if the greenskeeper is acroscopic the expurgator is a Hittite.
sent1: that the fact that the bragger does not undress expurgator and it is not centrifugal does not hold if the expurgator is non-Hittite is not incorrect. sent2: the fact that the bragger does not undress expurgator and is centrifugal is not true. sent3: the greenskeeper is acroscopic if that the bragger does not undress expurgator and is not centrifugal does not hold. sent4: the greenskeeper is not acroscopic if that that the bragger does not undress expurgator and is not centrifugal is not wrong does not hold. sent5: the greenskeeper is a Hittite. sent6: the greenskeeper is not acroscopic if the fact that the bragger is centrifugal is not wrong. sent7: if that the expurgator is not a Hittite is true the fact that the bragger does not undress expurgator and is centrifugal does not hold. sent8: that the bragger is acroscopic hold if the fact that the greenskeeper is centrifugal hold.
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the greenskeeper is acroscopic.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the expurgator is not a Hittite.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the bragger does not undress expurgator and is not centrifugal is incorrect.; sent4 & int1 -> int2: the greenskeeper is not acroscopic.; assump2 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the expurgator is Hittite.; [assump2] & int4 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = if the greenskeeper is acroscopic the expurgator is a Hittite. ; $context$ = sent1: that the fact that the bragger does not undress expurgator and it is not centrifugal does not hold if the expurgator is non-Hittite is not incorrect. sent2: the fact that the bragger does not undress expurgator and is centrifugal is not true. sent3: the greenskeeper is acroscopic if that the bragger does not undress expurgator and is not centrifugal does not hold. sent4: the greenskeeper is not acroscopic if that that the bragger does not undress expurgator and is not centrifugal is not wrong does not hold. sent5: the greenskeeper is a Hittite. sent6: the greenskeeper is not acroscopic if the fact that the bragger is centrifugal is not wrong. sent7: if that the expurgator is not a Hittite is true the fact that the bragger does not undress expurgator and is centrifugal does not hold. sent8: that the bragger is acroscopic hold if the fact that the greenskeeper is centrifugal hold. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump2: Let's assume that the greenskeeper is acroscopic.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that the expurgator is not a Hittite.; sent1 & assump1 -> int1: the fact that the bragger does not undress expurgator and is not centrifugal is incorrect.; sent4 & int1 -> int2: the greenskeeper is not acroscopic.; assump2 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the expurgator is Hittite.; [assump2] & int4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__