p → q ≡∼p ∨ q and de Morgan’s laws? I need to understand the steps

In this problem, you will get some practice with the logic of sets, i.e., ways of putting sets together to make other sets. The main tool here will be presence tables. Your task is to verify, using presence tables, that the following relations between sets are true.

Proficiency #8. Which of the following are logically equivalent to the statement -[(Vx E U) (¬p(x) V q(x))] if U is the set of all parrots, p(x) is the statement "x is talkative", q(x) is the statement “x is green" (Choose all that apply): I. There is an parrot who is not green and is talkative. II. No talkative parrots are green. III. All green parrots are talkative. IV. Not all parrots are not green. V. At least one talkative parrot is not green. VI. Not all talkative parrots are green.

Prove the following, using the semantic equivalences. In each step apply only one rule once and state the name of the rule.   a. (p ∧ q) → r ≡ (p → r ) ∨ (q → r )