rirekisyo ni tiisana matigai ga atta node, kakinaosimasita.

In this sentence, に marks the place/location where something exists.

The pattern is:

• A に B が ある
• There is B in/on/at A

So:

• 履歴書に間違いがあった
• There was a mistake on/in the résumé

Here, the mistake is treated as something that exists on the résumé, so に is natural.

Because Japanese often talks about mistakes using the verb ある: a mistake exists.

So:

• 間違いがある = there is a mistake
• 間違いがあった = there was a mistake

This sounds very natural in Japanese. It is different from English, where we might say it was wrong or there was an error.

Using でした would not express the same idea as naturally here. The sentence is not saying the résumé was a mistake; it is saying the résumé had a mistake in it.

Because 間違い is the thing that is being identified as existing.

In the pattern:

• 場所 に 物 が ある

the thing that exists usually takes が.

So:

• 履歴書に = on the résumé
• 間違いが = a mistake
• あった = existed / there was

Also, が often introduces new information. The important new information here is that there was a mistake.

Both 小さな間違い and 小さい間違い are possible.

However, 小さな is very common before nouns and often sounds a bit more natural or descriptive in fixed expressions like:

• 小さな町 = a small town
• 小さな問題 = a small problem
• 小さな間違い = a small/minor mistake

Here, 小さな間違い suggests a minor mistake, not a serious one.

So the difference is not huge, but 小さな is a very natural choice in this kind of phrase.

ので gives the reason: because / so.

• 間違いがあったので、書き直しました
• Because there was a mistake, I rewrote it

Compared with から, ので often sounds:

• a bit softer
• a bit more explanatory
• a bit more objective or polite

So:

• 間違いがあったから、書き直しました is also correct
• but ので sounds slightly gentler and more formal

That matches the polite style of 書き直しました.

書き直しました comes from:

• 書く = to write
• 直す = to fix, repair, do again

When combined as V-stem + 直す, it often means:

• to do something over
• to redo something
• to correct by doing it again

So 書き直す means:

• to rewrite
• to write again in corrected form

In this sentence, it suggests the speaker did not just notice the mistake—they rewrote the résumé to fix it.

The object is omitted because it is obvious from context.

The full idea is:

• 履歴書を書き直しました
• I rewrote the résumé

Japanese often leaves out words that are already understood. Since the sentence has just mentioned 履歴書, there is no need to repeat it.

So the omitted object is:

• 履歴書

and the omitted subject is probably:

• I

Because Japanese very often omits the subject when it is clear from context.

Here, 書き直しました strongly suggests that the speaker is talking about their own action, so I is understood naturally.

A fuller version could be:

• 私は履歴書に小さな間違いがあったので、書き直しました。

But in natural Japanese, that often sounds unnecessarily explicit unless there is a reason to emphasize I.

Because the sentence is describing a completed situation in the past.

• 間違いがあった = there was a mistake
• 書き直しました = rewrote it

The speaker is looking back on what happened:

1. There was a mistake in the résumé.
2. Because of that, they rewrote it.

So both events are treated as completed.

Usually it means a minor mistake, not physically small.

In English, we also say:

• a small mistake
• a minor error

So here 小さな refers to the importance/severity of the mistake, not size.

Depending on context, it might be something like:

• a typo
• a missing character
• a minor formatting error
• a small factual mistake

Sometimes in natural English, yes—but the Japanese is more specifically rewrote it.

書き直しました suggests the correction was made by writing it over again, not just by generally fixing it.

So:

• I corrected it = possible as a natural English translation in some contexts
• I rewrote it = closer to the Japanese wording

If you want to stay close to the original grammar, rewrote it is better.

Yes, it is very natural.

Japanese often expresses this kind of idea with:

• document に mistake が ある

For example:

• レポートに間違いがある = There is a mistake in the report.
• メールに誤字があった = There was a typo in the email.

So 履歴書に小さな間違いがあった is a standard and natural structure.

Yes. In a sentence like this, ので connects the reason and the result, so in English it can become either:

• because there was a mistake, I rewrote it
• there was a mistake, so I rewrote it

Both capture the relationship correctly.

The Japanese grammar is literally showing reason → result, and English can express that in either way depending on what sounds most natural.