{e.name∣employee(e)∧(∀x)[¬employee(x)∨x.supervisorName≠e.name∨x.sex=‘‘male"]} ...(1)
By Using De-morgan's law
We can write expression ∀x(P(X)) as NOT ∃x(NOT P(X)).
Using this concept, we rewrite the conditon (1) as given in question above
{e.name∣employee(e)∧ NOT(∃x)[employee(x) ^ NOT x.supervisorName≠e.name ^ NOT x.sex=‘‘male"]} ...(2)
Considering only 2 genders are represented in the database as either male or female we can again rewrite expression (2) as
{e.name∣employee(e)∧ NOT(∃x)[employee(x) ^ x.supervisorName = e.name ^ x.sex=‘‘female"]} ...(3)
Now it is easier to read the expression above.
It Says, for a tuple of employee, there must not be a case that this employee being considered is supervisor of some female employee. That means it selects all those employee who do not supervise any female employee hence do no have any immediate female sub-ordinate.
Hence, Ans (C)