For a cross-text question, compare not only the authors' conclusions but also how each text weighs the available evidence. Pay particular attention to distinctions among what is possible, what is directly supported, and what has been conclusively established; Hard questions often place these different levels of certainty in otherwise plausible choices.
Hints
- Hint 1
Compare the sources
Consider which evidence was produced near the revision and which evidence reflects reception many years later.
- Hint 2
Distinguish possibility from support
An interpretation can remain possible even if the evidence offered for it is less direct than the evidence for another explanation.
- Hint 3
Watch for overstatements
Compare choices that say one interpretation is impossible, equally supported, or merely possible. Determine which degree of certainty matches Text 2.
Step-by-step
- Step 1
Identify Sato's interpretation
Sato argues that Varga deliberately used the hammered dulcimer to evoke regional folk music. She bases this interpretation partly on reviews written about two decades after the revision.
- Step 2
Compare the evidence's timing
Text 2 distinguishes evidence created near the revision from later reception. Because the reviews appeared after the dulcimer had become a more prominent regional symbol, they are less direct evidence of what Varga intended in 1892.
- Step 3
Evaluate the memorandum carefully
The 1892 memorandum directly identifies a technical purpose: making an inner rhythm audible through the brass. Text 2 therefore gives this evidence greater weight, but it also notes that a practical document may omit other artistic aims.
- Step 4
Preserve both parts of Text 2's position
The best response must distinguish possibility from evidentiary support. Text 2 leaves a regional purpose possible while maintaining that the later reviews do not establish that purpose and that the memorandum more directly supports a technical explanation.