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

 It is currently 23 May 2017, 11:02

### 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

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

Author Message
TAGS:

### Hide Tags

Senior Manager
Affiliations: CFA Level 2
Joined: 05 May 2004
Posts: 265
Location: Hanoi
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 115 [1] , given: 0

Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their [#permalink]

### Show Tags

02 Sep 2004, 06:48
1
KUDOS
95
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"

Manager
Joined: 29 Jul 2009
Posts: 119
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 94 [0], given: 23

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

### Show Tags

04 Aug 2009, 07:11
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

In choices A, C, and E, "in attributing ... behavior modifies the perpetrators", producing the illogical statement that the perpetrators rather than the defense attorneys are attributing behavior to food allergies.

B and D by using "If" and " is attributed " (a passive construction ) correct the modifier issue by nullifying the fact the perpetrators are the doers of the action!!!

Usage of passive suggests that someone else is doing the action rather that perpetrators...

hth
Intern
Joined: 30 Jul 2009
Posts: 40
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 45 [0], given: 1

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

### Show Tags

04 Aug 2009, 07:29
a) in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy - not || to 'perpetrators are told'
b) if criminal or delinquent behavior is attributed to an allergy to some food -correct
c) in attributing behavior that is criminal or delinquent to an allergy to some food - not || and wordy

d) if some food allergy is attributed as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior - not ||
e)in attributing a food allergy as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior - not ||
Intern
Joined: 21 Sep 2006
Posts: 12
Followers: 0

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

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

### Show Tags

04 Aug 2009, 08:04
OA is B. The way OG explains is that the phrase modifies the perpetrators illogically and idiom attributed to x to y should be used. I was not able to wrap my head around the correct answer. Subject of the sentence is Defense attorney. Perpetrators acts as direct object. So according the to your suggestion (apoorvasrivastva), the passive phrase correctly relates to them.

Thanks!
Manager
Joined: 08 Jun 2009
Posts: 69
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 2

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

### Show Tags

09 Aug 2009, 01:16
"attribute" always confuses me. Thank you for clear explanation
Manager
Joined: 03 Aug 2009
Posts: 82
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 117 [0], given: 1

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

### Show Tags

31 Aug 2009, 03:32
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
_________________

Consider kudos for good post.

Intern
Joined: 26 Sep 2009
Posts: 12
Followers: 0

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

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

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2009, 13:07
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
[Reveal] Spoiler:

Can some please explain how they got this answer? I tried reading the explanation in the book and I'm still lost. Thanks.
Manager
Joined: 21 May 2009
Posts: 138
Followers: 2

Kudos [?]: 37 [0], given: 50

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

### Show Tags

30 Sep 2009, 23:15
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
Director
Status: Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. It's a dare. Impossible is nothing.
Affiliations: University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Posts: 961
Location: Singapore
Followers: 24

Kudos [?]: 805 [0], given: 36

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

### Show Tags

05 Jun 2010, 09:07
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

D and E can be eliminated since "attributed as" is WRONG IDIOM

Among A/B/C

A and C : will actually modify "the perpetrators"

Its not the perpetrators who can argue but the Defense Attorneys

B it is.
_________________

Please press kudos if you like my post.

Director
Status: Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. It's a dare. Impossible is nothing.
Affiliations: University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Posts: 961
Location: Singapore
Followers: 24

Kudos [?]: 805 [0], given: 36

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

### Show Tags

05 Jun 2010, 09:10
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

D and E can be eliminated since "attributed as" is WRONG IDIOM

Among A/B/C

A and C : will actually modify "the perpetrators"

Its not the perpetrators who can argue but the Defense Attorneys

B it is.
_________________

Please press kudos if you like my post.

SVP
Joined: 16 Jul 2009
Posts: 1536
Schools: CBS
WE 1: 4 years (Consulting)
Followers: 44

Kudos [?]: 1194 [0], given: 2

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

### Show Tags

18 Jul 2010, 04:26
Could anybody elaborate?
Thanks
_________________

The sky is the limit
800 is the limit

GMAT Club Premium Membership - big benefits and savings

SVP
Joined: 17 Feb 2010
Posts: 1512
Followers: 19

Kudos [?]: 629 [4] , given: 6

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

### Show Tags

18 Jul 2010, 13:23
4
KUDOS
I also got the OA wrong. However, after reading the sentence several times I think I understood what the it is trying to say.

Lets break the sentence in 2 parts.

Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their clients’ misconduct stemmed from a reaction to something ingested.

