there exists something such that if it is not a sputter the fact that it is not an emeritus and it is not unacceptable is false.
sent1: that something is a kind of non-megaloblastic thing that is not an absolute is wrong if it is not unacceptable. sent2: there is something such that if it is not a sputter the fact that it is an emeritus and it is not unacceptable is not correct. sent3: the seaport is not an emeritus and it is not unacceptable if it is not a sputter. sent4: there is something such that if it does not sputter then it is not a kind of an emeritus and it is not unacceptable. sent5: the fact that the seaport is not a lapidary and does not include is true if it is not violent. sent6: the fact that that the glove is not a Gladstone and not a brochette hold is not correct if it is not an emeritus. sent7: there exists something such that if it is not a sputter the fact that it is both not an emeritus and unacceptable does not hold. sent8: that the seaport is an emeritus but not unacceptable is not right if it does not sputter. sent9: the fact that the seaport is both not an emeritus and acceptable is not correct if it is not a kind of a sputter. sent10: the fact that the seaport is not an emeritus and not unacceptable is false if it does sputter. sent11: the fact that something is not a kind of a hysterosalpingogram and it does not Frenchify disrespect is not true if that it is not a endomorph is correct. sent12: there is something such that if it does sputter then the fact that it is both not an emeritus and acceptable is wrong. sent13: the fact that the seaport does not mist and it is not a kind of a sputter is not correct if it is not a kind of a battue.
sent9 -> hypothesis;
there is something such that if the fact that it is not a kind of a endomorph is right that it is not a hysterosalpingogram and it does not Frenchify disrespect is wrong.
sent11 -> int1: if the fact that the links is not a endomorph hold then the fact that it is not a hysterosalpingogram and it does not Frenchify disrespect does not hold.; int1 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is not a sputter the fact that it is not an emeritus and it is not unacceptable is false. ; $context$ = sent1: that something is a kind of non-megaloblastic thing that is not an absolute is wrong if it is not unacceptable. sent2: there is something such that if it is not a sputter the fact that it is an emeritus and it is not unacceptable is not correct. sent3: the seaport is not an emeritus and it is not unacceptable if it is not a sputter. sent4: there is something such that if it does not sputter then it is not a kind of an emeritus and it is not unacceptable. sent5: the fact that the seaport is not a lapidary and does not include is true if it is not violent. sent6: the fact that that the glove is not a Gladstone and not a brochette hold is not correct if it is not an emeritus. sent7: there exists something such that if it is not a sputter the fact that it is both not an emeritus and unacceptable does not hold. sent8: that the seaport is an emeritus but not unacceptable is not right if it does not sputter. sent9: the fact that the seaport is both not an emeritus and acceptable is not correct if it is not a kind of a sputter. sent10: the fact that the seaport is not an emeritus and not unacceptable is false if it does sputter. sent11: the fact that something is not a kind of a hysterosalpingogram and it does not Frenchify disrespect is not true if that it is not a endomorph is correct. sent12: there is something such that if it does sputter then the fact that it is both not an emeritus and acceptable is wrong. sent13: the fact that the seaport does not mist and it is not a kind of a sputter is not correct if it is not a kind of a battue. ; $proof$ = 
sent9 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__