Find all School-related info fast with the new School-Specific MBA Forum

It is currently 01 Oct 2014, 00:12

Close

GMAT Club Daily Prep

Thank you for using the timer - this advanced tool can estimate your performance and suggest more practice questions. We have subscribed you to Daily Prep Questions via email.

Customized
for You

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Track
Your Progress

every week, we’ll send you an estimated GMAT score based on your performance

Practice
Pays

we will pick new questions that match your level based on your Timer History

Not interested in getting valuable practice questions and articles delivered to your email? No problem, unsubscribe here.

Events & Promotions

Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  
Author Message
TAGS:
4 KUDOS received
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 08 Jul 2004
Posts: 606
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 36 [4] , given: 0

Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink] New post 02 Sep 2004, 05:14
4
This post received
KUDOS
20
This post was
BOOKMARKED
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their clients' misconduct stemmed from a reaction to something ingested, but in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions.
(A) in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy
(B) if criminal or delinquent behavior is attributed to an allergy to some food
(C) in attributing behavior that is criminal or delinquent to an allergy to some food
(D) if some food allergy is attributed as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior
(E) in attributing a food allergy as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior

Last edited by saurya_s on 21 Jun 2005, 13:10, edited 1 time in total.
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 22 Dec 2007
Posts: 158
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 0

Re: SC - attorney [#permalink] New post 02 Jun 2008, 15:49
A vs B for me.
I went with A on this as it appeared more concise. Not so sure after seeing the plethora of B's :?
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 04 Sep 2007
Posts: 215
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 7 [0], given: 0

Re: SC - attorney [#permalink] New post 03 Jun 2008, 14:55
bigtreezl wrote:
why not E?


See explanation above by "Legend" on why E is not the best option.
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1377
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 188 [0], given: 10

Reviews Badge
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink] New post 13 Jul 2008, 14:59
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their clients' misconduct stemmed from a reaction to something ingested, but in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are notresponsible for their actions.

A. in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy

B. if criminal or delinquent behavior is attributedto an allergy to some food

C. in attributing behavior that is criminal ordelinquent to an allergy to some food

D. if some food allergy is attributed as the cause ofcriminal or delinquent behavior

E. in attributing a food allergy as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior

"Attributed to" is an idiom and if you use that logic it is easy to find the answer. But what if we get an SC on similar lines but doesnot have a idiom issue?According to OG all incorrect answer choices have a modifier error. Lets discuss teh modifiers issues in this SC.
Director
Director
avatar
Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 658
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 63 [0], given: 7

Re: SC-tough one [#permalink] New post 13 Jul 2008, 15:31
goalsnr wrote:
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their clients' misconduct stemmed from a reaction to something ingested, but in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are notresponsible for their actions.

A. in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy

B. if criminal or delinquent behavior is attributedto an allergy to some food

C. in attributing behavior that is criminal ordelinquent to an allergy to some food

D. if some food allergy is attributed as the cause ofcriminal or delinquent behavior

E. in attributing a food allergy as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior

"Attributed to" is an idiom and if you use that logic it is easy to find the answer. But what if we get an SC on similar lines but doesnot have a idiom issue?According to OG all incorrect answer choices have a modifier error. Lets discuss teh modifiers issues in this SC.


We have to make sure that the scentence before the coma should modify 'the perpetrators' (that comes right after the coma). IMO C
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 1436
Followers: 34

Kudos [?]: 222 [0], given: 1

Re: SC-tough one [#permalink] New post 13 Jul 2008, 17:29
Read the sentence as is and ask the Question who is attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy?

A and C seem to say Perpetrators, it should actually modify defense attorneys. A & C are wrong for that reason

Also, the modifier that in C is not really needed. C & D behavior is better than behavior that is C & D

In D & E, word cause to me sounds redundant. X is attributed to Y itself tells us that Y is cause and X is effect.

I dont think we need the word cause again.

B remains and also uses if to show the condition.

