Check GMAT Club Decision Tracker for the Latest School Decision Releases https://gmatclub.com/AppTrack
GMAT Club

 It is currently 28 Mar 2017, 12:45

### 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

# Events & Promotions

###### Events & Promotions in June
Open Detailed Calendar

# Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics
Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Affiliations: CFA Level 2
Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 266
Location: Hanoi
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 106 [1] , given: 0

Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Sep 2004, 06:48
1
This post received
KUDOS
87
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
_________________

"Life is like a box of chocolates, you never know what you'r gonna get"

VP
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1367
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 640 [0], given: 10

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jul 2008, 15:59
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
Joined: 20 Sep 2006
Posts: 658
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 120 [0], given: 7

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jul 2008, 16:31
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
Joined: 05 Jul 2008
Posts: 1428
Followers: 39

Kudos [?]: 371 [0], given: 1

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jul 2008, 18:29
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
Joined: 12 Apr 2008
Posts: 500
Location: Eastern Europe
Schools: Oxford
Followers: 14

Kudos [?]: 226 [0], given: 4

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jul 2008, 18:44
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
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 1396
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 308 [0], given: 0

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jul 2008, 20:27
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

VP
Joined: 17 Jun 2008
Posts: 1396
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 308 [1] , given: 0

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jul 2008, 20:31
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
Joined: 07 Nov 2007
Posts: 1821
Location: New York
Followers: 36

Kudos [?]: 900 [0], given: 5

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink]

### Show Tags

13 Jul 2008, 22:09
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
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1367
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 640 [0], given: 10

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Jul 2008, 11:29
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
Joined: 03 Apr 2007
Posts: 1367
Followers: 4

Kudos [?]: 640 [0], given: 10

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Jul 2008, 11:29
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
Joined: 25 Nov 2006
Posts: 277
Followers: 2

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

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink]

### Show Tags

14 Jul 2008, 11:34
IMO B,

attributed...to - Idiom

The others have a modifier issue. They seem to modify preperators.....
Senior Manager
Joined: 05 Jun 2008
Posts: 307
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 139 [0], given: 0

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2008, 11:36
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
Joined: 04 Nov 2007
Posts: 48
Followers: 0

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

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink]

### Show Tags

19 Jul 2008, 12:14
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
Joined: 10 Mar 2008
Posts: 368
Followers: 5

Kudos [?]: 275 [0], given: 0

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink]

### Show Tags

20 Jul 2008, 06:19
A.

Construction: Attribute X (effect) to Y (cause)
Manager
Joined: 28 Mar 2009
Posts: 81
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 279 [0], given: 0

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Jul 2009, 00:55
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
Joined: 26 May 2009
Posts: 318
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 54 [0], given: 13

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Jul 2009, 02:20
IMO A.

Right usage of the idiom "attribute to"
Senior Manager
Joined: 25 Jun 2009
Posts: 306
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 124 [0], given: 6

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink]

### Show Tags

18 Jul 2009, 03:17
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
Joined: 28 Mar 2009
Posts: 81
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 279 [0], given: 0

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink]

### Show Tags

01 Aug 2009, 19:57
OA is B.
Intern
Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 13
Followers: 0

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

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Aug 2009, 06:27
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
Manager
Joined: 29 Jul 2009
Posts: 120
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 92 [0], given: 23

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Aug 2009, 06:32
abgo wrote:
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

I think this is OG 10 question..IMO B
Intern
Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 13
Followers: 0

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

Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink]

### Show Tags

04 Aug 2009, 06:56
apoorvasrivastva,

Could you provide explanation for your answer.

Thanks,
abgo
Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their   [#permalink] 04 Aug 2009, 06:56

Go to page   Previous    1   2   3   4   5   6   7    Next  [ 131 posts ]

Similar topics Replies Last post
Similar
Topics:
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their 0 20 Jul 2008, 06:19
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their 0 14 Jul 2008, 11:34
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their 0 03 Jun 2008, 15:55
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their 0 12 Jan 2008, 09:05
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their 0 17 May 2007, 13:01
Display posts from previous: Sort by

# Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their

 new topic post reply Question banks Downloads My Bookmarks Reviews Important topics

 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®.