the fact that the TC is not semantic is right.
sent1: if something is a wrecker it is Wittgensteinian. sent2: the boysenberry is sternutatory. sent3: that the fetoscope is carpellate is true. sent4: if the fetoscope is carpellate then the boysenberry is a wrecker. sent5: if the boysenberry is sternutatory and it is Wittgensteinian then the TC is not semantic.
sent4 & sent3 -> int1: that the boysenberry is a wrecker is true.; sent1 -> int2: if that the boysenberry is a wrecker is not wrong it is Wittgensteinian.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the boysenberry is Wittgensteinian.; int3 & sent2 -> int4: the boysenberry is sternutatory and it is Wittgensteinian.; int4 & sent5 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that the TC is not semantic is right. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is a wrecker it is Wittgensteinian. sent2: the boysenberry is sternutatory. sent3: that the fetoscope is carpellate is true. sent4: if the fetoscope is carpellate then the boysenberry is a wrecker. sent5: if the boysenberry is sternutatory and it is Wittgensteinian then the TC is not semantic. ; $proof$ = 
sent4 & sent3 -> int1: that the boysenberry is a wrecker is true.; sent1 -> int2: if that the boysenberry is a wrecker is not wrong it is Wittgensteinian.; int1 & int2 -> int3: the boysenberry is Wittgensteinian.; int3 & sent2 -> int4: the boysenberry is sternutatory and it is Wittgensteinian.; int4 & sent5 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__