BREAKING: Target Test Prep releases Brand New 2026 On Demand GMAT prep course

Redeem

1000SC #235

This topic has expert replies
Post new topic Locked
Previous Topic Next Topic
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 4:49 pm

1000SC #235

by tallynik » Fri Oct 24, 2008 8:17 pm
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

I marked A. Seems that's wrong. Any explanations?
Thanks For Your Help
Top
Source: — Sentence Correction |
User avatar
Legendary Member
Posts: 2134
Joined: Mon Oct 20, 2008 11:26 pm
Thanked: 237 times
Followed by:25 members
GMAT Score:730

by logitech » Fri Oct 24, 2008 9:12 pm
First of all, the correct idiom is X is attributed to Y or you can use attribute x to Y

There is also a causality in the sentence IF X is attributed to Y, then the perpetrators .....

You can eliminate A, C and E

Between B and D, D is using Y is attributed to X instead of X is attributed to Y

IMAO (B)
Top
Master | Next Rank: 500 Posts
Posts: 344
Joined: Sun Sep 28, 2008 11:00 am
Location: USA
Thanked: 6 times
Followed by:1 members

by Bidisha800 » Fri Oct 24, 2008 11:37 pm
Clear case of (B)
Drill baby drill !

GMATPowerPrep Test1= 740
GMATPowerPrep Test2= 760
Kaplan Diagnostic Test= 700
Kaplan Test1=600
Kalplan Test2=670
Kalplan Test3=570
Top
Legendary Member
Posts: 541
Joined: Thu May 31, 2007 6:44 pm
Location: UK
Thanked: 21 times
Followed by:3 members
GMAT Score:680

by rohangupta83 » Sat Oct 25, 2008 2:26 am
(B)
Top
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 48
Joined: Fri Oct 24, 2008 4:49 pm

by tallynik » Tue Oct 28, 2008 11:54 am
But Isn't A is of the form Attributing X to Y.
Thanks For Your Help
Top

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 2228
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:28 pm
Location: Montreal, Canada
Thanked: 639 times
Followed by:694 members
GMAT Score:780

by Stacey Koprince » Tue Oct 28, 2008 1:25 pm
Received a PM asking me to respond.

Modifier problem in the original sentence:

"IN ATTRIBUTING x to y, the perpetrators are..."

The perpetrators aren't attributing anything. The defense attorneys are. Eliminate A, C, and E.

D uses the wrong idiom, as others noted above. That leaves B!
Please note: I do not use the Private Messaging system! I will not see any PMs that you send to me!!

Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT

Contributor to Beat The GMAT!

Learn more about me
Top
Senior | Next Rank: 100 Posts
Posts: 79
Joined: Mon Oct 22, 2007 11:16 pm

by hk_4u » Sun Dec 13, 2009 3:16 am
Stacey Koprince wrote:
Modifier problem in the original sentence:

"IN ATTRIBUTING x to y, the perpetrators are..."

The perpetrators aren't attributing anything. The defense attorneys are. Eliminate A, C, and E.
Hi Stacey

I see that option A can be ruled out clearly on the basis of unidiomatic usage . However I have a doubt over the modifier.

"IN ATTRIBUTING x to y" seems to be a preposition phrase . Does a prepositional phrase modify the subject of the main clause in the same way as a participle clause does ?

Had the phrase been , "ATTRIBUTING x to y", I would have definitely thought that is modifies the perpetrators .

Seems I need to learn more about prepositional phrases.

Please comment.
Top

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 2228
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:28 pm
Location: Montreal, Canada
Thanked: 639 times
Followed by:694 members
GMAT Score:780

by Stacey Koprince » Sat Dec 26, 2009 8:38 am
Prepositional phrases can modify nouns or clauses - they're more flexible in general. In this case, you can think of it either way. The noun is "the perpetrators" and the clause is "the perpetrators are told..." Either way, the implication is that the perpetrators are the ones attributing X to Y.
Please note: I do not use the Private Messaging system! I will not see any PMs that you send to me!!

Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT

Contributor to Beat The GMAT!

Learn more about me
Top
Newbie | Next Rank: 10 Posts
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun Feb 21, 2010 4:14 am

by sarvesh.gmat » Sun Apr 18, 2010 1:20 am
Stacey Koprince wrote:Received a PM asking me to respond.

Modifier problem in the original sentence:

"IN ATTRIBUTING x to y, the perpetrators are..."

The perpetrators aren't attributing anything. The defense attorneys are. Eliminate A, C, and E.

D uses the wrong idiom, as others noted above. That leaves B!
Hi, I agree that A, C, E should be eliminated, but what about the incorrect usage of "if" i.e. using if without then in C and D.
Please explain how to chose between two wrong choices.
Top

GMAT/MBA Expert

User avatar
GMAT Instructor
Posts: 2228
Joined: Wed Dec 27, 2006 3:28 pm
Location: Montreal, Canada
Thanked: 639 times
Followed by:694 members
GMAT Score:780

by Stacey Koprince » Mon Apr 19, 2010 8:05 am
I think you're asking about the construction "If X, then Y" - is that right?

It isn't an absolute requirement to use the word "then" in that construction. You can drop that word. Both of these sentences are correct:

If I study hard, I will do well.
If I study hard, then I will do well.
Please note: I do not use the Private Messaging system! I will not see any PMs that you send to me!!

Stacey Koprince
GMAT Instructor
Director of Online Community
Manhattan GMAT

Contributor to Beat The GMAT!

Learn more about me
Top
Post new topic Locked
• Page 1 of 1