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

It is currently 27 Aug 2014, 11:24

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 [?]: 33 [4] , given: 0

GMAT Tests User
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink] New post 02 Sep 2004, 05:14
4
This post received
KUDOS
17
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: 11 Mar 2012
Posts: 98
Location: United Kingdom
GMAT 1: 720 Q48 V40
GRE 1: 2170 Q800 V700
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 13 [0], given: 15

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued............ [#permalink] New post 07 Apr 2012, 04:34
thanks Swoosh,

definitely clear now. it sometimes helps to take some time off and revisit the problems to understand how they work.

kudos!
Manager
Manager
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 [?]: 24 [0], given: 13

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued............ [#permalink] New post 07 Apr 2012, 10:12
tsheshraj wrote:
thanks Swoosh,

definitely clear now. it sometimes helps to take some time off and revisit the problems to understand how they work.

kudos!


Thanks, yeah revisiting old problems is one of the highest value-adds in the studying process IMO
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 14 Feb 2012
Posts: 228
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 61 [0], given: 7

Re: MGMAT SC a question about logical predication [#permalink] New post 25 Apr 2012, 04:10
chandru42 wrote:
Attribute X(an effect ) to Y(a cause). correct idiomatic usage D & E are out


in attributing behavior is wrong in A & C it modifies the perpetrators

so B is the winner



How does in attributing modify perpetrator ??? please explain ...
_________________

The Best Way to Keep me ON is to give Me KUDOS !!!
If you Like My posts please Consider giving Kudos

Shikhar

Expert Post
10 KUDOS received
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1779
Followers: 1237

Kudos [?]: 3400 [10] , given: 181

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink] New post 27 Apr 2012, 12:29
10
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
Hi Shikhar,

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.


In the underlined portion of the sentence, the verb-ing modifier “in attributing…” is modifying the subject of the following clause which is “the perpetrators”. This suggests that the perpetrators perform the action of “attributing” which is illogical.
Let’s take simple examples to see how this modifier is functioning.

Reading from the red book, grandmother put the children to sleep.

Here, the verb-ing modifier is “reading”. So, who did the action of reading? Grandmother. Since “grandmother” is the subject of the following clause, modifier “reading” is correctly modifying “grandmother”.

Now read this one.

Reading the book, the children were out to sleep by grandmother.

This sentence is not correct because the subject of the clause is now “the children” and they certainly did not do the action of “reading”.

In the same way, “perpetrators” did not do the action of “attributing” the criminal behavior. They are the ones who showed criminal behavior. Now, the “perpetrators” falls in the non-underlined portion of the sentence. Hence we must choose an answer choice that correctly refers to perpetrators. Choices A, C, and E can be eliminated alone on the modifier basis. Choice D has the idiom issue. Choice B correctly and clearly conveys the logical intended meaning of the sentence.

Hope this helps.
Thanks
Shraddha
_________________



Free Webinar: August 24, 2014 - Improve by 70 Points in 30 days: Register for this Free Webinar to learn how to define your strategy, analyze your mocks and improve by 70 points in 30 days. Click here to register.

1 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 28 Sep 2011
Posts: 35
Location: India
WE: Consulting (Computer Software)
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 15 [1] , given: 18

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink] New post 27 Apr 2012, 19:15
1
This post received
KUDOS
Can you suggest some fast track, screened questions that would boost the SC score in a couple of weeks?

egmat wrote:
Hi Shikhar,

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.


In the underlined portion of the sentence, the verb-ing modifier “in attributing…” is modifying the subject of the following clause which is “the perpetrators”. This suggests that the perpetrators perform the action of “attributing” which is illogical.
Let’s take simple examples to see how this modifier is functioning.

Reading from the red book, grandmother put the children to sleep.

Here, the verb-ing modifier is “reading”. So, who did the action of reading? Grandmother. Since “grandmother” is the subject of the following clause, modifier “reading” is correctly modifying “grandmother”.

Now read this one.

Reading the book, the children were out to sleep by grandmother.

This sentence is not correct because the subject of the clause is now “the children” and they certainly did not do the action of “reading”.

