there is something such that if it is not regimental then the fact that it is both not a typewriter and not Pasteurian does not hold.
sent1: the fact that the counselor is a kind of non-asteroidal thing that does multiply does not hold if it does not uncork ducat. sent2: if something does not bind tribalism that it is not a typewriter and not glandular is incorrect. sent3: that something is not a typewriter and is Pasteurian is incorrect if it is not regimental. sent4: the fact that something is both not a typewriter and not Pasteurian does not hold if it is not regimental.
sent4 -> int1: if the factor is not regimental that it is both not a typewriter and not Pasteurian is not right.; int1 -> hypothesis;
that the spinster is not a typewriter and it is not glandular does not hold if it does not bind tribalism.
sent2 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if it is not regimental then the fact that it is both not a typewriter and not Pasteurian does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the counselor is a kind of non-asteroidal thing that does multiply does not hold if it does not uncork ducat. sent2: if something does not bind tribalism that it is not a typewriter and not glandular is incorrect. sent3: that something is not a typewriter and is Pasteurian is incorrect if it is not regimental. sent4: the fact that something is both not a typewriter and not Pasteurian does not hold if it is not regimental. ; $proof$ = 
sent4 -> int1: if the factor is not regimental that it is both not a typewriter and not Pasteurian is not right.; int1 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__