there exists something such that it is a kind of a sprat.
sent1: the ether does not instruct groschen. sent2: if there exists something such that the fact that it is morphemic and it does holler is not correct then the cytostome is not unitary. sent3: that the cytostome is both agonal and not fictional is false. sent4: the fact that something is non-agonal and is nonfictional is incorrect if it is sad. sent5: a non-unitary thing is a kind of non-agonal thing that is not fictional. sent6: there is something such that the fact that it is morphemic and it hollers does not hold. sent7: if the cytostome is not sad the roulette is a kind of non-sad thing that is a sprat. sent8: the voluntary is sad and it is unitary if the roulette is not a kind of a sprat. sent9: the roulette is not sad. sent10: if something is not unitary then it is non-agonal. sent11: either something is not a sprat or it does not holler or both if it is not morphemic.
sent4 -> int1: that the cytostome is not agonal and it is not fictional is not true if it is sad.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the cytostome is sad.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the fact that the cytostome is not agonal and it is not fictional is wrong.; sent5 -> int3: the cytostome is not agonal and it is nonfictional if it is not unitary.; sent6 & sent2 -> int4: the cytostome is not unitary.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the cytostome is a kind of non-agonal thing that is not fictional.; int2 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the cytostome is not sad.; int7 & sent7 -> int8: the roulette is not sad but it is a sprat.; int8 -> int9: the roulette is a sprat.; int9 -> hypothesis;
that the voluntary is unitary is right.
sent11 -> int10: if the egg-and-dart is not morphemic then it is not a sprat and/or it does not holler.; sent1 -> int11: something does not instruct groschen.;
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that it is a kind of a sprat. ; $context$ = sent1: the ether does not instruct groschen. sent2: if there exists something such that the fact that it is morphemic and it does holler is not correct then the cytostome is not unitary. sent3: that the cytostome is both agonal and not fictional is false. sent4: the fact that something is non-agonal and is nonfictional is incorrect if it is sad. sent5: a non-unitary thing is a kind of non-agonal thing that is not fictional. sent6: there is something such that the fact that it is morphemic and it hollers does not hold. sent7: if the cytostome is not sad the roulette is a kind of non-sad thing that is a sprat. sent8: the voluntary is sad and it is unitary if the roulette is not a kind of a sprat. sent9: the roulette is not sad. sent10: if something is not unitary then it is non-agonal. sent11: either something is not a sprat or it does not holler or both if it is not morphemic. ; $proof$ = 
sent4 -> int1: that the cytostome is not agonal and it is not fictional is not true if it is sad.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the cytostome is sad.; int1 & assump1 -> int2: the fact that the cytostome is not agonal and it is not fictional is wrong.; sent5 -> int3: the cytostome is not agonal and it is nonfictional if it is not unitary.; sent6 & sent2 -> int4: the cytostome is not unitary.; int3 & int4 -> int5: the cytostome is a kind of non-agonal thing that is not fictional.; int2 & int5 -> int6: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int6 -> int7: the cytostome is not sad.; int7 & sent7 -> int8: the roulette is not sad but it is a sprat.; int8 -> int9: the roulette is a sprat.; int9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__