The correct answer is: A. None follows
The first statement, “Some bags are pockets,” can be expressed in symbolic form as $p \land q$. The second statement, “No pocket is a pouch,” can be expressed in symbolic form as $\neg q \lor \neg r$.
The first conclusion, “No bag is a pouch,” can be expressed in symbolic form as $\neg p \lor \neg r$. This conclusion does not follow from the premises, because it is possible for there to be bags that are not pockets, even if no pockets are pouches. For example, there are many types of bags that are not pockets, such as backpacks, suitcases, and duffel bags.
The second conclusion, “Some bags are not pouches,” can be expressed in symbolic form as $p \land \neg r$. This conclusion does follow from the premises, because if some bags are pockets, then it must be the case that some bags are not pouches.
The third conclusion, “Some pockets are bags,” can be expressed in symbolic form as $q \land p$. This conclusion does not follow from the premises, because it is possible for there to be pockets that are not bags, even if all bags are pockets. For example, there are many types of pockets that are not bags, such as the pockets on a shirt or pair of pants.
The fourth conclusion, “No pocket is a bag,” can be expressed in symbolic form as $\neg q \lor \neg p$. This conclusion does not follow from the premises, because it is possible for there to be bags that are not pockets, even if no pockets are pouches. For example, there are many types of bags that are not pockets, such as backpacks, suitcases, and duffel bags.
Therefore, the correct answer is: A. None follows