This Q is different from normal modifier Q's in that it moved the modifier to the middle of the sentence. Such Sentences are a rarity on the test and when it appears, it is difficult to spot. In this case, the idiom X is attributed to Y sets up the trap.
Director
Director
User avatar
Joined: 12 Apr 2008
Posts: 501
Location: Eastern Europe
Schools: Oxford
Followers: 11

Kudos [?]: 161 [0], given: 4

Re: SC-tough one [#permalink] New post 13 Jul 2008, 17:44
I think I met this SC… And I didn’t like it. :?

The key is to understand WHO exactly is attributing criminal behaviour to food allergy. And it is NOT the perpetrators themselves, but the attorneys. That’s why A, C, E are wrong.
To choose from B and D, I think, you need to recall the usage of idiom - because it is not the modifier error that marks the incorrect option in case of B and D (IMO, of course):

<Effect> is attributed to <Cause>
<criminal behaviour> is attributed to <allergy>

This leaves us with B.

Quote:
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their clients' misconduct stemmed from a reaction to something ingested, but in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are notresponsible for their actions.

A. in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy

B. if criminal or delinquent behavior is attributedto an allergy to some food

C. in attributing behavior that is criminal ordelinquent to an allergy to some food

D. if some food allergy is attributed as the cause ofcriminal or delinquent behavior

E. in attributing a food allergy as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 1406
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 118 [0], given: 0

Re: SC-tough one [#permalink] New post 13 Jul 2008, 19:27
goalsnr wrote:
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their clients' misconduct stemmed from a reaction to something ingested, but in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are notresponsible for their actions.

A. in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy

B. if criminal or delinquent behavior is attributedto an allergy to some food

C. in attributing behavior that is criminal ordelinquent to an allergy to some food

D. if some food allergy is attributed as the cause ofcriminal or delinquent behavior

E. in attributing a food allergy as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior

"Attributed to" is an idiom and if you use that logic it is easy to find the answer. But what if we get an SC on similar lines but doesnot have a idiom issue?According to OG all incorrect answer choices have a modifier error. Lets discuss teh modifiers issues in this SC.


Following the idiom "attributed to" and also usage of "in effect"
if X,perpetrators are in effect .... is actually incorrect
but in doing so,the perpetrators are in effect ..... CORRECT
hence we got to decide among A and C
Among A and C ,C is unnecessarily wordy hence eliminate .
IMO (A)
_________________

cheers
Its Now Or Never

1 KUDOS received
VP
VP
avatar
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 1406
Followers: 7

Kudos [?]: 118 [1] , given: 0

Re: SC-tough one [#permalink] New post 13 Jul 2008, 19:31
1
This post received
KUDOS
greenoak wrote:
I think I met this SC… And I didn’t like it. :?

The key is to understand WHO exactly is attributing criminal behaviour to food allergy. And it is NOT the perpetrators themselves, but the attorneys. That’s why A, C, E are wrong.
To choose from B and D, I think, you need to recall the usage of idiom - because it is not the modifier error that marks the incorrect option in case of B and D (IMO, of course):

<Effect> is attributed to <Cause>
<criminal behaviour> is attributed to <allergy>

This leaves us with B.

Quote:
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their clients' misconduct stemmed from a reaction to something ingested, but in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are notresponsible for their actions.

A. in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy

B. if criminal or delinquent behavior is attributedto an allergy to some food

C. in attributing behavior that is criminal ordelinquent to an allergy to some food

D. if some food allergy is attributed as the cause ofcriminal or delinquent behavior

E. in attributing a food allergy as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior


The highlighted statement is correct and in options A,C , E its NOT perpetrators but only attorneys who attribute.If we look at the A,C and E.. its said perpetrators are in effect told
This is in passive and indicates that they are told by attorneys .I belive we cannot remove (a,c,e) on this basis
_________________

cheers
Its Now Or Never

SVP
SVP
User avatar
Joined: 07 Nov 2007
Posts: 1829
Location: New York
Followers: 27

Kudos [?]: 463 [0], given: 5

Re: SC-tough one [#permalink] New post 13 Jul 2008, 21:09
spriya wrote:
greenoak wrote:
I think I met this SC… And I didn’t like it. :?

