Posted 01 February 2010 - 07:30 PM
I agree with you - they are VERY similar!
When you are extracting info/comparing like this, a good approach is always:
1. what does it/they say on the surface
and THEN:
2. what does it infer/imply when I 'read between the lines'.
So - looking at the surface features - are you SURE they are exactly the same?
Check out, for example, the reasons suggested by the two passages WHY the Big Three fell after the Conference.
And then, coming to the inference of the passage, whereas the two passages are very similar on the surface, what do you think about:
a. who/what they blame for the failure of the Treaty?
b. their assessments of the performance of the different leaders.
Does this give you some ideas?
The way to approach this element is along the lines of: 'And when Source B says "..." it seems to be implying that..., whereas in Source A, which says "..." the clear inference is that...'
If it's still as clear as mud get back to us and I'll tell you what I think!
PS if you know where the question comes from have you checked out the examiners' report on this question?