Logic consistency (disjunction with negation): Statement: “Anu either does not walk or she reads.” Pick a consistent pair. (i) Anu walks. (ii) Anu does not walk. (iii) Anu reads. (iv) Anu does not read.

Introduction / Context:
The statement is (~Walk) OR Read. Any situation with at least one true is acceptable.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• No exclusivity is stated; both can be true simultaneously.

Concept / Approach:
Choose a pair that makes the disjunction obviously true.

Step-by-Step Solution:
(ii) Not walk; (iii) Reads → certainly satisfies (~W) OR R (both parts true).

Verification / Alternative check:
(ii)(iv) would force both (~W) and (~R), which still satisfies the OR (since ~W is true) but is less aligned with common-sense reading tests; (ii)(iii) is the cleanest.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
They introduce contradictions or weaker, less direct support.

Common Pitfalls:
Assuming exclusivity where none is given.

Final Answer:
(ii) (iii)