there is something such that that either it does not advertise or it does not exclaim lectin or both does not hold.
sent1: the fact that the electrophorus exclaims lectin if the electrophorus either is not insubstantial or does not exclaim hot-rod or both is not incorrect. sent2: the slot does not exclaim liposuction. sent3: the slot exclaims lectin. sent4: if either the slot does not advertise or it does not exclaim lectin or both then it is insubstantial. sent5: if something does not pin buttocks and it is not an erection then it does not exclaim hot-rod. sent6: the fell is not an erection. sent7: something exclaims lectin. sent8: that the electrophorus is not insubstantial but it does exclaim hot-rod does not hold if that the slot is insubstantial is not incorrect. sent9: the calk is not insubstantial but it does eliminate Apeldoorn.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the slot does not advertise and/or does not exclaim lectin.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the slot is insubstantial.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: that the electrophorus is non-insubstantial thing that does exclaim hot-rod is not right.;
the environmentalist does not exclaim lectin.
sent5 -> int3: if the slot does not pin buttocks and is not an erection then it does not exclaim hot-rod.;
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that that either it does not advertise or it does not exclaim lectin or both does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the electrophorus exclaims lectin if the electrophorus either is not insubstantial or does not exclaim hot-rod or both is not incorrect. sent2: the slot does not exclaim liposuction. sent3: the slot exclaims lectin. sent4: if either the slot does not advertise or it does not exclaim lectin or both then it is insubstantial. sent5: if something does not pin buttocks and it is not an erection then it does not exclaim hot-rod. sent6: the fell is not an erection. sent7: something exclaims lectin. sent8: that the electrophorus is not insubstantial but it does exclaim hot-rod does not hold if that the slot is insubstantial is not incorrect. sent9: the calk is not insubstantial but it does eliminate Apeldoorn. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the slot does not advertise and/or does not exclaim lectin.; sent4 & assump1 -> int1: the slot is insubstantial.; int1 & sent8 -> int2: that the electrophorus is non-insubstantial thing that does exclaim hot-rod is not right.; __UNKNOWN__