the lumpfish does not conventionalize leaf.
sent1: the shogun is apiarian and not subhuman if that it tamps grille is not false. sent2: the forefather is not a kind of a one-fourth. sent3: the forefather is a Kwell. sent4: the lumpfish does not conventionalize leaf if the misanthrope is epiphytic thing that is a Herbert. sent5: the water-mint does bilk if it is epiphytic. sent6: the water-mint does conventionalize A-list but it does not bilk if the oeuvre is not autodidactic. sent7: the misanthrope tamps grille. sent8: the fact that something is not epiphytic and is not a kind of a Herbert is not true if it is not a Kwell. sent9: if something conventionalizes A-list and it tamps grille it is not subhuman. sent10: the fact that the oeuvre does not bilk is right if the forefather is a Kwell. sent11: if the fact that something is epiphytic is not wrong it does not bilk. sent12: the misanthrope is not non-epiphytic if the oeuvre does not bilk and it is not subhuman. sent13: The A-list conventionalizes oeuvre. sent14: the fact that the water-mint is autodidactic but it is not a one-fourth does not hold. sent15: the lumpfish does tamp grille if the oeuvre conventionalizes A-list. sent16: the oeuvre is subhuman and/or it does conventionalize A-list if the water-mint does not bilk. sent17: the oeuvre does not conventionalize leaf but it does tamp grille if the fact that the water-mint conventionalizes A-list is true. sent18: the water-mint is autodidactic and is not a kind of a one-fourth if the oeuvre does not tamp grille. sent19: the water-mint is autodidactic if the oeuvre does not tamp grille. sent20: the shogun does tamp grille if the oeuvre does not bilk and does not tamp grille. sent21: the water-mint is a kind of autodidactic thing that does not conventionalize leaf. sent22: the water-mint is autodidactic. sent23: if the oeuvre does not conventionalize leaf and does tamp grille then the lumpfish conventionalize leaf. sent24: if that the oeuvre is not a one-fourth is right the water-mint is subhuman and does not conventionalize A-list. sent25: the fact that the misanthrope is not subhuman hold. sent26: everything is a Herbert. sent27: if that the oeuvre is subhuman hold that the lumpfish does tamp grille is not incorrect. sent28: if the water-mint is subhuman the oeuvre conventionalizes A-list but it does not tamp grille.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the oeuvre does not tamp grille hold.; sent18 & assump1 -> int1: the water-mint is both autodidactic and not a one-fourth.; int1 & sent14 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the oeuvre tamps grille.; sent9 -> int4: if the oeuvre conventionalizes A-list and tamps grille then it is not subhuman.; sent10 & sent3 -> int5: the oeuvre does not bilk.; sent26 -> int6: the misanthrope is a Herbert.;
the lumpfish conventionalizes leaf.
$hypothesis$ = the lumpfish does not conventionalize leaf. ; $context$ = sent1: the shogun is apiarian and not subhuman if that it tamps grille is not false. sent2: the forefather is not a kind of a one-fourth. sent3: the forefather is a Kwell. sent4: the lumpfish does not conventionalize leaf if the misanthrope is epiphytic thing that is a Herbert. sent5: the water-mint does bilk if it is epiphytic. sent6: the water-mint does conventionalize A-list but it does not bilk if the oeuvre is not autodidactic. sent7: the misanthrope tamps grille. sent8: the fact that something is not epiphytic and is not a kind of a Herbert is not true if it is not a Kwell. sent9: if something conventionalizes A-list and it tamps grille it is not subhuman. sent10: the fact that the oeuvre does not bilk is right if the forefather is a Kwell. sent11: if the fact that something is epiphytic is not wrong it does not bilk. sent12: the misanthrope is not non-epiphytic if the oeuvre does not bilk and it is not subhuman. sent13: The A-list conventionalizes oeuvre. sent14: the fact that the water-mint is autodidactic but it is not a one-fourth does not hold. sent15: the lumpfish does tamp grille if the oeuvre conventionalizes A-list. sent16: the oeuvre is subhuman and/or it does conventionalize A-list if the water-mint does not bilk. sent17: the oeuvre does not conventionalize leaf but it does tamp grille if the fact that the water-mint conventionalizes A-list is true. sent18: the water-mint is autodidactic and is not a kind of a one-fourth if the oeuvre does not tamp grille. sent19: the water-mint is autodidactic if the oeuvre does not tamp grille. sent20: the shogun does tamp grille if the oeuvre does not bilk and does not tamp grille. sent21: the water-mint is a kind of autodidactic thing that does not conventionalize leaf. sent22: the water-mint is autodidactic. sent23: if the oeuvre does not conventionalize leaf and does tamp grille then the lumpfish conventionalize leaf. sent24: if that the oeuvre is not a one-fourth is right the water-mint is subhuman and does not conventionalize A-list. sent25: the fact that the misanthrope is not subhuman hold. sent26: everything is a Herbert. sent27: if that the oeuvre is subhuman hold that the lumpfish does tamp grille is not incorrect. sent28: if the water-mint is subhuman the oeuvre conventionalizes A-list but it does not tamp grille. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that that the oeuvre does not tamp grille hold.; sent18 & assump1 -> int1: the water-mint is both autodidactic and not a one-fourth.; int1 & sent14 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump1] & int2 -> int3: the oeuvre tamps grille.; sent9 -> int4: if the oeuvre conventionalizes A-list and tamps grille then it is not subhuman.; sent10 & sent3 -> int5: the oeuvre does not bilk.; sent26 -> int6: the misanthrope is a Herbert.; __UNKNOWN__