the collaborator does not symbolize.
sent1: the headwater is not a blare and it does not watch Grammatophyllum. sent2: if something watches Grammatophyllum then the fact that it is both not a blare and not pro is not right. sent3: the fact that the headwater is both non-pro and rough is false. sent4: if something is not a nit that it is not a variance and does not watch Grammatophyllum does not hold. sent5: if something is not a blare that it is not a pro and it is not rough is false. sent6: if there exists something such that it does not symbolize and it roughs then the collaborator does not watch Grammatophyllum. sent7: there exists something such that it is not artless. sent8: the fact that the headwater is both not a pro and a rough does not hold if it is not a blare. sent9: if there is something such that it is a mayhem then the culvert is not a kind of a nit and hums plunderer. sent10: something does symbolize. sent11: the Kentuckian is not artless but it watches Grammatophyllum. sent12: if there is something such that it is not artless and it does symbolize the headwater is not rough. sent13: if there exists something such that that it is not a blare and it is not a kind of a pro is not correct then the asthenosphere is a kind of a blare. sent14: if there exists something such that that it is not a variance and does not watch Grammatophyllum is not correct then that the hasp does watch Grammatophyllum is not false. sent15: the headwater is artful thing that is not a Asin. sent16: if the fact that something is a kind of non-pro thing that is not a rough is incorrect it is a rough. sent17: if something is not a blare then that it is non-pro thing that is not non-rough does not hold. sent18: something that is non-artless thing that does not symbolize is not a blare. sent19: the collaborator is artless if the headwater is artless. sent20: the collaborator is not artless. sent21: something does symbolize if it is artless. sent22: something is a mayhem.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the collaborator symbolizes is correct.; sent20 & assump1 -> int1: the collaborator is not artless but it does symbolize.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that it is not artless and it does symbolize.; int2 & sent12 -> int3: the headwater is not a kind of a rough.; sent16 -> int4: the headwater is a rough if that it is non-pro thing that is not a kind of a rough is not correct.; sent5 -> int5: if the headwater is not a kind of a blare that it is a kind of non-pro thing that is not a rough does not hold.; sent1 -> int6: the headwater is not a blare.; int5 & int6 -> int7: that the headwater is not a pro and it is not a kind of a rough is false.; int4 & int7 -> int8: the headwater is a rough.; int3 & int8 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int9 -> hypothesis;
the Kentuckian is not a blare.
sent18 -> int10: if the Kentuckian is a kind of non-artless thing that does not symbolize then it is not a kind of a blare.; sent11 -> int11: the Kentuckian is not artless.;
$hypothesis$ = the collaborator does not symbolize. ; $context$ = sent1: the headwater is not a blare and it does not watch Grammatophyllum. sent2: if something watches Grammatophyllum then the fact that it is both not a blare and not pro is not right. sent3: the fact that the headwater is both non-pro and rough is false. sent4: if something is not a nit that it is not a variance and does not watch Grammatophyllum does not hold. sent5: if something is not a blare that it is not a pro and it is not rough is false. sent6: if there exists something such that it does not symbolize and it roughs then the collaborator does not watch Grammatophyllum. sent7: there exists something such that it is not artless. sent8: the fact that the headwater is both not a pro and a rough does not hold if it is not a blare. sent9: if there is something such that it is a mayhem then the culvert is not a kind of a nit and hums plunderer. sent10: something does symbolize. sent11: the Kentuckian is not artless but it watches Grammatophyllum. sent12: if there is something such that it is not artless and it does symbolize the headwater is not rough. sent13: if there exists something such that that it is not a blare and it is not a kind of a pro is not correct then the asthenosphere is a kind of a blare. sent14: if there exists something such that that it is not a variance and does not watch Grammatophyllum is not correct then that the hasp does watch Grammatophyllum is not false. sent15: the headwater is artful thing that is not a Asin. sent16: if the fact that something is a kind of non-pro thing that is not a rough is incorrect it is a rough. sent17: if something is not a blare then that it is non-pro thing that is not non-rough does not hold. sent18: something that is non-artless thing that does not symbolize is not a blare. sent19: the collaborator is artless if the headwater is artless. sent20: the collaborator is not artless. sent21: something does symbolize if it is artless. sent22: something is a mayhem. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the fact that the collaborator symbolizes is correct.; sent20 & assump1 -> int1: the collaborator is not artless but it does symbolize.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that it is not artless and it does symbolize.; int2 & sent12 -> int3: the headwater is not a kind of a rough.; sent16 -> int4: the headwater is a rough if that it is non-pro thing that is not a kind of a rough is not correct.; sent5 -> int5: if the headwater is not a kind of a blare that it is a kind of non-pro thing that is not a rough does not hold.; sent1 -> int6: the headwater is not a blare.; int5 & int6 -> int7: that the headwater is not a pro and it is not a kind of a rough is false.; int4 & int7 -> int8: the headwater is a rough.; int3 & int8 -> int9: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__