the connoisseur is a shabbiness.
sent1: the fact that that something is not a shabbiness is not wrong if the fact that it does not secrete electrodynamometer and it is a kind of a shabbiness is wrong is correct. sent2: if there exists something such that it companies Amharic and/or is a icecream then the connoisseur is a vocabulary. sent3: the possession is not dramatic. sent4: the fact that the lander does secrete Comte but it is not theological is correct if something is not dramatic. sent5: if the lander secretes Comte and is not theological the Barber is not a vocabulary. sent6: the fact that the bowler is a rabbi is right if it does secrete electrodynamometer. sent7: something does company Turnicidae. sent8: if the connoisseur is a vocabulary then it is a kind of a shabbiness. sent9: if that the archbishopric is not a icecream is not incorrect the daisy does not company Amharic. sent10: something does secrete electrodynamometer and companies Turnicidae. sent11: the fact that the connoisseur does not secrete electrodynamometer and is a shabbiness is not right if the bowler does not company Turnicidae. sent12: there exists something such that it secretes electrodynamometer. sent13: either something companies Amharic or it is a shabbiness or both. sent14: the daisy companies Amharic if the bowler navigates. sent15: the androgen does secrete payola.
either something is a rabbi or it is a Mullah or both.
$hypothesis$ = the connoisseur is a shabbiness. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that that something is not a shabbiness is not wrong if the fact that it does not secrete electrodynamometer and it is a kind of a shabbiness is wrong is correct. sent2: if there exists something such that it companies Amharic and/or is a icecream then the connoisseur is a vocabulary. sent3: the possession is not dramatic. sent4: the fact that the lander does secrete Comte but it is not theological is correct if something is not dramatic. sent5: if the lander secretes Comte and is not theological the Barber is not a vocabulary. sent6: the fact that the bowler is a rabbi is right if it does secrete electrodynamometer. sent7: something does company Turnicidae. sent8: if the connoisseur is a vocabulary then it is a kind of a shabbiness. sent9: if that the archbishopric is not a icecream is not incorrect the daisy does not company Amharic. sent10: something does secrete electrodynamometer and companies Turnicidae. sent11: the fact that the connoisseur does not secrete electrodynamometer and is a shabbiness is not right if the bowler does not company Turnicidae. sent12: there exists something such that it secretes electrodynamometer. sent13: either something companies Amharic or it is a shabbiness or both. sent14: the daisy companies Amharic if the bowler navigates. sent15: the androgen does secrete payola. ; $proof$ = 
__UNKNOWN__