In the same way, “perpetrators” did not do the action of “attributing” the criminal behavior. They are the ones who showed criminal behavior. Now, the “perpetrators” falls in the non-underlined portion of the sentence. Hence we must choose an answer choice that correctly refers to perpetrators. Choices A, C, and E can be eliminated alone on the modifier basis. Choice D has the idiom issue. Choice B correctly and clearly conveys the logical intended meaning of the sentence.

Hope this helps.
Thanks
Shraddha

_________________

Kudos if you like the post!!!

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 27 Oct 2011
Posts: 191
Location: United States
Concentration: Finance, Strategy
GMAT 1: Q V
GPA: 3.7
WE: Account Management (Consumer Products)
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 37 [0], given: 4

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink] New post 28 Apr 2012, 19:04
B. the correct idiom that needs to be used is Attribute x to y. not attribute x as y. this eliminates D & E.
Also we must use "IF" at the beginning of the sentence because "in attributing" describes the perpetrator which we do not want to do. Rather we want to create a condition.
B fits both of these situations.
_________________

DETERMINED TO BREAK 700!!!

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 30 May 2008
Posts: 76
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 11 [0], given: 26

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink] New post 30 Apr 2012, 00:18
got this one wrong twice

attribute to is the correct idiom

tense also important here
Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 19 Oct 2011
Posts: 134
Location: India
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 164 [0], given: 33

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink] New post 01 May 2012, 09:24
awesome expl from egmat..

OG speaks about active and passive form of this idiom i guess...can someone expl both the constructions with examples..
_________________

Encourage me by pressing the KUDOS if you find my post to be helpful.



Help me win "The One Thing You Wish You Knew - GMAT Club Contest"
the-one-thing-you-wish-you-knew-gmat-club-contest-140358.html#p1130989

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 01 Mar 2012
Posts: 32
Concentration: Operations, Finance
GMAT 1: 740 Q49 V41
GPA: 3.3
WE: Engineering (Manufacturing)
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 46

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink] New post 01 May 2012, 19:43
Thanks Shraddha for such an lucid example. The official explanation wasn't clear to me. Can you please discuss a few more lines about the properties of -ing form when used as a modifier?
Expert Post
e-GMAT Representative
User avatar
Joined: 02 Nov 2011
Posts: 1779
Followers: 1237

Kudos [?]: 3400 [0], given: 181

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink] New post 01 May 2012, 19:57
Expert's post
Dear sub3108,

We have the Verb-ing modifier in the free trial of e-GMAT. Just register on e-GMAT and take the concept. The concept will explain the various ways in which the verb-ing modifier can be used.

-Rajat
_________________



Free Webinar: August 24, 2014 - Improve by 70 Points in 30 days: Register for this Free Webinar to learn how to define your strategy, analyze your mocks and improve by 70 points in 30 days. Click here to register.

Manager
Manager
avatar
Joined: 12 Mar 2012
Posts: 171
Location: India
Concentration: Technology, General Management
GMAT Date: 07-23-2012
WE: Programming (Telecommunications)
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 31 [0], given: 4

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink] New post 21 May 2012, 10:40
IMO, B is the correct answer!

B uses the idiom "attributed to" correctly.
A and C's language doesn't fit properly and use idiom incorrectly.
D and E makes sentence more wordy
_________________

FOCUS..this is all I need!

Ku-Do!

Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 28 Jul 2011
Posts: 213
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 27 [0], given: 13

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink] New post 24 May 2012, 19:53
egmat wrote:
Hi Shikhar,

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.


In the underlined portion of the sentence, the verb-ing modifier “in attributing…” is modifying the subject of the following clause which is “the perpetrators”. This suggests that the perpetrators perform the action of “attributing” which is illogical.
Let’s take simple examples to see how this modifier is functioning.

Reading from the red book, grandmother put the children to sleep.

Here, the verb-ing modifier is “reading”. So, who did the action of reading? Grandmother. Since “grandmother” is the subject of the following clause, modifier “reading” is correctly modifying “grandmother”.

Now read this one.

Reading the book, the children were out to sleep by grandmother.

This sentence is not correct because the subject of the clause is now “the children” and they certainly did not do the action of “reading”.

