Consider $\neg(X\wedge Y)\vdash\neg X \vee \neg Y$. The converse is valid since I can show that that inference is valid by using rules permitted. The above inference is valid classically but not intuitionistically. But, then, How can I show that certain inference is classically but not intuitionistically valid.
In classical case, to show that certain inference is not valid, it suffices to show that there exists a model in which the premises are all true but the consequent is false.
But in my textbook, it seems at least to me that there's no content on semantics of intuitionistic logic. How can I do?