if the region is catechetical the Minnesotan Frenches rationing or is not ctenoid or both.
sent1: if the region is both not funerary and a porter then that it is catechetical is right. sent2: if there is something such that it is not a porter the dribble is symptomatic. sent3: if the dribble is symptomatic the Minnesotan does French rationing or is ctenoid or both. sent4: the region Frenches rationing if there is something such that that it is non-ctenoid and funerary is not correct. sent5: the Minnesotan is ctenoid or is funerary or both if that the region does French rationing is correct. sent6: the region porters. sent7: that the region is a porter is not incorrect if something Frenches rationing. sent8: the dribble is symptomatic if there exists something such that the fact that it is not funerary but a porter does not hold. sent9: there exists something such that it is not funerary and it is a porter. sent10: the region is not catechetical if it is both not funerary and a porter. sent11: if the region is catechetical then the Minnesotan does French rationing and/or it is ctenoid. sent12: there is something such that the fact that it is funerary thing that does porter is not right. sent13: the Minnesotan does French rationing or it is ctenoid or both. sent14: something is symptomatic and is catechetical if the fact that it does not French rationing is correct.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the region is catechetical.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the region is non-funerary a porter.; sent10 & assump2 -> int1: the region is not catechetical.; assump1 & int1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int2 -> int3: that the region is non-funerary a porter is not right.; int3 -> int4: there exists something such that that it is a kind of non-funerary a porter does not hold.; int4 & sent8 -> int5: the dribble is symptomatic.;
there is something such that the fact that it is not a kind of a infliximab and it grounds is not right.
sent14 -> int6: the dribble is a kind of symptomatic thing that is catechetical if it does not French rationing.;
$hypothesis$ = if the region is catechetical the Minnesotan Frenches rationing or is not ctenoid or both. ; $context$ = sent1: if the region is both not funerary and a porter then that it is catechetical is right. sent2: if there is something such that it is not a porter the dribble is symptomatic. sent3: if the dribble is symptomatic the Minnesotan does French rationing or is ctenoid or both. sent4: the region Frenches rationing if there is something such that that it is non-ctenoid and funerary is not correct. sent5: the Minnesotan is ctenoid or is funerary or both if that the region does French rationing is correct. sent6: the region porters. sent7: that the region is a porter is not incorrect if something Frenches rationing. sent8: the dribble is symptomatic if there exists something such that the fact that it is not funerary but a porter does not hold. sent9: there exists something such that it is not funerary and it is a porter. sent10: the region is not catechetical if it is both not funerary and a porter. sent11: if the region is catechetical then the Minnesotan does French rationing and/or it is ctenoid. sent12: there is something such that the fact that it is funerary thing that does porter is not right. sent13: the Minnesotan does French rationing or it is ctenoid or both. sent14: something is symptomatic and is catechetical if the fact that it does not French rationing is correct. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the region is catechetical.; void -> assump2: Let's assume that the region is non-funerary a porter.; sent10 & assump2 -> int1: the region is not catechetical.; assump1 & int1 -> int2: this is contradiction.; [assump2] & int2 -> int3: that the region is non-funerary a porter is not right.; int3 -> int4: there exists something such that that it is a kind of non-funerary a porter does not hold.; int4 & sent8 -> int5: the dribble is symptomatic.; __UNKNOWN__