the swathe is a grand.
sent1: something is not a kind of a principle if it does not overturn garnish or is not a principle or both. sent2: the arame is a principle. sent3: the lysine is univalent. sent4: the swathe is not a grand if it does overturn garnish. sent5: the slinger overturns garnish if the repressor is a four-in-hand but it does not overturns garnish. sent6: the fact that the fact that the beautician is a neutralization and it does overturn arame is true is false if it is not a major-general. sent7: if something does not overturn enterotoxin it is not a abnegator. sent8: the lysine is not a kind of a principle. sent9: something is not a grand if it does overturn garnish. sent10: the repressor is a kind of a abnegator. sent11: if the fact that the beautician is a kind of a neutralization and does overturn arame is false the Whistler does not overturn split. sent12: that the repressor is both a four-in-hand and not a grand is wrong if there is something such that it is not a principle. sent13: either something does not overturn garnish or it is not a principle or both if it is not a abnegator. sent14: the lysine does barbarize seashell. sent15: the fact that the lysine is a four-in-hand if the repressor is a principle is not incorrect. sent16: the fact that the swathe does not overturn garnish is correct if it is a principle. sent17: the repressor is a kind of a principle. sent18: the beautician is not a major-general. sent19: if there exists something such that it is a four-in-hand then the swathe is a abnegator. sent20: something that is a abnegator and/or overturns garnish is not a grand. sent21: if the swathe is a four-in-hand then it is not a abnegator. sent22: the lysine does not overturn enterotoxin if there exists something such that that it is non-nonoperational thing that does overturn enterotoxin is wrong. sent23: the fact that that the Whistler is not nonoperational but it does overturn enterotoxin is not wrong does not hold if it does not overturn split.
sent15 & sent17 -> int1: the lysine is a four-in-hand.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that it is a four-in-hand.; int2 & sent19 -> int3: the swathe is a kind of a abnegator.; int3 -> int4: the swathe is a abnegator or overturns garnish or both.; sent20 -> int5: the fact that the swathe is not a grand is not wrong if it is a kind of a abnegator and/or it overturns garnish.; int4 & int5 -> hypothesis;
the swathe is a grand.
sent1 -> int6: if the lysine does not overturn garnish and/or it is not a kind of a principle it is not a kind of a principle.; sent13 -> int7: the lysine either does not overturn garnish or is not a kind of a principle or both if it is not a abnegator.; sent7 -> int8: if the lysine does not overturn enterotoxin then it is not a kind of a abnegator.; sent6 & sent18 -> int9: that the beautician is a neutralization and it does overturn arame does not hold.; sent11 & int9 -> int10: the Whistler does not overturn split.; sent23 & int10 -> int11: the fact that the Whistler is not nonoperational but it does overturn enterotoxin is wrong.; int11 -> int12: there is something such that that it is non-nonoperational thing that does overturn enterotoxin does not hold.; int12 & sent22 -> int13: that the lysine does not overturn enterotoxin is correct.; int8 & int13 -> int14: the lysine is not a abnegator.; int7 & int14 -> int15: either the lysine does not overturn garnish or it is not a kind of a principle or both.; int6 & int15 -> int16: the lysine is not a principle.; int16 -> int17: there is something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a principle is correct.; int17 & sent12 -> int18: the fact that the repressor is a four-in-hand that is not a kind of a grand does not hold.; int18 -> int19: there is something such that that it is a four-in-hand and is not a grand is not correct.;
$hypothesis$ = the swathe is a grand. ; $context$ = sent1: something is not a kind of a principle if it does not overturn garnish or is not a principle or both. sent2: the arame is a principle. sent3: the lysine is univalent. sent4: the swathe is not a grand if it does overturn garnish. sent5: the slinger overturns garnish if the repressor is a four-in-hand but it does not overturns garnish. sent6: the fact that the fact that the beautician is a neutralization and it does overturn arame is true is false if it is not a major-general. sent7: if something does not overturn enterotoxin it is not a abnegator. sent8: the lysine is not a kind of a principle. sent9: something is not a grand if it does overturn garnish. sent10: the repressor is a kind of a abnegator. sent11: if the fact that the beautician is a kind of a neutralization and does overturn arame is false the Whistler does not overturn split. sent12: that the repressor is both a four-in-hand and not a grand is wrong if there is something such that it is not a principle. sent13: either something does not overturn garnish or it is not a principle or both if it is not a abnegator. sent14: the lysine does barbarize seashell. sent15: the fact that the lysine is a four-in-hand if the repressor is a principle is not incorrect. sent16: the fact that the swathe does not overturn garnish is correct if it is a principle. sent17: the repressor is a kind of a principle. sent18: the beautician is not a major-general. sent19: if there exists something such that it is a four-in-hand then the swathe is a abnegator. sent20: something that is a abnegator and/or overturns garnish is not a grand. sent21: if the swathe is a four-in-hand then it is not a abnegator. sent22: the lysine does not overturn enterotoxin if there exists something such that that it is non-nonoperational thing that does overturn enterotoxin is wrong. sent23: the fact that that the Whistler is not nonoperational but it does overturn enterotoxin is not wrong does not hold if it does not overturn split. ; $proof$ = 
sent15 & sent17 -> int1: the lysine is a four-in-hand.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that it is a four-in-hand.; int2 & sent19 -> int3: the swathe is a kind of a abnegator.; int3 -> int4: the swathe is a abnegator or overturns garnish or both.; sent20 -> int5: the fact that the swathe is not a grand is not wrong if it is a kind of a abnegator and/or it overturns garnish.; int4 & int5 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__