the fact that the leg does not occur but the requiting pennyroyal occurs is wrong.
sent1: if not the heads-up but the thwack occurs the generousness does not occur. sent2: not the heads-up but the thwack occurs. sent3: both the requiting pennyroyal and the mercurialness happens. sent4: the staving discourse happens and the blacklisting Navaho happens. sent5: the fact that that not the generousness but the leg occurs hold prevents that the staving discourse occurs.
sent1 & sent2 -> int1: the generousness does not occur.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the leg happens.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the generousness does not occur but the leg occurs.; int2 & sent5 -> int3: the staving discourse does not occur.; sent4 -> int4: the staving discourse happens.; int3 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the leg does not occur.; sent3 -> int7: the requiting pennyroyal happens.; int6 & int7 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the leg does not occur but the requiting pennyroyal occurs is wrong. ; $context$ = sent1: if not the heads-up but the thwack occurs the generousness does not occur. sent2: not the heads-up but the thwack occurs. sent3: both the requiting pennyroyal and the mercurialness happens. sent4: the staving discourse happens and the blacklisting Navaho happens. sent5: the fact that that not the generousness but the leg occurs hold prevents that the staving discourse occurs. ; $proof$ = 
sent1 & sent2 -> int1: the generousness does not occur.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the leg happens.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the generousness does not occur but the leg occurs.; int2 & sent5 -> int3: the staving discourse does not occur.; sent4 -> int4: the staving discourse happens.; int3 & int4 -> int5: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int5 -> int6: the leg does not occur.; sent3 -> int7: the requiting pennyroyal happens.; int6 & int7 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__