[問題]OG(11th)67

[Emilyh]

67.Defense attorneys have occasionally argued that their clients' misconduct stemmed from a reaction to something ingested,but in attributiing criminal or deliquent behavior to some food allergy,the perpetrators are in affect told that they are not responsible for their actions.


OG解釋:in attributiing criminal or deliquent behavior to some food allergy是修飾perpetrators而不是attorneys，所以是錯的。
請問要如何判斷這句話是修飾誰?

謝謝

[hsudk]

語法上，in attributing 修飾but子句後的主詞perpetrators, 但邏輯上應該是修飾 attorney，所以產生了修飾錯誤。

另外 in attributing to 在 GMAT 中屬於有效性錯誤，一般會用被動式attributed to

[Emilyh]

不好意思，那為何在邏輯上判斷是修飾attorneys呢?

[hibettychen]

不好意思，那為何在邏輯上判斷是修飾attorneys呢?

邏輯上應該是attorney幫助perpetrator找到脫罪的理由
因此attribute "criminal or delinquent behavior" (果）to "some food allergy"(因）中，attribute to 的動作是attorney做的，而非perpetrator