there exists something such that if it does not sparkle kimberlite then it is not univalent.
sent1: if the pemmican sparkles Geastraceae it is not a crew. sent2: that the pemmican is not a flying or not non-absolutist or both is not correct if the fact that it is not a crew is true. sent3: the naboom is not univalent if that it does sparkle kimberlite is not wrong. sent4: if the ottoman is not univalent then it does whirl Lufkin. sent5: that either the naboom sparkles kimberlite or it is not pyknotic or both is false if the retardation is not univalent. sent6: the fact that if the naboom does not sparkle kimberlite then the naboom is univalent is right. sent7: the naboom is not a teaberry. sent8: the naboom is not pyknotic. sent9: the protege is not a sensorium. sent10: the naboom is not univalent if it is not pyknotic and does sparkle kimberlite. sent11: there is something such that if it does sparkle kimberlite then it is not univalent. sent12: the fact that something is a composition is not wrong if that the fact that it is not a flying or an absolutist or both hold does not hold. sent13: the naboom is univalent if it is non-pyknotic and it does not sparkle kimberlite. sent14: if the fact that the naboom either sparkles kimberlite or is not pyknotic or both is not true then the novelist does not sparkles kimberlite.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the naboom does not sparkle kimberlite is correct.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the naboom is a kind of non-pyknotic thing that does not sparkle kimberlite.;
the novelist does not sparkle kimberlite.
sent12 -> int2: the pemmican is a kind of a composition if the fact that it is not a flying and/or is an absolutist does not hold.;
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it does not sparkle kimberlite then it is not univalent. ; $context$ = sent1: if the pemmican sparkles Geastraceae it is not a crew. sent2: that the pemmican is not a flying or not non-absolutist or both is not correct if the fact that it is not a crew is true. sent3: the naboom is not univalent if that it does sparkle kimberlite is not wrong. sent4: if the ottoman is not univalent then it does whirl Lufkin. sent5: that either the naboom sparkles kimberlite or it is not pyknotic or both is false if the retardation is not univalent. sent6: the fact that if the naboom does not sparkle kimberlite then the naboom is univalent is right. sent7: the naboom is not a teaberry. sent8: the naboom is not pyknotic. sent9: the protege is not a sensorium. sent10: the naboom is not univalent if it is not pyknotic and does sparkle kimberlite. sent11: there is something such that if it does sparkle kimberlite then it is not univalent. sent12: the fact that something is a composition is not wrong if that the fact that it is not a flying or an absolutist or both hold does not hold. sent13: the naboom is univalent if it is non-pyknotic and it does not sparkle kimberlite. sent14: if the fact that the naboom either sparkles kimberlite or is not pyknotic or both is not true then the novelist does not sparkles kimberlite. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the naboom does not sparkle kimberlite is correct.; sent8 & assump1 -> int1: the naboom is a kind of non-pyknotic thing that does not sparkle kimberlite.; __UNKNOWN__