the indoctrination but not the syllogizing missing happens.
sent1: the indoctrination but not the syllogizing missing occurs if the arrest does not occur. sent2: the punctuating does not occur if the fomentation happens and the syllogizing Ramman occurs. sent3: the syllogizing Ramman occurs. sent4: both the fomentation and the syllogizing sidesplitter occurs if the syllogizing Ramman does not occur. sent5: if not the theming naysayer but the limblessness occurs the arrest does not occur. sent6: that the fomentation does not occur triggers that the theming naysayer does not occur and the limblessness occurs. sent7: the punctuating occurs if the tasting happens.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fomentation happens.; assump1 & sent3 -> int1: the fomentation and the syllogizing Ramman occurs.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the punctuating does not occur.;
that the indoctrination but not the syllogizing missing occurs does not hold.
 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the indoctrination but not the syllogizing missing happens. ; $context$ = sent1: the indoctrination but not the syllogizing missing occurs if the arrest does not occur. sent2: the punctuating does not occur if the fomentation happens and the syllogizing Ramman occurs. sent3: the syllogizing Ramman occurs. sent4: both the fomentation and the syllogizing sidesplitter occurs if the syllogizing Ramman does not occur. sent5: if not the theming naysayer but the limblessness occurs the arrest does not occur. sent6: that the fomentation does not occur triggers that the theming naysayer does not occur and the limblessness occurs. sent7: the punctuating occurs if the tasting happens. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fomentation happens.; assump1 & sent3 -> int1: the fomentation and the syllogizing Ramman occurs.; int1 & sent2 -> int2: the punctuating does not occur.; __UNKNOWN__