the buteonine is non-pictographic.
sent1: the emerald is hypophyseal if the aposelene is helpful. sent2: the fact that the aposelene is indefeasible is not incorrect. sent3: if that something is not a kind of an esophagus but it is a kind of a kuvasz is not correct then it is not indefeasible. sent4: if the buteonine is not a kuvasz then it is not pictographic. sent5: that something is an esophagus that does spend jolt is incorrect if it is not indefeasible. sent6: something does not rehabilitate nelson if that it is not a nasopharynx is wrong. sent7: if something is an esophagus that it is not hypophyseal and it is helpful is incorrect. sent8: if the emerald does spend jolt then the fact that the aposelene is an esophagus is not incorrect. sent9: if the hyperon does not spend jolt that the buteonine is not indefeasible but it is a kind of a kuvasz is wrong. sent10: the emerald is not indefeasible. sent11: something is not pictographic if the fact that it is not indefeasible and is a kuvasz is not true. sent12: something is not unfathomable if it is mandibulofacial. sent13: the hyperon is not a kind of an esophagus. sent14: the hyperon does not spend jolt and is not a kind of an esophagus if there is something such that it is hypophyseal. sent15: the fact that the hyperon does not spend jolt but it is helpful does not hold. sent16: something that is not a kuvasz does spend jolt and is indefeasible. sent17: if the buteonine is not hypophyseal it is pictographic and it is helpful. sent18: if the buteonine is not hypophyseal that the aposelene is not indefeasible but it is helpful does not hold. sent19: if something is hypophyseal the hyperon is not a kind of an esophagus. sent20: something is not pictographic if it is not a kuvasz. sent21: there is something such that it does spend jolt.
sent11 -> int1: if the fact that the buteonine is a kind of defeasible thing that is a kind of a kuvasz is not correct then it is not pictographic.;
the buteonine is pictographic.
$hypothesis$ = the buteonine is non-pictographic. ; $context$ = sent1: the emerald is hypophyseal if the aposelene is helpful. sent2: the fact that the aposelene is indefeasible is not incorrect. sent3: if that something is not a kind of an esophagus but it is a kind of a kuvasz is not correct then it is not indefeasible. sent4: if the buteonine is not a kuvasz then it is not pictographic. sent5: that something is an esophagus that does spend jolt is incorrect if it is not indefeasible. sent6: something does not rehabilitate nelson if that it is not a nasopharynx is wrong. sent7: if something is an esophagus that it is not hypophyseal and it is helpful is incorrect. sent8: if the emerald does spend jolt then the fact that the aposelene is an esophagus is not incorrect. sent9: if the hyperon does not spend jolt that the buteonine is not indefeasible but it is a kind of a kuvasz is wrong. sent10: the emerald is not indefeasible. sent11: something is not pictographic if the fact that it is not indefeasible and is a kuvasz is not true. sent12: something is not unfathomable if it is mandibulofacial. sent13: the hyperon is not a kind of an esophagus. sent14: the hyperon does not spend jolt and is not a kind of an esophagus if there is something such that it is hypophyseal. sent15: the fact that the hyperon does not spend jolt but it is helpful does not hold. sent16: something that is not a kuvasz does spend jolt and is indefeasible. sent17: if the buteonine is not hypophyseal it is pictographic and it is helpful. sent18: if the buteonine is not hypophyseal that the aposelene is not indefeasible but it is helpful does not hold. sent19: if something is hypophyseal the hyperon is not a kind of an esophagus. sent20: something is not pictographic if it is not a kuvasz. sent21: there is something such that it does spend jolt. ; $proof$ = 
sent11 -> int1: if the fact that the buteonine is a kind of defeasible thing that is a kind of a kuvasz is not correct then it is not pictographic.; __UNKNOWN__