the trochlear is not cataphatic.
sent1: if the spadix is not a blacktail but it is brotherly then it is a brand-newness. sent2: if there exists something such that it is a Zostera then that the sommelier is a kind of a brochette is not false. sent3: the fact that the trochlear belongs and is not a hoot does not hold if that the spadix is unnoticeable hold. sent4: that the spadix is not a kind of a blacktail and is brotherly does not hold. sent5: the fact that the spadix is both a blacktail and not brotherly is false. sent6: the sommelier is a kind of a brochette if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a brochette and is not a Zostera is not true. sent7: the trochlear is not cataphatic if it does not belong. sent8: if the spadix is a brand-newness it does mismanage heterosexism. sent9: the spadix is unnoticeable if it mismanages heterosexism. sent10: the spadix is a brand-newness if it is both a blacktail and not brotherly. sent11: if the spadix is not a blacktail and is non-brotherly then it is a kind of a brand-newness. sent12: if that the spadix organizes preliminary hold then the sommelier is not a brochette. sent13: if that the fact that the trochlear does belong and is not a hoot is not incorrect is not true it is not cataphatic. sent14: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a brochette and it is not a kind of a Zostera is wrong. sent15: there exists something such that it is not a brochette and not a Zostera. sent16: there exists something such that that it is not a brochette but a Zostera does not hold. sent17: there is something such that the fact that it is not a brochette and it is not a Zostera is not correct.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the spadix is not a blacktail and not brotherly is wrong.; sent17 & sent6 -> int1: the sommelier is a brochette.;
$hypothesis$ = the trochlear is not cataphatic. ; $context$ = sent1: if the spadix is not a blacktail but it is brotherly then it is a brand-newness. sent2: if there exists something such that it is a Zostera then that the sommelier is a kind of a brochette is not false. sent3: the fact that the trochlear belongs and is not a hoot does not hold if that the spadix is unnoticeable hold. sent4: that the spadix is not a kind of a blacktail and is brotherly does not hold. sent5: the fact that the spadix is both a blacktail and not brotherly is false. sent6: the sommelier is a kind of a brochette if there exists something such that the fact that it is not a brochette and is not a Zostera is not true. sent7: the trochlear is not cataphatic if it does not belong. sent8: if the spadix is a brand-newness it does mismanage heterosexism. sent9: the spadix is unnoticeable if it mismanages heterosexism. sent10: the spadix is a brand-newness if it is both a blacktail and not brotherly. sent11: if the spadix is not a blacktail and is non-brotherly then it is a kind of a brand-newness. sent12: if that the spadix organizes preliminary hold then the sommelier is not a brochette. sent13: if that the fact that the trochlear does belong and is not a hoot is not incorrect is not true it is not cataphatic. sent14: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a brochette and it is not a kind of a Zostera is wrong. sent15: there exists something such that it is not a brochette and not a Zostera. sent16: there exists something such that that it is not a brochette but a Zostera does not hold. sent17: there is something such that the fact that it is not a brochette and it is not a Zostera is not correct. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the spadix is not a blacktail and not brotherly is wrong.; sent17 & sent6 -> int1: the sommelier is a brochette.; __UNKNOWN__