Passage A doesn’t present language that “picture reality in compatible ways.” The issue of compatibility of languages isn’t brought up. There’s no suggestion that one language might be incompatible with another. The discussion of German and Spanish simply involves languages that can create different feelings or associations with certain concepts. But whether one language is compatible with another is a different issue.

Passage B doesn’t discuss grammatical structure and how grammar can influence thought. What it does discuss is whether numerical language can influence thought.

Passage A doesn’t suggest mutual understanding between different languages is “impossible.” It doesn’t suggest that German speakers can’t understand Spanish speakers, or vice versa.

Passage A doesn’t suggest linguistic differences are caused by conceptual differences. Rather, Passage A rejects the idea that language constrains thought. But it doesn’t support the belief that thoughts can affect languages.

This isn’t what we expected, but it’s the only accurate answer. Passage A does indeed focus on differences in subjective associations (what German speakers associate with “bridge” vs. what Spanish speakers associate with the “bridge”). Passage B does focus on the possession of concepts (numerical concepts).