if the convolution is a sight the polypore is not nonarbitrable.
sent1: the convolution is nonarbitrable if the polypore denationalizes fondler or does sight or both. sent2: the convolution is not a thymus if the polypore sights. sent3: if the convolution does denationalize fondler or it does sight or both the polypore is not nonarbitrable. sent4: that the polypore does not denationalize fondler hold. sent5: the convolution is nonarbitrable if the polypore sights and/or denationalizes fondler. sent6: the fact that the convolution is not nonarbitrable is right if the polypore is a sight. sent7: if the polypore does denationalize fondler the convolution is nonarbitrable. sent8: the convolution is nonarbitrable. sent9: that the convolution is arbitrable is true if the polypore does denationalize fondler or sights or both. sent10: if the polypore does denationalize fondler then the convolution is not nonarbitrable. sent11: the polypore is not a sight if the convolution is nonarbitrable. sent12: the fact that the polypore does not sight is not wrong if the convolution does denationalize fondler and/or it is nonarbitrable. sent13: the insectivore is not nonarbitrable. sent14: the polypore does not denationalize fondler if the convolution sights or it is nonarbitrable or both. sent15: if the polypore either is nonarbitrable or is a sight or both the convolution denationalizes fondler. sent16: the fact that if the polypore is a sight and/or is nonarbitrable then the convolution denationalizes fondler is not false. sent17: the convolution is not amphoric. sent18: the fondler denationalizes fondler.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the convolution is a sight.; assump1 -> int1: the convolution denationalizes fondler or it is a kind of a sight or both.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: the polypore is not nonarbitrable.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = if the convolution is a sight the polypore is not nonarbitrable. ; $context$ = sent1: the convolution is nonarbitrable if the polypore denationalizes fondler or does sight or both. sent2: the convolution is not a thymus if the polypore sights. sent3: if the convolution does denationalize fondler or it does sight or both the polypore is not nonarbitrable. sent4: that the polypore does not denationalize fondler hold. sent5: the convolution is nonarbitrable if the polypore sights and/or denationalizes fondler. sent6: the fact that the convolution is not nonarbitrable is right if the polypore is a sight. sent7: if the polypore does denationalize fondler the convolution is nonarbitrable. sent8: the convolution is nonarbitrable. sent9: that the convolution is arbitrable is true if the polypore does denationalize fondler or sights or both. sent10: if the polypore does denationalize fondler then the convolution is not nonarbitrable. sent11: the polypore is not a sight if the convolution is nonarbitrable. sent12: the fact that the polypore does not sight is not wrong if the convolution does denationalize fondler and/or it is nonarbitrable. sent13: the insectivore is not nonarbitrable. sent14: the polypore does not denationalize fondler if the convolution sights or it is nonarbitrable or both. sent15: if the polypore either is nonarbitrable or is a sight or both the convolution denationalizes fondler. sent16: the fact that if the polypore is a sight and/or is nonarbitrable then the convolution denationalizes fondler is not false. sent17: the convolution is not amphoric. sent18: the fondler denationalizes fondler. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the convolution is a sight.; assump1 -> int1: the convolution denationalizes fondler or it is a kind of a sight or both.; int1 & sent3 -> int2: the polypore is not nonarbitrable.; [assump1] & int2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__