if that the Shahaptian is not nonpsychoactive and it is not a kind of a golfing does not hold then the fact that it is not clitoral is right.
sent1: the Shahaptian is not herbivorous. sent2: the Shahaptian is not unsavory. sent3: the Shahaptian is not genuine. sent4: the Shahaptian is incongruous. sent5: if something does not resect Rhenish it is not a kind of a forwarding. sent6: the Shahaptian is not shockable. sent7: that the Shahaptian is a kind of non-larval thing that is not specialistic is not true. sent8: the cuppa is not incongruous. sent9: something is a kind of a sincerity but it does not resect spathe if the fact that it is not a premiere is not false. sent10: if something that is specialistic is incongruous then it is not clitoral. sent11: the tamanoir is not incongruous if the fact that it is not non-chromatographic and it is idiographic does not hold. sent12: the fact that the Shahaptian is both not non-proteolytic and not extralinguistic is true. sent13: if the fact that that the Shahaptian is both not non-specialistic and not unlawful is not right is not wrong it is not tubercular. sent14: the Shahaptian is a kind of a perspicuity. sent15: if the cuckoopint is a kind of a forwarding and it is a kind of a poisonberry then it is not nonpsychoactive. sent16: the Shahaptian is nonpsychoactive but it is not a golfing if it is not specialistic. sent17: the terreplein is not incongruous. sent18: the shaver is not nonpsychoactive and it does not cling wand. sent19: if something is not a sextillion then it is not extralinguistic.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the Shahaptian is not specialistic.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the Shahaptian is not nonpsychoactive and it is not a golfing is incorrect.; sent10 -> int1: if the Shahaptian is specialistic thing that is incongruous then it is not clitoral.;
the growth is clitoral.
$hypothesis$ = if that the Shahaptian is not nonpsychoactive and it is not a kind of a golfing does not hold then the fact that it is not clitoral is right. ; $context$ = sent1: the Shahaptian is not herbivorous. sent2: the Shahaptian is not unsavory. sent3: the Shahaptian is not genuine. sent4: the Shahaptian is incongruous. sent5: if something does not resect Rhenish it is not a kind of a forwarding. sent6: the Shahaptian is not shockable. sent7: that the Shahaptian is a kind of non-larval thing that is not specialistic is not true. sent8: the cuppa is not incongruous. sent9: something is a kind of a sincerity but it does not resect spathe if the fact that it is not a premiere is not false. sent10: if something that is specialistic is incongruous then it is not clitoral. sent11: the tamanoir is not incongruous if the fact that it is not non-chromatographic and it is idiographic does not hold. sent12: the fact that the Shahaptian is both not non-proteolytic and not extralinguistic is true. sent13: if the fact that that the Shahaptian is both not non-specialistic and not unlawful is not right is not wrong it is not tubercular. sent14: the Shahaptian is a kind of a perspicuity. sent15: if the cuckoopint is a kind of a forwarding and it is a kind of a poisonberry then it is not nonpsychoactive. sent16: the Shahaptian is nonpsychoactive but it is not a golfing if it is not specialistic. sent17: the terreplein is not incongruous. sent18: the shaver is not nonpsychoactive and it does not cling wand. sent19: if something is not a sextillion then it is not extralinguistic. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the Shahaptian is not specialistic.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the Shahaptian is not nonpsychoactive and it is not a golfing is incorrect.; sent10 -> int1: if the Shahaptian is specialistic thing that is incongruous then it is not clitoral.; __UNKNOWN__