there exists something such that if it is not bromidic the fact that it is both not a kennel and inadvisable is not right.
sent1: there is something such that if that it is not bromidic is not false then that it does kennel and it is inadvisable is wrong. sent2: that the holdover is both not a kennel and inadvisable is incorrect if it is not bromidic. sent3: that the holdover is a kennel and it is inadvisable does not hold if it is not bromidic. sent4: there is something such that if the fact that it is bromidic is true then the fact that it does not kennel and it is inadvisable does not hold. sent5: there is something such that if it is not a mud that it does not prime Juno and is a underseller does not hold. sent6: that that the holdover does not kennel but it is inadvisable hold is not correct if it is bromidic. sent7: there is something such that if it does not gate thesis the fact that it does not achromatize flocculation and it is a sympatry is not right. sent8: that that the goosefoot does not gate thesis and gates Tatum is incorrect is not wrong if it is not a kind of an attractiveness. sent9: if the holdover is not bromidic it is not a kind of a kennel and it is inadvisable. sent10: there is something such that if it is not enthusiastic then that it does not gate loanword and is a Dacrydium does not hold. sent11: the fact that there exists something such that if that it is not bromidic hold then it does not kennel and is inadvisable is not false. sent12: the fact that something is not a mud but it is bromidic does not hold if it does not wrest writ.
sent2 -> hypothesis;
if the holdover does not wrest writ then that it does not mud and is bromidic does not hold.
sent12 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is not bromidic the fact that it is both not a kennel and inadvisable is not right. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that if that it is not bromidic is not false then that it does kennel and it is inadvisable is wrong. sent2: that the holdover is both not a kennel and inadvisable is incorrect if it is not bromidic. sent3: that the holdover is a kennel and it is inadvisable does not hold if it is not bromidic. sent4: there is something such that if the fact that it is bromidic is true then the fact that it does not kennel and it is inadvisable does not hold. sent5: there is something such that if it is not a mud that it does not prime Juno and is a underseller does not hold. sent6: that that the holdover does not kennel but it is inadvisable hold is not correct if it is bromidic. sent7: there is something such that if it does not gate thesis the fact that it does not achromatize flocculation and it is a sympatry is not right. sent8: that that the goosefoot does not gate thesis and gates Tatum is incorrect is not wrong if it is not a kind of an attractiveness. sent9: if the holdover is not bromidic it is not a kind of a kennel and it is inadvisable. sent10: there is something such that if it is not enthusiastic then that it does not gate loanword and is a Dacrydium does not hold. sent11: the fact that there exists something such that if that it is not bromidic hold then it does not kennel and is inadvisable is not false. sent12: the fact that something is not a mud but it is bromidic does not hold if it does not wrest writ. ; $proof$ = 
sent2 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__