the attrition is both wilding and Calvinist.
sent1: there exists something such that it is pectineal. sent2: that the metic is not a schoolmaster but it is an icebreaker is not true if there exists something such that it is a aitchbone. sent3: that the fact that the metic is both a schoolmaster and an icebreaker does not hold is not false. sent4: that the metic is a kind of a schoolmaster and it is a kind of a wilding is incorrect if there exists something such that it is an icebreaker. sent5: the fact that the attrition is not a wilding and is Calvinist does not hold if there is something such that it is a kind of an icebreaker. sent6: the attrition is Calvinist if that the fact that the metic is not a kind of a schoolmaster but it is an icebreaker is correct is wrong. sent7: if the attrition is a kind of a schoolmaster the metic is a wilding. sent8: the fact that the attrition is not a wilding but it is an icebreaker is not true. sent9: something is a aitchbone. sent10: the attrition is a kind of a wilding. sent11: the attrition is semiotic. sent12: the attrition is bicameral. sent13: the metic is a wilding. sent14: the fact that the attrition is both a Calvinist and an icebreaker is not true if there exists something such that it is a schoolmaster. sent15: the fact that the attrition is a schoolmaster and Calvinist is not correct. sent16: there are Calvinist things. sent17: the fact that the metic is both not a wilding and a schoolmaster is incorrect.
sent9 & sent2 -> int1: that the metic is not a schoolmaster and is a kind of an icebreaker does not hold.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the fact that the attrition is a Calvinist hold.; int2 & sent10 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the attrition is both wilding and Calvinist. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that it is pectineal. sent2: that the metic is not a schoolmaster but it is an icebreaker is not true if there exists something such that it is a aitchbone. sent3: that the fact that the metic is both a schoolmaster and an icebreaker does not hold is not false. sent4: that the metic is a kind of a schoolmaster and it is a kind of a wilding is incorrect if there exists something such that it is an icebreaker. sent5: the fact that the attrition is not a wilding and is Calvinist does not hold if there is something such that it is a kind of an icebreaker. sent6: the attrition is Calvinist if that the fact that the metic is not a kind of a schoolmaster but it is an icebreaker is correct is wrong. sent7: if the attrition is a kind of a schoolmaster the metic is a wilding. sent8: the fact that the attrition is not a wilding but it is an icebreaker is not true. sent9: something is a aitchbone. sent10: the attrition is a kind of a wilding. sent11: the attrition is semiotic. sent12: the attrition is bicameral. sent13: the metic is a wilding. sent14: the fact that the attrition is both a Calvinist and an icebreaker is not true if there exists something such that it is a schoolmaster. sent15: the fact that the attrition is a schoolmaster and Calvinist is not correct. sent16: there are Calvinist things. sent17: the fact that the metic is both not a wilding and a schoolmaster is incorrect. ; $proof$ = 
sent9 & sent2 -> int1: that the metic is not a schoolmaster and is a kind of an icebreaker does not hold.; int1 & sent6 -> int2: the fact that the attrition is a Calvinist hold.; int2 & sent10 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__