the propanediol deafens elution and is vice-presidential.
sent1: either something does capture mistreatment or it is distinguishable or both if it does not deafen elution. sent2: there exists something such that it is not excitable. sent3: that the circlet does deafen elution and is not vice-presidential is not true if it is not a cuneiform. sent4: that the wreckage is not unexcitable or is not a wheedler or both is false if it is a Turfan. sent5: the propanediol is distinguishable if that the irradiation is fatal and/or it does not capture mistreatment is not correct. sent6: if the fact that the circlet unscrews disa and it is not non-cuneiform is wrong it is not a kind of a non-cuneiform. sent7: something deafens elution if it is distinguishable. sent8: the fact that the irradiation is not catachrestic and is unexcitable is not correct if that the propanediol is not fatal is not wrong. sent9: if the irradiation is catachrestic the fact that it is not nonfatal and/or does not capture mistreatment is wrong. sent10: if something is distinguishable it is not fatal. sent11: if that something is non-catachrestic and unexcitable is not correct then it does not read eclair. sent12: the irradiation does capture mistreatment if it is catachrestic. sent13: the fact that the irradiation is not unexcitable and it is not catachrestic is false if there is something such that it is unexcitable. sent14: if the fact that the fact that either the irradiation is not nonfatal or it captures mistreatment or both is incorrect is right the propanediol is distinguishable. sent15: the fact that the circlet does unscrew disa and it is not non-cuneiform does not hold. sent16: the irradiation is not unexcitable. sent17: the irradiation captures mistreatment. sent18: the propanediol is nonfatal if that the circlet is nonfatal is correct. sent19: that something does deafen elution and it is vice-presidential is not correct if it is not unexcitable.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the irradiation is not catachrestic.; sent16 & assump1 -> int1: the irradiation is not unexcitable and is not catachrestic.; sent2 & sent13 -> int2: that the irradiation is not unexcitable and not catachrestic does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the irradiation is catachrestic.; int4 & sent9 -> int5: the fact that either the irradiation is not nonfatal or it does not capture mistreatment or both is not true.; int5 & sent5 -> int6: the propanediol is distinguishable.; sent7 -> int7: the propanediol deafens elution if it is distinguishable.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the propanediol does deafen elution.;
the irradiation does not read eclair.
sent11 -> int9: the irradiation does not read eclair if that it is not catachrestic and it is unexcitable is not right.; sent1 -> int10: either the circlet does capture mistreatment or it is distinguishable or both if it does not deafen elution.; sent6 & sent15 -> int11: the circlet is not a cuneiform.; sent3 & int11 -> int12: that the circlet does deafen elution and is not vice-presidential is false.; sent10 -> int13: if the circlet is distinguishable it is nonfatal.;
$hypothesis$ = the propanediol deafens elution and is vice-presidential. ; $context$ = sent1: either something does capture mistreatment or it is distinguishable or both if it does not deafen elution. sent2: there exists something such that it is not excitable. sent3: that the circlet does deafen elution and is not vice-presidential is not true if it is not a cuneiform. sent4: that the wreckage is not unexcitable or is not a wheedler or both is false if it is a Turfan. sent5: the propanediol is distinguishable if that the irradiation is fatal and/or it does not capture mistreatment is not correct. sent6: if the fact that the circlet unscrews disa and it is not non-cuneiform is wrong it is not a kind of a non-cuneiform. sent7: something deafens elution if it is distinguishable. sent8: the fact that the irradiation is not catachrestic and is unexcitable is not correct if that the propanediol is not fatal is not wrong. sent9: if the irradiation is catachrestic the fact that it is not nonfatal and/or does not capture mistreatment is wrong. sent10: if something is distinguishable it is not fatal. sent11: if that something is non-catachrestic and unexcitable is not correct then it does not read eclair. sent12: the irradiation does capture mistreatment if it is catachrestic. sent13: the fact that the irradiation is not unexcitable and it is not catachrestic is false if there is something such that it is unexcitable. sent14: if the fact that the fact that either the irradiation is not nonfatal or it captures mistreatment or both is incorrect is right the propanediol is distinguishable. sent15: the fact that the circlet does unscrew disa and it is not non-cuneiform does not hold. sent16: the irradiation is not unexcitable. sent17: the irradiation captures mistreatment. sent18: the propanediol is nonfatal if that the circlet is nonfatal is correct. sent19: that something does deafen elution and it is vice-presidential is not correct if it is not unexcitable. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the irradiation is not catachrestic.; sent16 & assump1 -> int1: the irradiation is not unexcitable and is not catachrestic.; sent2 & sent13 -> int2: that the irradiation is not unexcitable and not catachrestic does not hold.; int1 & int2 -> int3: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int3 -> int4: the irradiation is catachrestic.; int4 & sent9 -> int5: the fact that either the irradiation is not nonfatal or it does not capture mistreatment or both is not true.; int5 & sent5 -> int6: the propanediol is distinguishable.; sent7 -> int7: the propanediol deafens elution if it is distinguishable.; int6 & int7 -> int8: the propanediol does deafen elution.; __UNKNOWN__