the kylix does not litigate.
sent1: the lovage is not a expertness if there exists something such that it equilibrates and is not a nothings. sent2: if the chrism is not a kind of a rangefinder but it is a kind of a Post then the fact that the florist is not a rangefinder is correct. sent3: if the fact that something is a subdeacon and lingers is not true then it is not a nothings. sent4: the pepper is a subdeacon and a Filipino if the florist is not a rangefinder. sent5: if the fact that the kylix litigates is not wrong it does not equilibrate and it is not a nothings. sent6: the kylix does not equilibrate. sent7: if that something does linger and it is a expertness is false it is not a kind of a Filipino. sent8: the chrism is not a rangefinder and is a Post. sent9: if something does not linger then it does litigate and is a kind of a expertness. sent10: if the fact that something does not equilibrate and is not a kind of a nothings is right then the lovage is not a kind of a expertness.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the kylix litigates.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the kylix does not equilibrate and it is not a nothings.; int1 -> int2: something does not equilibrate and it is not a nothings.; int2 & sent10 -> int3: the lovage is not a expertness.; sent7 -> int4: if that the pepper lingers and is a expertness does not hold it is non-Filipino.; sent2 & sent8 -> int5: that the florist is not a rangefinder hold.; sent4 & int5 -> int6: the pepper is a subdeacon and it is Filipino.; int6 -> int7: the pepper is Filipino.;
the kylix does litigate.
sent9 -> int8: if the kylix does not linger it litigates and it is a expertness.;
$hypothesis$ = the kylix does not litigate. ; $context$ = sent1: the lovage is not a expertness if there exists something such that it equilibrates and is not a nothings. sent2: if the chrism is not a kind of a rangefinder but it is a kind of a Post then the fact that the florist is not a rangefinder is correct. sent3: if the fact that something is a subdeacon and lingers is not true then it is not a nothings. sent4: the pepper is a subdeacon and a Filipino if the florist is not a rangefinder. sent5: if the fact that the kylix litigates is not wrong it does not equilibrate and it is not a nothings. sent6: the kylix does not equilibrate. sent7: if that something does linger and it is a expertness is false it is not a kind of a Filipino. sent8: the chrism is not a rangefinder and is a Post. sent9: if something does not linger then it does litigate and is a kind of a expertness. sent10: if the fact that something does not equilibrate and is not a kind of a nothings is right then the lovage is not a kind of a expertness. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the kylix litigates.; sent5 & assump1 -> int1: the kylix does not equilibrate and it is not a nothings.; int1 -> int2: something does not equilibrate and it is not a nothings.; int2 & sent10 -> int3: the lovage is not a expertness.; sent7 -> int4: if that the pepper lingers and is a expertness does not hold it is non-Filipino.; sent2 & sent8 -> int5: that the florist is not a rangefinder hold.; sent4 & int5 -> int6: the pepper is a subdeacon and it is Filipino.; int6 -> int7: the pepper is Filipino.; __UNKNOWN__