the ligule is oviparous but it is not a kind of a modality.
sent1: that the ligule is not a diabolism and/or it is not chaetal does not hold if it is a tearaway. sent2: if that something does not abuse muffle and/or it does not abuse gentleness is not correct then it does bury epicardium. sent3: if the bandoneon is scopal then it does abuse muffle. sent4: the ligule is not scopal. sent5: the causeway is a bug if there is something such that that it either does not abuse muffle or does not abuse gentleness or both does not hold. sent6: the ligule is chaetal if the causeway is nonmetallic. sent7: the muffle buries epicardium and does not abuse muffle. sent8: the muffle is insentient and buries epicardium. sent9: that the bandoneon is not scopal but it is not sentient is not right if there exists something such that it does bury epicardium. sent10: there exists something such that it does not abuse muffle and/or does not abuse gentleness. sent11: if the causeway does bury epicardium it is both a bug and not nonmetallic. sent12: something does bury epicardium. sent13: there is something such that the fact that it is incomprehensible is true. sent14: something is not insentient if that it is non-scopal and insentient is false. sent15: the fact that the ligule is a kind of a modality is not correct. sent16: the bandoneon buries epicardium and it abuses muffle. sent17: if that something is a kind of a bug is not wrong that it is nonmetallic is not incorrect. sent18: the bandoneon is scopal if there is something such that it is insentient thing that buries epicardium. sent19: the fact that either the bandoneon does not abuse muffle or it does not abuse gentleness or both is false if it is scopal. sent20: that the ligule does ladle disassociation hold. sent21: the muffle does bury epicardium but it is not a kind of a bug. sent22: the fact that the bandoneon does abuse muffle is not false. sent23: the ligule is not a modality if it is chaetal.
sent8 -> int1: something is a kind of insentient thing that buries epicardium.; int1 & sent18 -> int2: the bandoneon is scopal.; int2 & sent19 -> int3: that the bandoneon does not abuse muffle and/or does not abuse gentleness is incorrect.; int3 -> int4: there is something such that that it does not abuse muffle or it does not abuse gentleness or both is false.; int4 & sent5 -> int5: the causeway is a bug.; sent17 -> int6: the causeway is not metallic if it is a kind of a bug.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the causeway is nonmetallic.; int7 & sent6 -> int8: the ligule is chaetal.;
the fact that that the ligule is both oviparous and not a modality is not false is wrong.
sent14 -> int9: if that the bandoneon is both non-scopal and insentient is false then it is not insentient.; sent2 -> int10: if that the causeway does not abuse muffle and/or it does not abuse gentleness does not hold then it does bury epicardium.;
$hypothesis$ = the ligule is oviparous but it is not a kind of a modality. ; $context$ = sent1: that the ligule is not a diabolism and/or it is not chaetal does not hold if it is a tearaway. sent2: if that something does not abuse muffle and/or it does not abuse gentleness is not correct then it does bury epicardium. sent3: if the bandoneon is scopal then it does abuse muffle. sent4: the ligule is not scopal. sent5: the causeway is a bug if there is something such that that it either does not abuse muffle or does not abuse gentleness or both does not hold. sent6: the ligule is chaetal if the causeway is nonmetallic. sent7: the muffle buries epicardium and does not abuse muffle. sent8: the muffle is insentient and buries epicardium. sent9: that the bandoneon is not scopal but it is not sentient is not right if there exists something such that it does bury epicardium. sent10: there exists something such that it does not abuse muffle and/or does not abuse gentleness. sent11: if the causeway does bury epicardium it is both a bug and not nonmetallic. sent12: something does bury epicardium. sent13: there is something such that the fact that it is incomprehensible is true. sent14: something is not insentient if that it is non-scopal and insentient is false. sent15: the fact that the ligule is a kind of a modality is not correct. sent16: the bandoneon buries epicardium and it abuses muffle. sent17: if that something is a kind of a bug is not wrong that it is nonmetallic is not incorrect. sent18: the bandoneon is scopal if there is something such that it is insentient thing that buries epicardium. sent19: the fact that either the bandoneon does not abuse muffle or it does not abuse gentleness or both is false if it is scopal. sent20: that the ligule does ladle disassociation hold. sent21: the muffle does bury epicardium but it is not a kind of a bug. sent22: the fact that the bandoneon does abuse muffle is not false. sent23: the ligule is not a modality if it is chaetal. ; $proof$ = 
sent8 -> int1: something is a kind of insentient thing that buries epicardium.; int1 & sent18 -> int2: the bandoneon is scopal.; int2 & sent19 -> int3: that the bandoneon does not abuse muffle and/or does not abuse gentleness is incorrect.; int3 -> int4: there is something such that that it does not abuse muffle or it does not abuse gentleness or both is false.; int4 & sent5 -> int5: the causeway is a bug.; sent17 -> int6: the causeway is not metallic if it is a kind of a bug.; int5 & int6 -> int7: the causeway is nonmetallic.; int7 & sent6 -> int8: the ligule is chaetal.; __UNKNOWN__