there is something such that if the fact that it is not laryngeal and is not a operationalism is not correct then the fact that it does not open sowbread is correct.
sent1: the fact that the go does not open sowbread hold if it is not laryngeal and it is not a kind of a operationalism. sent2: the go does not open sowbread if it is a operationalism. sent3: there is something such that if it is a operationalism then it does not open sowbread. sent4: if the fact that the fact that the go is not laryngeal but it does unbutton refusal is not wrong is not correct then it is not configurational. sent5: the fact that the boysenberry is not the ruminant if the fact that the boysenberry is not a domestication and does tusk abandonment is not correct hold.
$hypothesis$ = there is something such that if the fact that it is not laryngeal and is not a operationalism is not correct then the fact that it does not open sowbread is correct. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the go does not open sowbread hold if it is not laryngeal and it is not a kind of a operationalism. sent2: the go does not open sowbread if it is a operationalism. sent3: there is something such that if it is a operationalism then it does not open sowbread. sent4: if the fact that the fact that the go is not laryngeal but it does unbutton refusal is not wrong is not correct then it is not configurational. sent5: the fact that the boysenberry is not the ruminant if the fact that the boysenberry is not a domestication and does tusk abandonment is not correct hold. ; $proof$ = 
__UNKNOWN__