the daughter-in-law forgets but it is not a hoard.
sent1: if something announces principal the fact that it does forget and does not hoard is not right. sent2: if the fact that the apatite is a Bonaire is correct then the underpart is a hoard. sent3: the caramel is alimentative but it is not nutritional if the knacker does not announce principal. sent4: if the fact that the caramel is undesirous and not a postbox is not true it does not hoard. sent5: if the fact that the underpart is a kind of a hoard hold the daughter-in-law does forget. sent6: if the knacker does not announce principal that the caramel is alimentative hold. sent7: the daughter-in-law does forget and is not a hoard if the underpart does hoard. sent8: that the apatite is not accessional if the knacker announces principal hold. sent9: there is something such that it is not undesirous. sent10: the caramel is not accessional. sent11: something that does announce principal does not forget. sent12: that the caramel is alimentative thing that is not nutritional does not hold.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the knacker does not announce principal.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the caramel is not non-alimentative but non-nutritional.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the knacker announces principal.; int3 & sent8 -> int4: the apatite is not accessional.;
the apatite does not forget.
sent11 -> int5: if the apatite does announce principal then it does not forget.;
$hypothesis$ = the daughter-in-law forgets but it is not a hoard. ; $context$ = sent1: if something announces principal the fact that it does forget and does not hoard is not right. sent2: if the fact that the apatite is a Bonaire is correct then the underpart is a hoard. sent3: the caramel is alimentative but it is not nutritional if the knacker does not announce principal. sent4: if the fact that the caramel is undesirous and not a postbox is not true it does not hoard. sent5: if the fact that the underpart is a kind of a hoard hold the daughter-in-law does forget. sent6: if the knacker does not announce principal that the caramel is alimentative hold. sent7: the daughter-in-law does forget and is not a hoard if the underpart does hoard. sent8: that the apatite is not accessional if the knacker announces principal hold. sent9: there is something such that it is not undesirous. sent10: the caramel is not accessional. sent11: something that does announce principal does not forget. sent12: that the caramel is alimentative thing that is not nutritional does not hold. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the knacker does not announce principal.; sent3 & assump1 -> int1: the caramel is not non-alimentative but non-nutritional.; int1 & sent12 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the knacker announces principal.; int3 & sent8 -> int4: the apatite is not accessional.; __UNKNOWN__