Cordinating conjunction + subor. conjunc.

mundasingh123 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
OA is B
But i thought that a coordinating conjunction cannot be used along with a subordinator such as if.
Please correct me in case i am incorrect

I believe it's used to - emphasize the idea in the main clause.

First of all this is an official question (OG-12) so u cannot doubt about its validity. Second, its one of the toughest question. Third, its an awesome question as i spent a lot of time in it earlier and learned a few great things.

Now, first, i request u to notice the structure of this question. The question contains two Independent clauses correctly connected with COMMA + FANBOYS (co-ordinating conjunction). Now, in the second independent clause, the structure is:

COMMA + BUT + MODIFIER ( if criminal or delinquent behavior..) + CLAUSE (the perpetrators...)

So as u can see, IF...part is a modifier, modifying an Independent clause, and that IC is connected to another IC with COMMA + COORDINATING CONJUNCTION...so the structure is fine and i see no issue here as this is the only best possible way here.

gmat25 wrote:First of all this is an official question (OG-12) so u cannot doubt about its validity. Second, its one of the toughest question. Third, its an awesome question as i spent a lot of time in it earlier and learned a few great things.

Now, first, i request u to notice the structure of this question. The question contains two Independent clauses correctly connected with COMMA + FANBOYS (co-ordinating conjunction). Now, in the second independent clause, the structure is:

COMMA + BUT + MODIFIER ( if criminal or delinquent behavior..) + CLAUSE (the perpetrators...)

So as u can see, IF...part is a modifier, modifying an Independent clause, and that IC is connected to another IC with COMMA + COORDINATING CONJUNCTION...so the structure is fine and i see no issue here as this is the only best possible way here.

Pg 189 MGMAT SC Guide
Line 4 from Top
Use only 1 connecting word at once . i guess there is an exception in this case in this case

Hi,
I do not have MGMAT SC. So, I am not sure what exactly is written in that. Coming to this question:

Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their clients' misconduct stemmed from a reaction to something ingested, but if criminal or delinquent behavior is attributed to an allergy to some food, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions.

As gmat25 has already mentioned, this is no exception and it has one and only one FANBOY after comma.
Now, consider the second Independent clause:
if criminal or delinquent behavior is attributed to an allergy to some food, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions.
Here the subordinating conjunction 'if' introduces the dependent clause 'if criminal or delinquent behavior is attributed to an allergy to some food' and relates the dependent clause to the independent clause 'the perpetrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions', making the entire sentence an Independent clause.

'Comma + But' is used to join this Independent clause with the preceding independent clause. The connecting word is only one i.e. 'but'. 'If' is part of the second Independent clause. It is not a connecting word between the two Independent clauses.

Frankenstein wrote:Hi,
I do not have MGMAT SC. So, I am not sure what exactly is written in that. Coming to this question:

Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their clients' misconduct stemmed from a reaction to something ingested, but if criminal or delinquent behavior is attributed to an allergy to some food, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions.

As gmat25 has already mentioned, this is no exception and it has one and only one FANBOY after comma.
Now, consider the second Independent clause:
if criminal or delinquent behavior is attributed to an allergy to some food, the perpetrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions.
Here the subordinating conjunction 'if' introduces the dependent clause 'if criminal or delinquent behavior is attributed to an allergy to some food' and relates the dependent clause to the independent clause 'the perpetrators are in effect told that they are not responsible for their actions', making the entire sentence an Independent clause.

'Comma + But' is used to join this Independent clause with the preceding independent clause. The connecting word is only one i.e. 'but'. 'If' is part of the second Independent clause. It is not a connecting word between the two Independent clauses.

How do U know there is no exception

mundasingh123 wrote:How do U know there is no exception

Hi,
At least this example is clearly not an exception to the rule you stated. Do you have any official question which is an exception? If so please post it so that we can learn from it.

Frankenstein wrote:

mundasingh123 wrote:How do U know there is no exception

Hi,
At least this example is clearly not an exception to the rule you stated. Do you have any official question which is an exception? If so please post it so that we can learn from it.

The mgmat sc guide says that a sentence such as : Although X did Y, yet X could not do Z .
is wrong because it uses a coordinating conjunction as well as subord. conjunction .
When i said this sentence is an exception , what i meant was the subordinating conjunction has not been used to connect the same 2 independent clauses that have been joined by a cordinating conjunction . The sub. conjunction has been used within a coord. conjunction .
Whereas in the example that i just pasted above has a coord. conjunction within a sub. conjunction . I hope you are able to traverse your way through this entangle of words.

mundasingh123 wrote:

Frankenstein wrote:

mundasingh123 wrote:How do U know there is no exception

Hi,
At least this example is clearly not an exception to the rule you stated. Do you have any official question which is an exception? If so please post it so that we can learn from it.

The mgmat sc guide says that a sentence such as : Although X did Y, yet X could not do Z .
is wrong because it uses a coordinating conjunction as well as subord. conjunction .
When i said this sentence is an exception , what i meant was the subordinating conjunction has not been used to connect the same 2 independent clauses that have been joined by a cordinating conjunction . The sub. conjunction has been used within a coord. conjunction .
Whereas in the example that i just pasted above has a coord. conjunction within a sub. conjunction . I hope you are able to traverse your way through this entangle of words.

Ohhh...i see, so this where u are struggling. Before anything, I suggest something for your own good, rigidly applying some rules is okay but some doesn't means all. After all its a language not mathematics. I didn't read what's written in MGMAT GUIDE, but here i share my views.

First of all...this "BUT IF" construction is NOT AT ALL AN EXCEPTION. Why??? I'm sure u must have seen AND IF construction a number of times.

MADE UP EXAMPLE:

Harry potter's mother was muggle born kid, and if you read the book - Harry potter and the prisoner of Askaban - by J.K rollings, you come to know about many secrets behind her death.


So, did u notice, this AND IF construction is so common in day to day usage and this construction is same as BUT IF.


Now, coming back to your issue, that MGMAT thing, see don't get confuse and don't over think. BUT is a coordinating conjunction, but the main thing is its creates CONTRAST right. Same thing is applicable for YET also. These words used to show the differentiation. Now, ALTHOUGH, a subordinating conjunction also serves the same purpose. ALTHOUGH already contains a BUT / YET in it and if u attach BUT / YET with ALTHOUGH then that error falls in the category of REDUNDANCY not a construction error. In short, Although X, But Y construction is wrong as it is REDUNDANT. That's why i said, i perceive ALTHOUGH as it contain a hidden BUT / YET already in it.

MOREOVER, COMMA + COORDINATING CONJUNCTION IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE IS ACCEPTED AS A CLAUSE INITIATOR, NOW THE CLAUSE CAN INITIATE WITH A DEPENDENT CLAUSE, FOLLOWED BY AN INDEPENDENT CLAUSE OR VICE VERSA, SO THIS THING IN ANY CASE CANNOT BE AN ISSUE.


hope this help!!!

BUT is a coordinating conjunction, but the main thing is its creates CONTRAST right. Same thing is applicable for YET also. These words used to show the differentiation. Now, ALTHOUGH, a subordinating conjunction also serves the same purpose. ALTHOUGH already contains a BUT / YET in it and if u attach BUT / YET with ALTHOUGH then that error falls in the category of REDUNDANCY not a construction error. In short, Although X, But Y construction is wrong as it is REDUNDANT. That's why i said, i perceive ALTHOUGH as it contain a hidden BUT / YET already in it.

Though i dont agree with you on a few things regarding the blind application of rules to SC . The OG has quite a few Scs in which we arrive at the OA by following rules for idiomatic usage and considerations of Concision and awkwardness. But ill give you the credit for the quoted portion above

mundasingh123 wrote:

BUT is a coordinating conjunction, but the main thing is its creates CONTRAST right. Same thing is applicable for YET also. These words used to show the differentiation. Now, ALTHOUGH, a subordinating conjunction also serves the same purpose. ALTHOUGH already contains a BUT / YET in it and if u attach BUT / YET with ALTHOUGH then that error falls in the category of REDUNDANCY not a construction error. In short, Although X, But Y construction is wrong as it is REDUNDANT. That's why i said, i perceive ALTHOUGH as it contain a hidden BUT / YET already in it.

Though i dont agree with you on a few things regarding the blind application of rules to SC . The OG has quite a few Scs in which we arrive at the OA by following rules for idiomatic usage and considerations of Concision and awkwardness. But ill give you the credit for the quoted portion above

Well i believe in that case u should pm Ron to get more clarity on this issue.

gmat25 wrote:

mundasingh123 wrote:

BUT is a coordinating conjunction, but the main thing is its creates CONTRAST right. Same thing is applicable for YET also. These words used to show the differentiation. Now, ALTHOUGH, a subordinating conjunction also serves the same purpose. ALTHOUGH already contains a BUT / YET in it and if u attach BUT / YET with ALTHOUGH then that error falls in the category of REDUNDANCY not a construction error. In short, Although X, But Y construction is wrong as it is REDUNDANT. That's why i said, i perceive ALTHOUGH as it contain a hidden BUT / YET already in it.

Though i dont agree with you on a few things regarding the blind application of rules to SC . The OG has quite a few Scs in which we arrive at the OA by following rules for idiomatic usage and considerations of Concision and awkwardness. But ill give you the credit for the quoted portion above

Well i believe in that case u should pm Ron to get more clarity on this issue.

Yea . He must be already busy with PMs from lots of BTG Members