Logical Reasoning MCQ - Statement and Conclusion

Step I: First, we check that there are three terms, tables, golden and teak. Here, table is the middle term. Then, we see whether it is in the form: A to B and B to C. It is not; so alignment is required. For alignment, we just need to change the order in this case.
After alignment:
All teak are tables.
Some tables are golden.
Step II: This is ‘A + I’. (Please refer to ‘syllogism rule table’. No conclusion can be drawn.
So, option (d) is the answer.
Venn diagram solution:

Conclusion I: Some teak may or may not be golden. There is ambiguity. Conclusion I does not follow.
Conclusion II: Similarly, some golden may or may not be teak.
As there is ambiguity in both cases, none follows. Thus, option (d) is the answer.

First check the number of terms. It is three. Now look at alignment.
Now, the common term ‘man’ is not in the form A to B and B to C. So alignment is required.
Align this pair as ‘Karan is a man’ and ‘No man is a Tiger’. Here, it is important to mention that statement ‘Karan is a Tiger’ is considered as A type.
Now, A + E = E. So conclusion I ‘Karan is not a Tiger’ follows.
Alternative solution:
Venn diagram solution:

Three terms—Teacher, girls, and dull. Next, it is in proper format. No alignment is required.
Now, A + E = E. That is ‘No Teacher is dull’. Conclusion II follows. Boys is not mentioned as a term. So nothing can be said about conclusion I.
Venn diagram solution:

There are three terms—poets, inspiring, and artists.
All poets (A) are inspiring (B).
All artists (C) are inspiring (B).
A to B.
C to B.
So alignment is required as it should be in the form A to B and B to C.
After converting second statement.
All poets are inspiring (A type).
Some inspiring persons are artists (I type). It contradicts second conclusion also.
A + I = No conclusion.
So, option (d) is the answer.
Venn diagram solution: