the inflection does not occur.
sent1: if the omnivorousness occurs the exothermicness does not occur. sent2: if that the recompense happens is not wrong that both the immeasurableness and the non-exothermicness occurs is not correct. sent3: the fact that the recompense occurs is right. sent4: that the immeasurableness and the exothermicness occurs is incorrect. sent5: the inflection does not occur if the Honduran occurs and/or the commanding happens. sent6: the conventionalness does not occur. sent7: the recompense does not occur if the incriminating khesari does not occur and the rarefaction occurs. sent8: the fact that the discourteousness happens and the assailing popularism does not occur does not hold. sent9: that the command does not occur is prevented by the non-omnivorousness. sent10: if the fact that the omnivorousness occurs hold that the immeasurableness occurs but the exothermicness does not occur is right.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the omnivorousness occurs.; sent10 & assump1 -> int1: both the immeasurableness and the non-exothermicness happens.; sent2 & sent3 -> int2: the fact that both the immeasurableness and the non-exothermicness occurs does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the omnivorousness does not occur.; int4 & sent9 -> int5: the commanding happens.; int5 -> int6: the fact that either the Honduranness or the commanding or both occurs is true.; int6 & sent5 -> hypothesis;
the fact that the discourteousness happens and the assailing popularism does not occur does not hold.
 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the inflection does not occur. ; $context$ = sent1: if the omnivorousness occurs the exothermicness does not occur. sent2: if that the recompense happens is not wrong that both the immeasurableness and the non-exothermicness occurs is not correct. sent3: the fact that the recompense occurs is right. sent4: that the immeasurableness and the exothermicness occurs is incorrect. sent5: the inflection does not occur if the Honduran occurs and/or the commanding happens. sent6: the conventionalness does not occur. sent7: the recompense does not occur if the incriminating khesari does not occur and the rarefaction occurs. sent8: the fact that the discourteousness happens and the assailing popularism does not occur does not hold. sent9: that the command does not occur is prevented by the non-omnivorousness. sent10: if the fact that the omnivorousness occurs hold that the immeasurableness occurs but the exothermicness does not occur is right. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the omnivorousness occurs.; sent10 & assump1 -> int1: both the immeasurableness and the non-exothermicness happens.; sent2 & sent3 -> int2: the fact that both the immeasurableness and the non-exothermicness occurs does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the omnivorousness does not occur.; int4 & sent9 -> int5: the commanding happens.; int5 -> int6: the fact that either the Honduranness or the commanding or both occurs is true.; int6 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__