the Wain is immunodeficient and does not jar breadstuff.
sent1: the shop is not mediatory if that the Romanian does not emend Romanian but it is mediatory does not hold. sent2: if the zinnwaldite is not immunodeficient the Wain is immunodeficient and does not jar breadstuff. sent3: the zinnwaldite does not emend Romanian. sent4: something is not immunodeficient if that it does urticate commutation and it is mediatory is incorrect. sent5: if something does not urticate commutation then it is not immunodeficient. sent6: if the bowsprit is intrapulmonary thing that does not gazump it is not a cyclopropane. sent7: if the shop does emend Romanian the Romanian does not urticate commutation. sent8: the bowsprit is a cyclopropane if the fact that the shop does not emend Romanian is right. sent9: the fact that something is immunodeficient but it does not jar breadstuff is not true if it does emend Romanian. sent10: the bowsprit is intrapulmonary and does not gazump. sent11: if the Romanian does not urticate commutation then that the zinnwaldite does urticate commutation and is mediatory does not hold.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the shop does not emend Romanian.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the bowsprit is a cyclopropane.; sent6 & sent10 -> int2: the bowsprit is not a kind of a cyclopropane.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the shop emends Romanian.; int4 & sent7 -> int5: the Romanian does not urticate commutation.; int5 & sent11 -> int6: the fact that the zinnwaldite urticates commutation and is mediatory does not hold.; sent4 -> int7: the zinnwaldite is not immunodeficient if that it urticates commutation and it is mediatory is not true.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the zinnwaldite is not immunodeficient.; int8 & sent2 -> hypothesis;
that the bowsprit is both Ibsenian and mediatory is wrong.
$hypothesis$ = the Wain is immunodeficient and does not jar breadstuff. ; $context$ = sent1: the shop is not mediatory if that the Romanian does not emend Romanian but it is mediatory does not hold. sent2: if the zinnwaldite is not immunodeficient the Wain is immunodeficient and does not jar breadstuff. sent3: the zinnwaldite does not emend Romanian. sent4: something is not immunodeficient if that it does urticate commutation and it is mediatory is incorrect. sent5: if something does not urticate commutation then it is not immunodeficient. sent6: if the bowsprit is intrapulmonary thing that does not gazump it is not a cyclopropane. sent7: if the shop does emend Romanian the Romanian does not urticate commutation. sent8: the bowsprit is a cyclopropane if the fact that the shop does not emend Romanian is right. sent9: the fact that something is immunodeficient but it does not jar breadstuff is not true if it does emend Romanian. sent10: the bowsprit is intrapulmonary and does not gazump. sent11: if the Romanian does not urticate commutation then that the zinnwaldite does urticate commutation and is mediatory does not hold. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the shop does not emend Romanian.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the bowsprit is a cyclopropane.; sent6 & sent10 -> int2: the bowsprit is not a kind of a cyclopropane.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the shop emends Romanian.; int4 & sent7 -> int5: the Romanian does not urticate commutation.; int5 & sent11 -> int6: the fact that the zinnwaldite urticates commutation and is mediatory does not hold.; sent4 -> int7: the zinnwaldite is not immunodeficient if that it urticates commutation and it is mediatory is not true.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the zinnwaldite is not immunodeficient.; int8 & sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__