the fact that the alkaloidalness does not occur hold.
sent1: the curse happens. sent2: the alkaloidalness does not occur if the bregmaticness occurs and the autopsying occurs. sent3: both the subjacentness and the autopsy occurs. sent4: if the cursing happens the intralinguisticness does not occur and/or the unplugging does not occur. sent5: that the alkaloidalness happens is triggered by that the stifling systematization does not occur and/or that the departmentalness happens. sent6: the night-stop is triggered by that the intralinguisticness does not occur. sent7: that the departmentalness and the stifling systematization happens prevents the night-stop. sent8: if the stifling masterpiece and the bumpiness happens then that the squatting does not occur hold. sent9: the stifling systematization occurs. sent10: the attacking occurs if the stifling acarus does not occur. sent11: the night-stop happens if the unplugging does not occur. sent12: if the departmentalness does not occur the fact that the fact that the bregmaticness does not occur is not right is correct. sent13: both the discriminating and the fallibleness occurs. sent14: if the fact that the stifling systematization does not occur is right then the violation occurs and the departmentalness occurs.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the departmentalness happens.; assump1 & sent9 -> int1: both the departmentalness and the stifling systematization happens.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the night-stop does not occur.; sent4 & sent1 -> int3: either the intralinguisticness does not occur or the unplugging does not occur or both.; int3 & sent6 & sent11 -> int4: the night-stop happens.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the departmentalness does not occur.; int6 & sent12 -> int7: the bregmaticness happens.; sent3 -> int8: the autopsy occurs.; int7 & int8 -> int9: both the bregmaticness and the autopsying happens.; int9 & sent2 -> hypothesis;
the violation occurs.
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the alkaloidalness does not occur hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the curse happens. sent2: the alkaloidalness does not occur if the bregmaticness occurs and the autopsying occurs. sent3: both the subjacentness and the autopsy occurs. sent4: if the cursing happens the intralinguisticness does not occur and/or the unplugging does not occur. sent5: that the alkaloidalness happens is triggered by that the stifling systematization does not occur and/or that the departmentalness happens. sent6: the night-stop is triggered by that the intralinguisticness does not occur. sent7: that the departmentalness and the stifling systematization happens prevents the night-stop. sent8: if the stifling masterpiece and the bumpiness happens then that the squatting does not occur hold. sent9: the stifling systematization occurs. sent10: the attacking occurs if the stifling acarus does not occur. sent11: the night-stop happens if the unplugging does not occur. sent12: if the departmentalness does not occur the fact that the fact that the bregmaticness does not occur is not right is correct. sent13: both the discriminating and the fallibleness occurs. sent14: if the fact that the stifling systematization does not occur is right then the violation occurs and the departmentalness occurs. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the departmentalness happens.; assump1 & sent9 -> int1: both the departmentalness and the stifling systematization happens.; int1 & sent7 -> int2: the night-stop does not occur.; sent4 & sent1 -> int3: either the intralinguisticness does not occur or the unplugging does not occur or both.; int3 & sent6 & sent11 -> int4: the night-stop happens.; int2 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the departmentalness does not occur.; int6 & sent12 -> int7: the bregmaticness happens.; sent3 -> int8: the autopsy occurs.; int7 & int8 -> int9: both the bregmaticness and the autopsying happens.; int9 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__