Statements: Some bricks are trees. All trees are pens. All pens are boats.…

Concept: A statement of the form "Some A are B" (a particular affirmative) always converts simply — it is logically equivalent to "Some B are A". Separately, when a particular affirmative premise ("Some A are B") shares its predicate term with a universal affirmative premise ("All B are C"), the two combine validly into "Some A are C". This chaining pattern can be re-applied again through a further universal premise that shares a term with the newly reached "Some…are…" statement — there is no cap on how many premises may be linked in sequence.

Application, step by step:

1. Start from the given premise: Some bricks are trees.

2. Combine it with All trees are pens (shared term: trees) to get: Some bricks are pens.

3. Combine Some bricks are pens with All pens are boats (shared term: pens) to get: Some bricks are boats.

4. Convert each reached "Some X are Y" statement to its equivalent "Some Y are X" form: Some bricks are trees converts to Some trees are bricks; Some bricks are pens converts to Some pens are bricks; Some bricks are boats converts to Some boats are bricks.

Cross-check (Venn view): since All trees are pens and All pens are boats, every tree is also a pen and a boat. The premise Some bricks are trees says the brick–tree overlap region is non-empty; that same region therefore also lies inside pens and inside boats. So this one overlapping region simultaneously touches bricks, trees, pens, and boats — which is exactly what each of the four listed statements below claims.

Since each of the four listed statements is reached this way, all four hold, and the correct choice is the one stating that all of them follow.