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

It is currently 21 Oct 2014, 07:58

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 [?]: 43 [4] , given: 0

Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink] New post 02 Sep 2004, 05:14
4
This post received
KUDOS
23
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.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Status: Do and Die!!
Joined: 15 Sep 2010
Posts: 333
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 74 [0], given: 193

Re: Defense attorneys [#permalink] New post 05 Oct 2010, 17:44
i considerB becoz off if cauusse.... but wasnt sure
_________________

I'm the Dumbest of All !!

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 06 Aug 2010
Posts: 225
Location: Boston
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 81 [0], given: 5

Re: Defense attorneys [#permalink] New post 06 Oct 2010, 05:33
sachinrelan 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
110
(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

I spotted right answer as B because of right idiom attributed ...to , but couldnt understand why other options are wrong ?


As constructed, "in attributing behavior" seems to be modifying "perpetrators" - so the sentence is saying that the perpetrators themselves are attributing their crimes to some sort of food. But that's not right - it's the attorneys doing that. So A, C, and E are all out. D is wordy and makes "allergy" the subject, which doesn't really work with "perpetrators". B.
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 27 Jun 2010
Posts: 40
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 28 [0], given: 7

Re: Defense attorneys [#permalink] New post 09 Oct 2010, 23:00
VeritasPrepMimi wrote:
A) is wrong because of a modifier error. The perpetrators are not attributing their own behavior to a food allergy. Their defense attorneys are making that claim.

C) is wrong for a similar reason. It has the additional problem of wordiness. There’s no need to say “behavior that is criminal or delinquent” when you could just say “criminal or delinquent behavior.”

D) and E) are wrong because of an incorrect idiom. Never say “attributed as.” Something can only be “attributed to” someone or something.



I am still a little confused in this sentence how "in attributing.." is modifying The perpetrators and not defence attorneys, it would be kind of you if you can elaborate more on that and help me understand to spot the problem?

Also when we turn the sentence to IF then how it starts modifying defense attorneys and not perpetrators?
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 06 Aug 2010
Posts: 225
Location: Boston
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 81 [0], given: 5

Re: Defense attorneys [#permalink] New post 10 Oct 2010, 05:25
sachinrelan wrote:
VeritasPrepMimi wrote:
A) is wrong because of a modifier error. The perpetrators are not attributing their own behavior to a food allergy. Their defense attorneys are making that claim.

C) is wrong for a similar reason. It has the additional problem of wordiness. There’s no need to say “behavior that is criminal or delinquent” when you could just say “criminal or delinquent behavior.”

D) and E) are wrong because of an incorrect idiom. Never say “attributed as.” Something can only be “attributed to” someone or something.



I am still a little confused in this sentence how "in attributing.." is modifying The perpetrators and not defence attorneys, it would be kind of you if you can elaborate more on that and help me understand to spot the problem?

Also when we turn the sentence to IF then how it starts modifying defense attorneys and not perpetrators?


"but" begins a new clause, with a new subject and a new predicate. So "in attributing" modifies the subject of this clause, which is "perpetrators".
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 23 May 2010
Posts: 35
Followers: 0

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

Re: Defense attorneys [#permalink] New post 11 Oct 2010, 08:11
This question is from OG12. . it is a modifier question referenced in the MGMAT Sentence correction book. .wish I could remember the number
Current Student
User avatar
Status: Current MBA Student
Joined: 19 Nov 2009
Posts: 129
Concentration: Finance, General Management
GMAT 1: 720 Q49 V40
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 68 [0], given: 210

During my initial review of this problem, I had difficulty [#permalink] New post 04 Jan 2011, 16:22
During my initial review of this problem, I had difficulty recognizing the main problems with this SC statement. Please help.

79. 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,
Expert Post
2 KUDOS received
Retired Moderator
avatar
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 2266
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Followers: 267

Kudos [?]: 1697 [2] , given: 249

Premium Member
Re: OG SC #79 [#permalink] New post 05 Jan 2011, 01:10
2
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
This is primarily an issue of mis-modification and then that of the idiom ‘attributed to’ or ‘attributed as’

The mis-modification relates to who or what the modifier phrase ‘in attributing criminal or
delinquent behavior to some food allergy’
is modifying- the perpetrators or the defence attorneys? - Please note that 'the perpetrators' is not underlined and it is the attorneys who are attributing. So any choice that has the modifier ‘in attributing x to’ perpetrators is logically wrong. So A, C and E are gone at first sight.

Between B and D, which use a passive voice construction to circumvent the modification problem, B is better because it uses the correct idiom 'attributed to' rather than the unidiomatic 'attributed as'
_________________

Get the best GMAT Prep Resources with GMAT Club Premium Membership

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 73
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 4

Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink] New post 10 Mar 2011, 20:39
235. 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: 09 Feb 2011
Posts: 285
Concentration: General Management, Social Entrepreneurship
Schools: HBS '14 (A)
GMAT 1: 770 Q50 V47
Followers: 10

Kudos [?]: 118 [0], given: 13

Re: 235/1000 - cause - effect [#permalink] New post 10 Mar 2011, 21:49
The verb Attribute will take 'to' Hence,D and E are eliminated
The sentence takes the form - If X is done Y is done.
Both verbs- atrribute and tell should be in the same verb form- attributed, told or attributing, telling.
Hence , B
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 73
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 4

Re: 235/1000 - cause - effect [#permalink] New post 10 Mar 2011, 22:24
but my understanding was that "if" is used only in Cause-Effect situations in GMAT.

