that the radial is jurisprudential and does not name abstractness does not hold.
sent1: the Angel is not jurisprudential if the justiciar does not name mod or is a Thuja or both. sent2: the services is an admiration. sent3: the fact that the radial is jurisprudential but it does not name abstractness is incorrect if the Angel is not jurisprudential. sent4: if the services is a Thuja that does name mod then the radial is not an admiration. sent5: the services is a Thuja if the justiciar is both not a retailer and a catfish. sent6: the justiciar does not name mod or is a kind of a Thuja or both if the services is not a Thuja. sent7: if something is not an admiration then it is jurisprudential and it does not name abstractness. sent8: if something is not appositional it is not a retailer and it is a catfish.
the radial is jurisprudential but it does not name abstractness.
sent7 -> int1: the radial is jurisprudential and does not name abstractness if it is not a kind of an admiration.; sent8 -> int2: if the fact that the justiciar is not appositional is correct it is not a kind of a retailer and it is a catfish.;
$hypothesis$ = that the radial is jurisprudential and does not name abstractness does not hold. ; $context$ = sent1: the Angel is not jurisprudential if the justiciar does not name mod or is a Thuja or both. sent2: the services is an admiration. sent3: the fact that the radial is jurisprudential but it does not name abstractness is incorrect if the Angel is not jurisprudential. sent4: if the services is a Thuja that does name mod then the radial is not an admiration. sent5: the services is a Thuja if the justiciar is both not a retailer and a catfish. sent6: the justiciar does not name mod or is a kind of a Thuja or both if the services is not a Thuja. sent7: if something is not an admiration then it is jurisprudential and it does not name abstractness. sent8: if something is not appositional it is not a retailer and it is a catfish. ; $proof$ = 
__UNKNOWN__