Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their clients’ miscond

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
_________________

D and E are out because they do not use a right idiom (to attribute x to y).
A and C are out because they sound like perpetrators are the ones who attribute behavior to allergy. I think the ones who attribute behavior to allergy in the SC are attorneys.

I wanted to pour in my explaination for this question just to consolidate in my mind:

Idiom Usage:
1. One attributes X, an effect, to Y, a cause
2. X (an effect) is attributed to Y.

(D) : wrong Idiom usage
(E) : wrong Idiom usage
(C): Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their clients' misconduct stemmed from a reaction to something ingested, but in attributing behavior that is criminal or delinquent to an allergy to some food, the perpeptrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions.

Now lets see Independent sentence starting with but:
in attributing behavior that is criminal or delinquent to an allergy to some food, the perpeptrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions

"in attributing..." : Prepositional Phrase is modifying immediate Noun i.e. Perpetrators and thus conveying wrong meaning. So, this choice is wrong.

(A): wrong : same as (C).
(B): Correct of the lot.


However, it is quite confusing/awkward to use "but" alongwith "if".

What do you guys think?

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'
_________________

Dear Friends,

Here is a detailed explanation to this question-

Meaning is crucial to solving this problem:
Understanding the intended meaning is key to solving this question; the intended meaning of the crucial part of this sentence is that if criminal or delinquent behavior is attributed to a food allergy, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions.

Concepts tested here: Meaning + Modifiers + Idioms + Awkwardness/Redundancy

• In a “phrase + comma + noun” construction, the phrase must correctly modify the noun; this is one of the most frequently tested concepts on GMAT sentence correction.
• "attribute to" is the correct, idiomatic construction.

A: Trap. This answer choice incorrectly uses "in attributing...food allergy" to modify "the perpetrators", incorrectly implying that the perpetrators are attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy, and as a result, they are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions; the intended meaning is that in the event that criminal or delinquent behavior is attributed to a food allergy, by a second entity, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions; please remember, in a “phrase + comma + noun” construction, the phrase must correctly modify the noun.

B: Correct. This answer choice uses the phrase "if criminal or delinquent behavior is attributed to an allergy to some food"; the use of the "if...then ("then" is implied)" avoids the modifier error seen in Options A, C, and E, as the "if" phrase modifies the entirety of the following clause, conveying the intended meaning - that in the event that criminal or delinquent behavior is attributed to a food allergy, by a second entity, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions. Further, Option B correctly uses the idiomatic construction "attributed to". Additionally, Option B is free of any awkwardness or redundancy.

C: This answer choice incorrectly uses "in attributing...some food" to modify "the perpetrators", incorrectly implying that the perpetrators are attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy, and as a result, they are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions; the intended meaning is that in the event that criminal or delinquent behavior is attributed to a food allergy, by a second entity, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions; please remember, in a “phrase + comma + noun” construction, the phrase must correctly modify the noun. Further, Option C uses the needlessly wordy phrase "behavior that is criminal or delinquent", leading to awkwardness and redundancy.

D: Trap. This answer choice incorrectly uses the unidiomatic construction "attributed...as"; please remember, "attribute to" is the correct, idiomatic construction. Further, Option D uses the needlessly wordy phrase "attributed as the cause", leading to awkwardness and redundancy.

E: This answer choice incorrectly uses "in attributing... behavior" to modify "the perpetrators", incorrectly implying that the perpetrators are attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy, and as a result, they are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions; the intended meaning is that in the event that criminal or delinquent behavior is attributed to a food allergy, by a second entity, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions; please remember, in a “phrase + comma + noun” construction, the phrase must correctly modify the noun. Further, Option E incorrectly uses the unidiomatic construction "attributing...as"; please remember, "attribute to" is the correct, idiomatic construction.

Hence, B is the best answer choice.

To understand the concept of "Phrase Comma Subject" and "Subject Comma Phrase" on GMAT, you may want to watch the following video (~1minute):



All the best!
Experts' Global Team
_________________

I would go with A for conciseness.
B's "to an allergy to some food" seems wordy to me
C) relative pronoun "that" is not required and actually makes it wordier
D and E are redundant for when you attribute X to Y, you don't need to say "attribute X as the cause of Y"

I believe it's B

A,C,D are all wrong because they use "in attributing" without specifying WHO is attributing

by attributing, not in attributing, so (A), (C), (E) are out.

(D) is out, food allergy is attributed to be the cause, not as the cause
(B) for me.

For me, B is concise and 'an allergy to some food' is less ambiguous than 'some food allergy'.

to add to walker's explanation, "Attributed To" is the correct idiom here.

also the choices starting with "in attributing.." make it sound like the perpetrators are doing the "attributing"

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.

Note - The conjuction 'but' is followed by an independent clause

(A) in attributing criminal or delinquent behavior to some food allergy - is a modifier and the noun following it should be the attorneys because it's the attorneys who are attributing criminal behavior to some food allergy, not the perpetrators.

(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 - also a modifier and has the same flaw as answer choice 'A'.

(D) if some food allergy is attributed as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior - Idiom. Attributed to

(E) in attributing a food allergy as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior - Same as 'A'.

Ans is B

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

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
_________________

Hi daagh,

The explanations is most convincing, but is the use of "if" fine in this sentence.

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.
_________________

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"

@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

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
_________________

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
_________________