that if the repining tactility happens the fact that the configurationalness occurs is correct is true.
sent1: the Europeanness happens. sent2: the jolting happens if that the historiography does not occur but the fronting microprocessor occurs does not hold. sent3: if the onomasticsness does not occur then the non-asceticness and the non-triangulateness occurs. sent4: if the fact that the protectorship happens but the configurationalness does not occur is incorrect then the protectorship does not occur. sent5: the ideologicalness occurs. sent6: the configurationalness occurs if the repining tactility does not occur but the protectorship happens. sent7: if the fact that the protectorship does not occur is not false then both the fronting give-and-go and the repining tactility happens. sent8: if that not the repining tactility but the protectorship happens is not right the configurationalness occurs. sent9: the bethinking happens if the fact that both the non-Olympicsness and the blot occurs does not hold. sent10: if the asceticness does not occur that the protectorship but not the configurationalness happens is wrong.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the repining tactility does not occur and the protectorship occurs.; assump2 -> int1: the repining tactility does not occur.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the repining tactility occurs.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int2 -> int3: that not the repining tactility but the protectorship happens does not hold.; int3 & sent8 -> int4: the configurationalness occurs.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis;
the fronting give-and-go happens.
$hypothesis$ = that if the repining tactility happens the fact that the configurationalness occurs is correct is true. ; $context$ = sent1: the Europeanness happens. sent2: the jolting happens if that the historiography does not occur but the fronting microprocessor occurs does not hold. sent3: if the onomasticsness does not occur then the non-asceticness and the non-triangulateness occurs. sent4: if the fact that the protectorship happens but the configurationalness does not occur is incorrect then the protectorship does not occur. sent5: the ideologicalness occurs. sent6: the configurationalness occurs if the repining tactility does not occur but the protectorship happens. sent7: if the fact that the protectorship does not occur is not false then both the fronting give-and-go and the repining tactility happens. sent8: if that not the repining tactility but the protectorship happens is not right the configurationalness occurs. sent9: the bethinking happens if the fact that both the non-Olympicsness and the blot occurs does not hold. sent10: if the asceticness does not occur that the protectorship but not the configurationalness happens is wrong. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the repining tactility does not occur and the protectorship occurs.; assump2 -> int1: the repining tactility does not occur.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the repining tactility occurs.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int2 -> int3: that not the repining tactility but the protectorship happens does not hold.; int3 & sent8 -> int4: the configurationalness occurs.; [assump1] & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__