How to write the below paragraph in First Order Logic and Convert them into Conjunctive Normal Form

Question

I tried to do this. but this is uncertain. see this below my answer. Please kindly help for me. how do you do this.

1. Any employee who does not participates for the strike or work in
   contract basis will report for work.

2. Some employees in contract basis will participate for the meeting.

3. All employees who do the strike will participate for the meeting.
4. Chamari does not report for work.

** My Answer.

1. Ɐx [employee(x) ꓥ ¬[PST(x) ꓦ PWO(x)]] → work(x)
2. ⱻx [ Employee(x) ꓥ PMeeting(x)]
3. Ɐx [ employee(x) ꓥ strike(x) → meeting(x)]
4. ¬ report(x)

**

Answer 1

The bracketing on your (1) needs attention.   You want: $~\forall x~(A\wedge\neg (B\lor C)\to D)$ or possibly $~\forall x~((A\wedge\neg (B\lor C))\to D)$ to be extra clear.   In any case, be sure to capture the whole implication within the scope of the quantifier.

Your (2) does not mention work in contract basis, however it needs to do so.   Also, your capitalisations should be consistent; be case sensitive.

Your (3) is okay , but you've used $\textsf{PST}$ for "participating in the strike" earlier, and $\textsf{PMeeting}$ for "participating in the meeting". Be more consistent with your labelling.

Your (4) should use a constant that more clearly indicates that it represents Chamari -- such as "$\textrm{Chamari}$".

Answer 2

As all quantified statement are about employees, I consider that to be the domain of discourse, so I don't "need" a separate predicate for being an employee. I'll use $S(x)$ for '$x$ participates in the strike", $C(x)$ for "$x$ works on contract basis", and $W(x)$ for "$x$ shows up for work", $M(x)$ for "$x$ participates in the meeting.

Then (1) becomes $$\forall x: (\lnot C(x) \lor \lnot S(x)) \to W(x)$$

(2) can becomes: $$\exists x: (C(x) \land M(x))$$

(3) can be:

$$\forall x: S(x) \to M(x)$$

and (4), letting the constant $c$ be "Chamari", simply $$\lnot W(c)$$