The correct answer is: Only I and III follow.
The first statement is “Some tables are TVs.” This means that there exists at least one table that is also a TV. The second statement is “Some TVs are radios.” This means that there exists at least one TV that is also a radio.
From the first statement, we cannot conclude that “Some radios are tables.” This is because the first statement only tells us that there exists at least one table that is also a TV. It does not tell us anything about radios.
From the second statement, we cannot conclude that “All radios are TVs.” This is because the second statement only tells us that there exists at least one TV that is also a radio. It does not tell us that all TVs are radios.
However, from the first and second statements together, we can conclude that “Some tables are radios.” This is because the first statement tells us that there exists at least one table that is also a TV. The second statement tells us that there exists at least one TV that is also a radio. Therefore, there must exist at least one table that is also a radio.
We can also conclude that “Some radios are TVs.” This is because the first statement tells us that there exists at least one table that is also a TV. The second statement tells us that there exists at least one TV that is also a radio. Therefore, there must exist at least one radio that is also a TV.
We cannot conclude that “All TVs are tables.” This is because the first and second statements together only tell us that there exists at least one table that is also a radio. They do not tell us that all TVs are tables.
We cannot conclude that “All radios are tables.” This is because the first and second statements together only tell us that there exists at least one table that is also a radio. They do not tell us that all radios are tables.
Therefore, the only conclusions that follow from the statements are “Some tables are radios” and “Some radios are TVs.”