Sentence Correction

This question is from the offical study guide

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 behaior 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 atributed as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior
E) in attributing a food allergy as the cause of criminal or delinquent behavior

Would any one please explain why the answer is not E? Why B is correct?

Thank you.

Great question - consider here the fact that the non-underlined portion "the perpetrators are..." comes right after a comma and right after the answer choice. So if you were to take E and say:

"in attributing a behavior to an allergy, the perpetrators..."

Well, this makes it sound as though the perpetrators are the ones who are attributing that behavior to an allergy. But the next part:

"the perpetrators are told..."

Doesn't make sense then. If I attribute my behavior to an allergy, I'm not being told anything...I'm both the attributor and the one being told, so I'm not telling myself. Plus the beginning of the sentence highlights the defense attorneys - they're logically the ones doing the attribution. So E, technically, is guilty of an improper modifier. Even broader, it just doesn't make logical sense (as is the case with most modifier errors when you really look at what makes them "wrong").

I also have problem with the tense. If we choose B, should we use "will" in the unconditional clause? "the perpetrators are in effect told that they will not be responsible for their actions?

Thank you.

Couple things on that tense:

1) You don't get a choice, since "are told..." is outside the underline, so part of good SC strategy is learning to live with some language that you don't love. The easiest way to make a question tough is to use correct language that you know people won't like.

2) In this case, "are" is actually much more logical than "will". The word "perpetrators" already signifies that someone committed a crime. So those actions have already happened, and the defense attorney is saying "but you can't be held responsible". If the sentence were to use "will", that's forward-thinking, so it's a prediction about the verdict ("I don't think you'll be found guilty") and not a general statement about the client's actual guilt ("yes you did this, but only because of an allergy - you are not responsible").