that the quiche is a disfluency but it is not a kind of an exigency does not hold.
sent1: the fact that the quiche is a kind of a disfluency that is an exigency does not hold. sent2: if the quiche is not a kind of a disfluency that the derringer is a windowsill and is an exigency is not true. sent3: the fact that the derringer is a windowsill and avionic is false. sent4: that the quiche is a disfluency and is not an exigency does not hold if the shoetree is not infrequent. sent5: if something is not a kind of a toothpaste that it is both not a SSA and unjust is incorrect. sent6: the fact that the shoetree is both anaphasic and not a disfluency is incorrect. sent7: if the fact that the derringer is a windowsill and is avionic is wrong the shoetree is not infrequent. sent8: the derringer is a company and it is a oilfish. sent9: the fact that the shoetree is infrequent and is an exigency is not correct. sent10: if the fact that something is not a kind of a SSA but it is unjust is not right it is not infrequent. sent11: something that is frequent is a disfluency and not an exigency.
sent7 & sent3 -> int1: the shoetree is frequent.; int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis;
the quiche is a kind of a disfluency and is not an exigency.
sent11 -> int2: if the quiche is not infrequent it is a disfluency and it is not a kind of an exigency.; sent10 -> int3: if the fact that the quiche is not a kind of a SSA and is unjust is not true it is not infrequent.; sent5 -> int4: that the quiche is not a SSA but unjust is not true if it is not a toothpaste.; sent8 -> int5: the derringer is a company.; int5 -> int6: there exists something such that the fact that it is a company is correct.;
$hypothesis$ = that the quiche is a disfluency but it is not a kind of an exigency does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the quiche is a kind of a disfluency that is an exigency does not hold. sent2: if the quiche is not a kind of a disfluency that the derringer is a windowsill and is an exigency is not true. sent3: the fact that the derringer is a windowsill and avionic is false. sent4: that the quiche is a disfluency and is not an exigency does not hold if the shoetree is not infrequent. sent5: if something is not a kind of a toothpaste that it is both not a SSA and unjust is incorrect. sent6: the fact that the shoetree is both anaphasic and not a disfluency is incorrect. sent7: if the fact that the derringer is a windowsill and is avionic is wrong the shoetree is not infrequent. sent8: the derringer is a company and it is a oilfish. sent9: the fact that the shoetree is infrequent and is an exigency is not correct. sent10: if the fact that something is not a kind of a SSA but it is unjust is not right it is not infrequent. sent11: something that is frequent is a disfluency and not an exigency. ; $proof$ = 
sent7 & sent3 -> int1: the shoetree is frequent.; int1 & sent4 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__