The key is to understand WHO exactly is attributing criminal behaviour to food allergy. And it is NOT the perpetrators themselves, but the attorneys. That’s why A, C, E are wrong.
To choose from B and D, I think, you need to recall the usage of idiom - because it is not the modifier error that marks the incorrect option in case of B and D (IMO, of course):

<Effect> is attributed to <Cause>
<criminal behaviour> is attributed to <allergy>

This leaves us with B.

Quote:
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their clients' misconduct stemmed from a reaction to something ingested, but in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are notresponsible for their actions.

A. in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy

B. if criminal or delinquent behavior is attributedto an allergy to some food

C. in attributing behavior that is criminal ordelinquent to an allergy to some food

D. if some food allergy is attributed as the cause ofcriminal or delinquent behavior

E. in attributing a food allergy as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior


The highlighted statement is correct and in options A,C , E its NOT perpetrators but only attorneys who attribute.If we look at the A,C and E.. its said perpetrators are in effect told
This is in passive and indicates that they are told by attorneys .I belive we cannot remove (a,c,e) on this basis





Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their clients' misconduct stemmed from a reaction to something ingested, but in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are notresponsible for their actions.

= ...., BUT in attributing criminal or delinquesnt... ,the perpetrators are in effect...
CAN be re writtena as
= BUT the perpetrators "in attributing crimal or deliquent..blah blah", are in effect... blah blah..

So, In A,C,E It looks like "The Perpetrators" are attributing criminal and deliquenct behavior.. actually that's not the case..
_________________

Your attitude determines your altitude
Smiling wins more friends than frowning

VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1377
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 188 [0], given: 10

Reviews Badge
Re: SC-tough one [#permalink] New post 14 Jul 2008, 10:29
greenoak wrote:
I think I met this SC… And I didn’t like it. :?

The key is to understand WHO exactly is attributing criminal behaviour to food allergy. And it is NOT the perpetrators themselves, but the attorneys. That’s why A, C, E are wrong.
To choose from B and D, I think, you need to recall the usage of idiom - because it is not the modifier error that marks the incorrect option in case of B and D (IMO, of course):

<Effect> is attributed to <Cause>
<criminal behaviour> is attributed to <allergy>

This leaves us with B.

Quote:
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their clients' misconduct stemmed from a reaction to something ingested, but in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are notresponsible for their actions.

A. in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy

B. if criminal or delinquent behavior is attributedto an allergy to some food

C. in attributing behavior that is criminal ordelinquent to an allergy to some food

D. if some food allergy is attributed as the cause ofcriminal or delinquent behavior

E. in attributing a food allergy as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior


Spot on :)

Yes we have a modifier error in the original SC. "in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior " modifies the preperators.
=> A,C,E are out
"attributed to" and not "attributed as" is teh correct idiom
->D is out

B wins
VP
VP
User avatar
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1377
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 188 [0], given: 10

Reviews Badge
Re: SC-tough one [#permalink] New post 14 Jul 2008, 10:29
OA is B


My explanation:
we have a modifier error in the original SC. "in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior " modifies the preperators.
=> A,C,E are out
"attributed to" and not "attributed as" is teh correct idiom
->D is out

B wins
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 277
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 23 [0], given: 0

Re: SC-tough one [#permalink] New post 14 Jul 2008, 10:34
IMO B,

attributed...to - Idiom

The others have a modifier issue. They seem to modify preperators.....
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 05 Jun 2008
Posts: 313
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 0

Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink] New post 19 Jul 2008, 10:36
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their clients’ misconduct stemmed from a reaction to something ingested, but in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions.
(A) in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy
(B) if criminal or delinquent behavior is attributed to an allergy to some food
(C) in attributing behavior that is criminal or delinquent to an allergy to some food
(D) if some food allergy is attributed as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior
(E) in attributing a food allergy as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior
any explaination???
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 04 Nov 2007
Posts: 49
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 0

