Which of the following choices presents a logically sound argument, that is, an argument with valid reasoning and acceptable premises?

Introduction / Context:
This question comes from basic logic and critical reasoning. It asks you to recognise a sound argument. In logic, an argument is sound when its reasoning is valid and its premises are true or at least acceptable in the given context. Such questions are important in exams because they train you to distinguish correct reasoning from faulty reasoning.

Given Data / Assumptions:
- Each option contains a small argument with premises and a conclusion.
- We must identify the one that follows a valid logical pattern and uses premises that can be accepted within the scenario.

- Option a discusses teachers in one school and clothing.
- Option b discusses turtles, reptiles, and a snake.
- Option c discusses two authors and the speaker's desire.

Concept / Approach:
To find a sound argument, first check whether the reasoning is valid: if the premises are true, must the conclusion also be true. Then consider whether the premises are at least reasonable within the scenario. Option a has the logical form: All A are B; x is not B; therefore x is not A. This is a form of reasoning similar to modus tollens in set terms, and it is valid. The premises are specific to one school and can be treated as acceptable for this problem. By contrast, option b gives invalid reasoning, and option c gives a conclusion that does not follow from the premises at all.

Step-by-Step Solution:
Step 1: Analyse option a: "All teachers in this school wear sarees. Mrs. Gomati does not wear a saree. Therefore, Mrs. Gomati is not a teacher in this school." If all teachers in this school are saree wearers and she does not wear one, then she cannot be a teacher there. The conclusion follows from the premises.
Step 2: Analyse option b: "All turtles are reptiles. The snake is not a turtle. Therefore, the snake is not a reptile." Here the reasoning says: All A are B; x is not A; so x is not B. This is invalid, because the snake could still be a reptile through some other path.
Step 3: Analyse option c: "Amitav Ghosh is an author. Arundhati Roy is an author. Therefore, I want to be an author." The conclusion about "I want to be an author" has no logical connection to the premises.
Step 4: Reject "All of the above" and "None of the above" because only option a meets the condition of sound reasoning.

Verification / Alternative check:
For option a, try to imagine a situation where the two premises are true but the conclusion is false. If all teachers in the school wear sarees and a person does not wear one, that person cannot be in the set of teachers in that school. This means the conclusion must hold whenever the premises hold, so the reasoning is valid. Options b and c clearly fail this test.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
- Option b: invalid reasoning because it denies only one sufficient condition and then denies the broader category, which does not follow.

- Option c: the conclusion about desire is unrelated to the premises about authorship.
- Option d: incorrect because not all given arguments are sound.
- Option e: also incorrect because option a is a sound argument.

Common Pitfalls:
Students often confuse a valid argument with a true conclusion. Remember that logic cares primarily about the structure. An argument is valid if, assuming the premises are true, the conclusion must be true. It becomes sound when the premises are in fact true or at least acceptable in the context. Here, option a illustrates a clean valid pattern that can be accepted as sound for exam purposes.

Final Answer:
The sound argument is: "All teachers in this school wear sarees. Mrs. Gomati does not wear a saree. Therefore, Mrs. Gomati is not a teacher in this school."