the Angolese is a kind of a perpendicular.
sent1: the Angolese is not a perpendicular if the sand is not perpendicular and not cybernetic. sent2: the fact that the mattock is not a kind of a fuselage but it is a megalomaniac is wrong. sent3: that the fact that the liberal does not vomit and is not macrocosmic is not true hold if the goldenseal is not macrocosmic. sent4: if something is a kind of a zap then the fact that it is a fuselage and it is not participial is not true. sent5: the here is not a zap if there is something such that that either it is cybernetic or it is not participial or both is not right. sent6: if that the liberal does not vomit and it is not macrocosmic is not true then the Angolese is a kind of a megalomaniac. sent7: if that the here zaps is not right that that the goldenseal is not a zaps and it is non-rotational is not incorrect does not hold. sent8: the sand is participial. sent9: something is a perpendicular if it is a megalomaniac. sent10: if that something is not a kind of a zap and is not rotational does not hold it is not macrocosmic. sent11: there exists something such that that it is a receptionist and/or not hydrokinetic is wrong. sent12: something that is not a kind of a fuselage is both not a perpendicular and not cybernetic. sent13: that the sand is cybernetic and/or it is not participial does not hold if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a fuselage. sent14: the fact that the liberal is rotational and is not a vomit is not correct.
sent10 -> int1: the goldenseal is not macrocosmic if the fact that it is not a zap and it is not rotational is incorrect.; sent9 -> int2: the Angolese is perpendicular if it is a megalomaniac.;
the Angolese is not a kind of a perpendicular.
sent12 -> int3: if the sand is not a fuselage it is both not perpendicular and not cybernetic.; sent4 -> int4: the fact that the here is both a fuselage and not participial is false if it zaps.;
$hypothesis$ = the Angolese is a kind of a perpendicular. ; $context$ = sent1: the Angolese is not a perpendicular if the sand is not perpendicular and not cybernetic. sent2: the fact that the mattock is not a kind of a fuselage but it is a megalomaniac is wrong. sent3: that the fact that the liberal does not vomit and is not macrocosmic is not true hold if the goldenseal is not macrocosmic. sent4: if something is a kind of a zap then the fact that it is a fuselage and it is not participial is not true. sent5: the here is not a zap if there is something such that that either it is cybernetic or it is not participial or both is not right. sent6: if that the liberal does not vomit and it is not macrocosmic is not true then the Angolese is a kind of a megalomaniac. sent7: if that the here zaps is not right that that the goldenseal is not a zaps and it is non-rotational is not incorrect does not hold. sent8: the sand is participial. sent9: something is a perpendicular if it is a megalomaniac. sent10: if that something is not a kind of a zap and is not rotational does not hold it is not macrocosmic. sent11: there exists something such that that it is a receptionist and/or not hydrokinetic is wrong. sent12: something that is not a kind of a fuselage is both not a perpendicular and not cybernetic. sent13: that the sand is cybernetic and/or it is not participial does not hold if there exists something such that it is not a kind of a fuselage. sent14: the fact that the liberal is rotational and is not a vomit is not correct. ; $proof$ = 
sent10 -> int1: the goldenseal is not macrocosmic if the fact that it is not a zap and it is not rotational is incorrect.; sent9 -> int2: the Angolese is perpendicular if it is a megalomaniac.; __UNKNOWN__