if the compound is not productive the fact that the onomancer is not incongruent and it does not upload hyperbaton is incorrect.
sent1: the fact that the onomancer is incongruent but it does not upload hyperbaton is not correct. sent2: if something does upload hyperbaton it is Ptolemaic. sent3: the onomancer is not incongruent and it does not upload hyperbaton. sent4: the Cathaya is incongruent if the cress ferments opening. sent5: if the cress is unproductive the compound is non-unproductive thing that does not ferment opening. sent6: the fact that the onomancer is incongruent and does not upload hyperbaton is incorrect if the compound is unproductive. sent7: if the Cathaya is incongruent that the onomancer is not incongruent and it does not upload hyperbaton does not hold. sent8: that the compound does not upload hyperbaton and it is not incongruent is incorrect if the onomancer upload hyperbaton. sent9: if the fact that the compound is unproductive is not false then the fact that the cress is not Ptolemaic but it is incongruent is incorrect. sent10: if the fact that the cress is Ptolemaic and/or not unproductive is not true then the compound does ferment opening. sent11: if the compound is unproductive the onomancer is not incongruent and it does not upload hyperbaton. sent12: if the compound is unproductive the cress is Ptolemaic. sent13: if the onomancer does upload hyperbaton that the fact that the compound does not upload hyperbaton and it is not unproductive hold does not hold. sent14: if something is incongruent the fact that that it is Ptolemaic and/or it is not unproductive hold does not hold. sent15: if the Cathaya is incongruent then that the onomancer is a kind of incongruent thing that uploads hyperbaton is not correct.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the compound is unproductive.; sent12 & assump1 -> int1: the cress is not non-Ptolemaic.;
the compound does ferment opening.
sent14 -> int2: that the cress is Ptolemaic and/or it is not unproductive does not hold if it is incongruent.;
$hypothesis$ = if the compound is not productive the fact that the onomancer is not incongruent and it does not upload hyperbaton is incorrect. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the onomancer is incongruent but it does not upload hyperbaton is not correct. sent2: if something does upload hyperbaton it is Ptolemaic. sent3: the onomancer is not incongruent and it does not upload hyperbaton. sent4: the Cathaya is incongruent if the cress ferments opening. sent5: if the cress is unproductive the compound is non-unproductive thing that does not ferment opening. sent6: the fact that the onomancer is incongruent and does not upload hyperbaton is incorrect if the compound is unproductive. sent7: if the Cathaya is incongruent that the onomancer is not incongruent and it does not upload hyperbaton does not hold. sent8: that the compound does not upload hyperbaton and it is not incongruent is incorrect if the onomancer upload hyperbaton. sent9: if the fact that the compound is unproductive is not false then the fact that the cress is not Ptolemaic but it is incongruent is incorrect. sent10: if the fact that the cress is Ptolemaic and/or not unproductive is not true then the compound does ferment opening. sent11: if the compound is unproductive the onomancer is not incongruent and it does not upload hyperbaton. sent12: if the compound is unproductive the cress is Ptolemaic. sent13: if the onomancer does upload hyperbaton that the fact that the compound does not upload hyperbaton and it is not unproductive hold does not hold. sent14: if something is incongruent the fact that that it is Ptolemaic and/or it is not unproductive hold does not hold. sent15: if the Cathaya is incongruent then that the onomancer is a kind of incongruent thing that uploads hyperbaton is not correct. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the compound is unproductive.; sent12 & assump1 -> int1: the cress is not non-Ptolemaic.; __UNKNOWN__