the cloudiness does determine jagua.
sent1: if there is something such that it is either not calycular or not smokeless or both the motley does not limp. sent2: the chap is not calycular and/or is not a kind of a young if there exists something such that it is a kind of a fortification. sent3: the princess does limp and it is a kind of a fortification. sent4: there exists something such that it does determine jagua. sent5: that that the chap does not determine jagua and it is not young is wrong is not wrong. sent6: if something does not determine motley that it is a young and it is not calycular is not true. sent7: something does not limp but it determines jagua if it is not a fortification. sent8: the fact that the motley is not smokeless and it is not a kind of a Danish is not right if the ascidian does not determine motley. sent9: the cloudiness does not determine jagua if that the motley is both non-smokeless and not Danish does not hold. sent10: if there is something such that it is not calycular and/or it is not a kind of a young then the fact that the ascidian does not determine motley is true.
sent3 -> int1: the princess is a fortification.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that that it is a fortification is correct.; int2 & sent2 -> int3: the chap is not calycular and/or it is not a young.; int3 -> int4: there exists something such that it is not calycular and/or it is not a young.; int4 & sent10 -> int5: that the ascidian does not determine motley is not incorrect.; sent8 & int5 -> int6: the fact that the motley is not smokeless and it is not a kind of a Danish does not hold.; sent9 & int6 -> hypothesis;
the cloudiness determines jagua.
sent7 -> int7: the cloudiness does not limp but it determines jagua if it is not a fortification.; sent6 -> int8: the fact that the princess is a kind of young thing that is non-calycular is wrong if it does not determine motley.;
$hypothesis$ = the cloudiness does determine jagua. ; $context$ = sent1: if there is something such that it is either not calycular or not smokeless or both the motley does not limp. sent2: the chap is not calycular and/or is not a kind of a young if there exists something such that it is a kind of a fortification. sent3: the princess does limp and it is a kind of a fortification. sent4: there exists something such that it does determine jagua. sent5: that that the chap does not determine jagua and it is not young is wrong is not wrong. sent6: if something does not determine motley that it is a young and it is not calycular is not true. sent7: something does not limp but it determines jagua if it is not a fortification. sent8: the fact that the motley is not smokeless and it is not a kind of a Danish is not right if the ascidian does not determine motley. sent9: the cloudiness does not determine jagua if that the motley is both non-smokeless and not Danish does not hold. sent10: if there is something such that it is not calycular and/or it is not a kind of a young then the fact that the ascidian does not determine motley is true. ; $proof$ = 
sent3 -> int1: the princess is a fortification.; int1 -> int2: there is something such that that it is a fortification is correct.; int2 & sent2 -> int3: the chap is not calycular and/or it is not a young.; int3 -> int4: there exists something such that it is not calycular and/or it is not a young.; int4 & sent10 -> int5: that the ascidian does not determine motley is not incorrect.; sent8 & int5 -> int6: the fact that the motley is not smokeless and it is not a kind of a Danish does not hold.; sent9 & int6 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__