?.. but in that case,would pour be correct?

French!!!