Hey, that’s cool. I was responding to the original post, which did not mention assumptions. Just a nonsensical true or false question.
You never read the Pit, do you? 
The last part of the sentence (“some groks are griks”) can be true or false. But the whole sentence (“If X then Y” ) is false.
A: All poodles are dogs, so if some poodles are bald then some dogs are bald.
B: Not all girls are adults, therefore the “some” girls that are infants may or may not overlap with the girls that are adults (and in this instance, none of the adult girls are infant girls).
B therefore refutes the given proposition, and one counterexample is enough, therefore the one-letter answer is “F”.
This explains why a well-formed syllogism should be very wary of using “some”… 
B has a problem because of the way you stated it. Compare it to A.
“girls” is the superset, but you are putting adults into girls, then girls into infants.
B: If some adults are girls and some infants are girls then some adults are infants.
See how that fixed it? Its false, but it makes sense why.
In A you did it correctly, with dogs as the super set, and poodles and bald being sub sets.
The sentence is not true or false, for the simple reason that it is not actually a sentence. Grok, grak, and grik are just placeholders. It is no different than if they left blank spaces instead, except that would make it more clear that it wasn’t a sentence.
The question is asking if, were you to replace them with meaningful words, the sentences created would necessarily be true.
They don’t have to be real words. Even real words may have more than one definition. What’s missing is the definition of the relationship between the words, which cannot be determined from the sentence itself. You can call it false because all graks are not necessarily groks, and all griks are not necessarily graks. But if would better to call it fallacious because it assumes relationships that may not exist.
Thanks for the clarity! There are some sharp people hanging out here – I appreciate your time.
Incubus, sorry to disappoint – it’s never a true intention. I’ve heard stories that the asteroid belt was created specifically so bonsai planets could exist. It’s just a story, though.
Rysto, I expected to be confronted for calling B false, based on examples from the pit! Adult=Infantile, at the very least, on many occasions.
As for the silly t/f statement, it is good to learn that venn diagrams show why it is ‘fallacious’. Visuals can be very handy! Thanks again, to everyone.
No, if the syllogism were instead “All graks are griks; all griks are groks; therefore all graks are groks” that would be a sound syllogism even if we did not have a clue what griks, graks or groks were. The problem is that when you are told “Some X are Y” you are unable to state whether all Y are X, or only some Y - in other words, whether Y is a subset of X, or there is only an intersection between the set X and the set Y.
Try this one: “If some men are doctors and some doctors are women, are some men women?”
Ok. I’ll try. The answer could be either “Yes” or “No” depending on your definition of “Men” and “Women”. What do I win?
You are asking a question there, not making an (il)logical proposition.
Me too —> 
…I just came in for the bonsai planets. I’d like a little place of my own.
Just draw a Venn diagram to find the answer.
You mean it would be valid. We could not call it sound, because we can assign no truth value to the premise (all graks are griks and all griks are groks).
Other than that, we are in agreement. If we look at the original question as a syllogism, then we can say it is invalid. But we still cannot look at it as a sentence and call it true or false, which was what I said.
We can, however, look at the sentence “If all graks are griks and all griks are groks, then all graks are groks” and assign it the value of “true”. Maybe all graks are griks, and maybe they’re not: We don’t know. But if they are, then the rest follows.
OK. If you want to get that pedantic, let’s try it with privatives: “If some law-breakers are men and some men are law-abiding, are some law-breakers law-abiding?”. “If some positive-numbers are fractions and some fractions are negative-numbers, are some negative-numbers positive-numbers?”, ""If some people-shorter-than-4-feet are men and some men are taller-than-6-feet, are some people-shorter-than-4-feet taller-than-6-feet
See Snarky_Kong’s point?
Hay! I pointed it out first! 