Re: Sc1000: Defense attorneys [#permalink] New post 19 Jul 2008, 11:14
vivektripathi wrote:
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their clients’ misconduct stemmed from a reaction to something ingested, but in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions.
(A) in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy
(B) if criminal or delinquent behavior is attributed to an allergy to some food
(C) in attributing behavior that is criminal or delinquent to an allergy to some food
(D) if some food allergy is attributed as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior
(E) in attributing a food allergy as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior
any explaination???


the preposition "in" is appropriate in this context. Preposition "if" requires a conditional clause (which we are not dealing with here). So, eliminate options B & D. Among A, C & E, we have to closely observe what is being attributed to what. In this context, the criminal/delinquent behaviour is attributed to some food allergy & so the perpetrators are told that they are not responsible for their actions. Answer A is the best choice.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 376
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 55 [0], given: 0

Re: Sc1000: Defense attorneys [#permalink] New post 20 Jul 2008, 05:19
A.

Construction: Attribute X (effect) to Y (cause)
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 28 Mar 2009
Posts: 84
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 0

Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink] New post 17 Jul 2009, 23:55
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their clients’ misconduct stemmed from a reaction to something ingested, but in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions.
(A) in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy
(B) if criminal or delinquent behavior is attributed to an allergy to some food
(C) in attributing behavior that is criminal or delinquent to an allergy to some food
(D) if some food allergy is attributed as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior
(E) in attributing a food allergy as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 26 May 2009
Posts: 317
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 35 [0], given: 13

Re: Defense attorneys [#permalink] New post 18 Jul 2009, 01:20
IMO A.

Right usage of the idiom "attribute to"
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 25 Jun 2009
Posts: 313
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 74 [0], given: 6

Re: Defense attorneys [#permalink] New post 18 Jul 2009, 02:17
skim wrote:
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their clients’ misconduct stemmed from a reaction to something ingested, but in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions.
(A) in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy
(B) if criminal or delinquent behavior is attributed to an allergy to some food
(C) in attributing behavior that is criminal or delinquent to an allergy to some food
(D) if some food allergy is attributed as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior
(E) in attributing a food allergy as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior


The correct idiom is "Attribute to". Hence D and E is out. Between A, B and C it should be B as this sentence is in passive form and in passive form we need to use the idiom as "is attributed to ". Moreover A and C is modifying "perpetrators instead of Defense attorneys.

Cheers
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 28 Mar 2009
Posts: 84
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 0

Re: Defense attorneys [#permalink] New post 01 Aug 2009, 18:57
OA is B.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 14
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 0 [0], given: 3

Defense Attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink] New post 04 Aug 2009, 05:27
Defense Attorneys have occasionally argued that their client's misconduct stemmed from a reaction to something ingested, but in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions.

a) in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy
b) if criminal or delinquent behavior is attributed to an allergy to some food
c) in attributing behavior that is criminal or delinquent to an allergy to some food
d) if some food allergy is attributed as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior
e)in attributing a food allergy as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior
Defense Attorneys have occasionally argued that their   [#permalink] 04 Aug 2009, 05:27
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their mun23 0 06 Apr 2013, 07:27
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their fanatico 0 22 Jul 2012, 07:28
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their tarek99 0 12 Jan 2008, 08:05
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their vshaunak@gmail.com 0 17 May 2007, 12:01
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their saurya_s 0 03 May 2005, 04:32
Display posts from previous: Sort by

Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their

  Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics  

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   4   5   6    Next  [ 116 posts ] 



GMAT Club MBA Forum Home| About| Privacy Policy| Terms and Conditions| GMAT Club Rules| Contact| Sitemap

Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group and phpBB SEO

Kindly note that the GMAT® test is a registered trademark of the Graduate Management Admission Council®, and this site has neither been reviewed nor endorsed by GMAC®.