the go-getter is telocentric and is not a firestone.
sent1: if the Shetland is Slovakian then the go-getter is not a firestone. sent2: something that is not Slovakian is guilty and not pleochroic. sent3: the go-getter is a firestone that is telocentric if it is not infinite. sent4: the go-getter is not a firestone. sent5: something is not a kind of a firestone if that it is a hunger that dings worry does not hold. sent6: the amphibolite does not ding go-getter. sent7: the fact that the amphibolite is Slovakian is not right. sent8: if the Shetland is Slovakian then the go-getter is telocentric but it is not a firestone. sent9: if there exists something such that it does hunger then the go-getter is not Slovakian. sent10: that the Shetland is not a kind of a hunger is true if the go-getter is a firestone. sent11: if the fact that the amphibolite is not a hunger is right the Shetland is Slovakian. sent12: the fact that the amphibolite is a kind of a stew and dings worry does not hold. sent13: if something does not ding worry then it is not a hunger. sent14: if something does not ding hee-haw then it is a hunger and it is infinite. sent15: if the amphibolite does not ding worry then it is not a kind of a hunger. sent16: if that the go-getter does stew and is telocentric is false it is not a hunger. sent17: if something is not Slovakian then that it is telocentric and is not a firestone does not hold.
the amphibolite is guilty and not pleochroic.
sent2 -> int1: if the amphibolite is not Slovakian it is guilty but not pleochroic.;
$hypothesis$ = the go-getter is telocentric and is not a firestone. ; $context$ = sent1: if the Shetland is Slovakian then the go-getter is not a firestone. sent2: something that is not Slovakian is guilty and not pleochroic. sent3: the go-getter is a firestone that is telocentric if it is not infinite. sent4: the go-getter is not a firestone. sent5: something is not a kind of a firestone if that it is a hunger that dings worry does not hold. sent6: the amphibolite does not ding go-getter. sent7: the fact that the amphibolite is Slovakian is not right. sent8: if the Shetland is Slovakian then the go-getter is telocentric but it is not a firestone. sent9: if there exists something such that it does hunger then the go-getter is not Slovakian. sent10: that the Shetland is not a kind of a hunger is true if the go-getter is a firestone. sent11: if the fact that the amphibolite is not a hunger is right the Shetland is Slovakian. sent12: the fact that the amphibolite is a kind of a stew and dings worry does not hold. sent13: if something does not ding worry then it is not a hunger. sent14: if something does not ding hee-haw then it is a hunger and it is infinite. sent15: if the amphibolite does not ding worry then it is not a kind of a hunger. sent16: if that the go-getter does stew and is telocentric is false it is not a hunger. sent17: if something is not Slovakian then that it is telocentric and is not a firestone does not hold. ; $proof$ = 
__UNKNOWN__