If criminal or delinquent behavior is attributed to an allergy to some food then the perpetrators [culprits] are told that they are not responsible for their actions.

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 --> this modifier should modify 'attorneys' not 'perpetrators'
(B) if criminal or delinquent behavior is attributed to an allergy to some food --> this is saying that if criminal behavior is attributed to an allergy to some food then the culprits are told that they are not responsible for their actions. Also, 'attributed to' is the correct idiom.
(C) in attributing behavior that is criminal or delinquent to an allergy to some food --> same as A
(D) if some food allergy is attributed as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior --> wrong idiom
(E) in attributing a food allergy as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior --> same as A
Director
Status: Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. It's a dare. Impossible is nothing.
Affiliations: University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Posts: 961
Location: Singapore
Followers: 24

Kudos [?]: 805 [0], given: 36

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

### Show Tags

25 Jul 2010, 23:11
Looks like you did a hell of research LOL.

Catherine wrote:
When a person is driving or is in actual physical control of a vehicle within this state and is under the influence of alcoholic beverages, any chemical substance, when affected to the extent that the person's normal faculties are impaired; has a blood or breath-alcohol level of 0.08 or more.
A DUI charge is very serious. Driving under the influence is a severe crime in every state. The consequences of a conviction are life-altering. If you don't seek professional DUI lawyers to protect your rights, You may face:
• Jail time
• Job loss
• Insurance coverage complications
• Impoundment of vehicle
• Ignition interlock device
• Probation
• Community service
• Alcohol education/treatment/assessment
• Restricted interstate or international travel

_________________

Please press kudos if you like my post.

Director
Status: Impossible is not a fact. It's an opinion. It's a dare. Impossible is nothing.
Affiliations: University of Chicago Booth School of Business
Joined: 26 Nov 2009
Posts: 961
Location: Singapore
Followers: 24

Kudos [?]: 805 [0], given: 36

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

### Show Tags

25 Jul 2010, 23:16
attribute to is the Idiom. D uses attributed as OUT

B is correct.
A, C and E : "in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy" ----> this modifies the perpetrators. Which changes the meaning of the sentence.
Perpetrator cannot ague in the case - attorney can.

gmataspirant2009 wrote:
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

_________________

Please press kudos if you like my post.

Intern
Joined: 27 Jun 2010
Posts: 41
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 138 [0], given: 7

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

### Show Tags

04 Oct 2010, 03:39
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 ?
Manager
Joined: 20 Apr 2010
Posts: 248
WE 1: 4.6 years Exp IT prof
Followers: 8

Kudos [?]: 30 [0], given: 51

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

### Show Tags

04 Oct 2010, 13:00
What is the Source of this question...???
_________________

I will give a Fight till the End

"To dream anything that you want to dream, that is the beauty of the human mind. To do anything that you want to do, that is the strength of the human will. To trust yourself, to test your limits, that is the courage to succeed."
- Bernard Edmonds

A person who is afraid of Failure can never succeed -- Amneet Padda

Don't Forget to give the KUDOS

Intern
Joined: 29 Dec 2009
Posts: 32
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 3 [0], given: 2

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

### Show Tags

05 Oct 2010, 15:15
"Some food allergy" incorrect.

Hence ANS (B)
Veritas Prep GMAT Instructor
Affiliations: Veritas Prep
Joined: 28 Jul 2010
Posts: 13
Followers: 5

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

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

### Show Tags

05 Oct 2010, 18:23
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.
Senior Manager
Status: Do and Die!!
Joined: 15 Sep 2010
Posts: 326
Followers: 1

Kudos [?]: 505 [0], given: 193

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

### Show Tags

05 Oct 2010, 18:44
i considerB becoz off if cauusse.... but wasnt sure
_________________

I'm the Dumbest of All !!

Manager
Joined: 06 Aug 2010
Posts: 224
Location: Boston
Followers: 3

Kudos [?]: 198 [0], given: 5

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

### Show Tags

06 Oct 2010, 06:33
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
Joined: 27 Jun 2010
Posts: 41
Followers: 0

Kudos [?]: 138 [0], given: 7

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

### Show Tags

10 Oct 2010, 00:00
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?
Re: Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their   [#permalink] 10 Oct 2010, 00:00

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 06 Apr 2013, 08:27
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their 0 13 Jul 2012, 17:33
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their 0 04 Oct 2012, 22:41
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their 0 22 Jul 2012, 08:28
Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their 0 28 Jan 2013, 02:32
Display posts from previous: Sort by