and option B doesn't look like that type...
Expert Post
2 KUDOS received
Retired Moderator
avatar
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 2266
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Followers: 267

Kudos [?]: 1697 [2] , given: 249

Premium Member
Re: 235/1000 - cause - effect [#permalink] New post 11 Mar 2011, 00:25
2
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
This is in fact a test of modification and idiom. The modifier phrase starting with 'in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy' wrongly modifies the perpetrators, while it should modify the defense attorneys. So let us remove any choice having the ‘in attributing' modifier. A, C and E are out in one stroke.
Between B and D, D faults on idiom. 'Attributed as' is wrong. B uses attributed to and is the right choice
_________________

Get the best GMAT Prep Resources with GMAT Club Premium Membership

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 73
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 4

Re: 235/1000 - cause - effect [#permalink] New post 11 Mar 2011, 22:27
Hi daagh,

The explanations is most convincing, but is the use of "if" fine in this sentence.
Expert Post
Retired Moderator
avatar
Status: worked for Kaplan's associates, but now on my own, free and flying
Joined: 19 Feb 2007
Posts: 2266
Location: India
WE: Education (Education)
Followers: 267

Kudos [?]: 1697 [0], given: 249

Premium Member
Re: 235/1000 - cause - effect [#permalink] New post 11 Mar 2011, 23:44
Expert's post
We have mostly seen the subordinate conjunction ‘if’ being used alone in conditional clauses as part of the “If- then” combination. Here the sentence means to imply that “if criminal or delinquent behavior is attributed to an allergy to some food, (then) the perpetrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions.” In order to complicate matters for test takers, the word ‘then’ has been deliberately dropped, still keeping the intended meaning intact.

Another way of looking at it is to take that the word “if” is being used as an alternative to other subordinate conjunctions such as “because” or “since”, in which case, the use of "if" may have some glitch on usage but not on grammar.
_________________

Get the best GMAT Prep Resources with GMAT Club Premium Membership

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 04 Jan 2011
Posts: 73
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 9 [0], given: 4

Re: 235/1000 - cause - effect [#permalink] New post 11 Mar 2011, 23:49
Thanks for the explanation...
1 KUDOS received
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 20 Jul 2011
Posts: 152
GMAT Date: 10-21-2011
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 36 [1] , given: 15

Re: MGMAT SC a question about logical predication [#permalink] New post 01 Sep 2011, 09:35
1
This post received
KUDOS
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 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


Answer: B
Idiom - it should be 'but by attributing' instead of 'but in attributing' ---> eliminates A, C and E
Idiom - 'attributed to' and not 'attributed as' ---> eliminates D
_________________

"The best day of your life is the one on which you decide your life is your own. No apologies or excuses. No one to lean on, rely on, or blame. The gift is yours - it is an amazing journey - and you alone are responsible for the quality of it. This is the day your life really begins." - Bob Moawab

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 12 Jul 2011
Posts: 154
Concentration: Operations, Strategy
GMAT 1: 680 Q46 V37
WE: Engineering (Telecommunications)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 14 [0], given: 42

Re: MGMAT SC a question about logical predication [#permalink] New post 18 Oct 2011, 04:46
ah i suck at idioms :(
Current Student
avatar
Joined: 18 Jun 2010
Posts: 150
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 15 [0], given: 2

Re: MGMAT SC a question about logical predication [#permalink] New post 18 Oct 2011, 10:07
Does "allergy TO some food items" in option B make sense?
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 24 Dec 2011
Posts: 23
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 8

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink] New post 23 Feb 2012, 12:21
Sorry for bumping up an old thread again. But I don't quite see how "in attributing" modifies perpetrators and not defense attorney's. I agree that the placement of the modifier is ambiguous but I would say it COULD modify both.

"In Attributing" modifies the subject of the sentence it modifies. The subject of the prior sentence is
"Defense Attorneys". So it COULD modify "Defense Attorneys". However, in the next sentence, "perpetrators" appears as the subject, so "attributing" COULD also modify the "perpetrators".

Based on this ambiguity I would rule out A,C,E. But I don't agree that it unambiguously modifies perpetrators rather than Defense Attorneys (from a grammatical point of view).

Can someone explain the flaw in my reasoning?

Thanks!
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 11 Mar 2012
Posts: 98
Location: United Kingdom
GMAT 1: 720 Q48 V40
GRE 1: 2170 Q800 V700
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 16 [0], given: 15

Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink] New post 06 Apr 2012, 10:30
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,

pls explain your answers
3 KUDOS received
Current Student
avatar
Joined: 19 Mar 2012
Posts: 174
Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, General Management
GMAT 1: 750 Q50 V42
GPA: 3.69
WE: Analyst (Mutual Funds and Brokerage)
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 26 [3] , given: 13

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued............ [#permalink] New post 06 Apr 2012, 11:18
3
This post received
KUDOS
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

There is a modifier issue in the the original sentence. ". . . but in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy, the perpetrators are in effect . . ."

That part right there suggests that it's the perpetrators who are doing the "attributing," when really its the defense attorneys that attribute the behavior to food allergies. SO knowing that, you can eliminate all the choice with the inappropriate modifier (choices A, C, and E). That leaves B and D. D is incorrect because the proper structure when using "attribute" is "attribute X to Y," but D does "attribute X as Y"
Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued............   [#permalink] 06 Apr 2012, 11:18
    Similar topics Author Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their goalsnr 0 14 Jul 2008, 10:34
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their mymba99 0 03 Jun 2008, 14:55
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®.