the fact that there is something such that if it is not a kind of a parole and it is not a kind of a bookishness then it is periodontics does not hold.
sent1: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a parole and is not a kind of a bookishness it is periodontics. sent2: the padlock is periodontics if it is not a parole but a bookishness. sent3: if the padlock is not a parole and it is not a bookishness then it is periodontics. sent4: something that does not contemn letter and is not periodontics is not a maniac. sent5: there is something such that if it is not a parole and is a bookishness then it is periodontics. sent6: the padlock is periodontics if it is both a parole and not a bookishness.
sent3 -> hypothesis;
if the padlock does not contemn letter and it is not periodontics it is a maniac.
sent4 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = the fact that there is something such that if it is not a kind of a parole and it is not a kind of a bookishness then it is periodontics does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is a kind of a parole and is not a kind of a bookishness it is periodontics. sent2: the padlock is periodontics if it is not a parole but a bookishness. sent3: if the padlock is not a parole and it is not a bookishness then it is periodontics. sent4: something that does not contemn letter and is not periodontics is not a maniac. sent5: there is something such that if it is not a parole and is a bookishness then it is periodontics. sent6: the padlock is periodontics if it is both a parole and not a bookishness. ; $proof$ = 
sent3 -> hypothesis; __DISPROVED__