In the same way, “perpetrators” did not do the action of “attributing” the criminal behavior. They are the ones who showed criminal behavior. Now, the “perpetrators” falls in the non-underlined portion of the sentence. Hence we must choose an answer choice that correctly refers to perpetrators. Choices A, C, and E can be eliminated alone on the modifier basis. Choice D has the idiom issue. Choice B correctly and clearly conveys the logical intended meaning of the sentence.

Hope this helps.
Thanks
Shraddha



Thats a nice explaination Shraddha.
Senior Manager
Senior Manager
avatar
Joined: 28 Dec 2010
Posts: 336
Location: India
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 37 [0], given: 33

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink] New post 25 May 2012, 07:30
choose B. but tell me guys if option A was instead.. 'by attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy', would it then be right?
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 23 Jul 2010
Posts: 18
Location: New York
Schools: Booth, Columbia, Ross, Kellogg
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 10 [0], given: 11

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink] New post 25 Jun 2012, 23:33
vibhav wrote:
choose B. but tell me guys if option A was instead.. 'by attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy', would it then be right?


I would still think no.
Since Attributing is the action done by defense attorney not the perpetrators. It should modify the doer of the action.
Manager
Manager
User avatar
Joined: 07 Dec 2011
Posts: 107
Location: India
Concentration: International Business, Strategy
GMAT Date: 07-30-2012
GPA: 2.66
WE: Information Technology (Computer Software)
Followers: 24

Kudos [?]: 94 [0], given: 116

Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink] New post 13 Jul 2012, 01:35
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


p.s: plz provide explanations too.
_________________

Please press Kudos if you found this post helpful

1 KUDOS received
Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 10 Apr 2012
Posts: 30
Location: Venezuela
Concentration: General Management, Finance
GPA: 3.07
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 23 [1] , given: 5

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally [#permalink] New post 13 Jul 2012, 12:51
1
This post received
KUDOS
@maybeam


The defense attorneys are attributing bad behavior to a food allergy. Logically, the perpetrators are not attributing bad behavior. Therefore A, C and E are out!

The underlined portion of the sentence is modifying something AFTER itself, because this modifier is after the word "but." This modifier is part of the second half of the sentence.

Secondly, the sentence is about attorneys attributing bad behavoir, not attribuiting food allergies. So D is also out! Leaving B as the correct answer.
Defense attorneys have argued that misconduct stemmed from...., but if behavior is attributed to ....., the perpetrators are told that they are not responsible for ...

Cheers
Expert Post
1 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: 260

Kudos [?]: 1542 [1] , given: 248

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally [#permalink] New post 13 Jul 2012, 13:22
1
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
After eliminating A,C and E for mismodification, between B and D, D can be straight away dropped D for using the wrong idiom attribute as, while B triumphs because of using the correct idiom attribute to
_________________

Get the best GMAT Prep Resources with GMAT Club Premium Membership

Expert Post
1 KUDOS received
Magoosh GMAT Instructor
User avatar
Joined: 28 Nov 2011
Posts: 305
Followers: 296

Kudos [?]: 457 [1] , given: 2

GMAT Tests User
Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally [#permalink] New post 13 Jul 2012, 16:33
1
This post received
KUDOS
Expert's post
We can quickly eliminate (A), (C), and (E). Each attributes the 'attributing' to the perpetrators. However, it is the defense attorneys who do the 'attributing.' You attribute something 'to'. Just like that we arrive at answer (B).

(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
_________________

Christopher Lele
Magoosh Test Prep


Image

Image

Intern
Intern
avatar
Joined: 17 Jun 2012
Posts: 8
Followers: 0

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

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink] New post 20 Jul 2012, 11:33
Suppose one of the options says, "by attributing ________ behaviour to an allergy to some food". Is this correct?
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: 260

Kudos [?]: 1542 [0], given: 248

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink] New post 22 Jul 2012, 07:28
Expert's post
No. It will not be. There is no difference between ‘in attributing’ and ‘by attributing’. Both are prepositional phrases and do neither alter the structure nor the logic. As long as the modified noun is not underlined, then we have to the change the modifier to suit the perpetrators.
_________________

Get the best GMAT Prep Resources with GMAT Club Premium Membership

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their   [#permalink] 22 Jul 2012, 07:28
    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®.