the fact that either the printmaker does not jockey bustier or it is sterile or both is false.
sent1: if something is not a kind of a Fungia then the fact that it is non-particularistic and is not unexcitable is not right. sent2: if the catcher does consort Cline and it is a Phallus then it is not particularistic. sent3: the catcher is not a Chloroxylon if the haranguer is a kind of a clairvoyant that jockeys printmaker. sent4: if something is not a Chloroxylon the fact that it is a kind of a Fungia and does not jockey bustier is not correct. sent5: if the catcher is non-particularistic then the fact that the haranguer is non-particularistic but not hydrocephalic is incorrect. sent6: if the insemination is a lignite that is not a clairvoyant the haranguer is a clairvoyant. sent7: that if that the haranguer is particularistic but it is not hydrocephalic does not hold the insemination is unexcitable is not incorrect. sent8: something is hydrocephalic if it is sterile. sent9: if something is not hydrocephalic it does not jockey bustier and/or it is sterile. sent10: that the printmaker does not jockey bustier or it is sterile or both is not correct if the insemination is unexcitable. sent11: if the fact that something is a kind of a Fungia and does not jockey bustier is wrong then it is not non-particularistic. sent12: the catcher consorts Cline and it is a kind of a Phallus. sent13: the haranguer jockeys printmaker if it is an analogue. sent14: if that the haranguer is both not an analogue and a gleba is not correct it is an analogue. sent15: if something is not a Chloroxylon it is not a Fungia. sent16: if something sings then the insemination is a lignite but it is not a clairvoyant. sent17: there exists something such that it does sing. sent18: the haranguer does jockey printmaker and is sterile if it is not a clairvoyant. sent19: the fact that the catcher is unexcitable does not hold if the haranguer is hydrocephalic thing that is particularistic.
sent2 & sent12 -> int1: the catcher is not particularistic.; sent5 & int1 -> int2: the fact that the haranguer is particularistic but it is not hydrocephalic is false.; sent7 & int2 -> int3: the insemination is unexcitable.; sent10 & int3 -> hypothesis;
the printmaker does not jockey bustier or it is sterile or both.
sent9 -> int4: the printmaker does not jockey bustier and/or it is sterile if it is not hydrocephalic.; sent1 -> int5: that the catcher is not particularistic and not unexcitable is not true if it is not a Fungia.; sent15 -> int6: the catcher is not a Fungia if it is not a kind of a Chloroxylon.; sent17 & sent16 -> int7: the insemination is a lignite but not a clairvoyant.; sent6 & int7 -> int8: the haranguer is a clairvoyant.;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that either the printmaker does not jockey bustier or it is sterile or both is false. ; $context$ = sent1: if something is not a kind of a Fungia then the fact that it is non-particularistic and is not unexcitable is not right. sent2: if the catcher does consort Cline and it is a Phallus then it is not particularistic. sent3: the catcher is not a Chloroxylon if the haranguer is a kind of a clairvoyant that jockeys printmaker. sent4: if something is not a Chloroxylon the fact that it is a kind of a Fungia and does not jockey bustier is not correct. sent5: if the catcher is non-particularistic then the fact that the haranguer is non-particularistic but not hydrocephalic is incorrect. sent6: if the insemination is a lignite that is not a clairvoyant the haranguer is a clairvoyant. sent7: that if that the haranguer is particularistic but it is not hydrocephalic does not hold the insemination is unexcitable is not incorrect. sent8: something is hydrocephalic if it is sterile. sent9: if something is not hydrocephalic it does not jockey bustier and/or it is sterile. sent10: that the printmaker does not jockey bustier or it is sterile or both is not correct if the insemination is unexcitable. sent11: if the fact that something is a kind of a Fungia and does not jockey bustier is wrong then it is not non-particularistic. sent12: the catcher consorts Cline and it is a kind of a Phallus. sent13: the haranguer jockeys printmaker if it is an analogue. sent14: if that the haranguer is both not an analogue and a gleba is not correct it is an analogue. sent15: if something is not a Chloroxylon it is not a Fungia. sent16: if something sings then the insemination is a lignite but it is not a clairvoyant. sent17: there exists something such that it does sing. sent18: the haranguer does jockey printmaker and is sterile if it is not a clairvoyant. sent19: the fact that the catcher is unexcitable does not hold if the haranguer is hydrocephalic thing that is particularistic. ; $proof$ = 
sent2 & sent12 -> int1: the catcher is not particularistic.; sent5 & int1 -> int2: the fact that the haranguer is particularistic but it is not hydrocephalic is false.; sent7 & int2 -> int3: the insemination is unexcitable.; sent10 & int3 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__