that the resort does not talk Milan and is traceable is false.
sent1: a scallion does talk sundowner. sent2: the fact that that the nomogram talks Milan and/or it is not a kind of a Romance is not correct is not wrong. sent3: that the resort does talk Milan and it is traceable is not right if it does not fool firebrick. sent4: that something does not talk Milan and is traceable is incorrect if it does not fool firebrick. sent5: if something does not fool firebrick then the fact that it talks Milan and is traceable is wrong. sent6: the resort is a corporatist if the Argonaut does not fool firebrick. sent7: the Argonaut is a scallion. sent8: the fact that the nostrum does talk Milan and it is an okra does not hold. sent9: if that the Argonaut either is a kind of an okra or is ponderable or both does not hold then it does not fool firebrick. sent10: that the resort does talk Milan and is traceable is false. sent11: if something is not imponderable then it is expendable. sent12: the resort is a corporatist. sent13: if something is expendable then it does not talk sundowner. sent14: if the Argonaut does not fool firebrick then the resort does not fool firebrick and is a corporatist.
sent11 -> int1: if that the Argonaut is not a kind of an imponderable is true then it is expendable.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that either the Argonaut is an okra or it is not an imponderable or both.; sent13 -> int2: if the Argonaut is expendable then it does not talk sundowner.; sent1 -> int3: if the Argonaut is a kind of a scallion then it does talk sundowner.; int3 & sent7 -> int4: the Argonaut talks sundowner.; sent4 -> int5: the fact that the resort does not talk Milan and is traceable is incorrect if it does not fool firebrick.;
that the resort does not talk Milan and is traceable is not false.
sent8 -> int6: there is something such that that it talks Milan and it is an okra does not hold.;
$hypothesis$ = that the resort does not talk Milan and is traceable is false. ; $context$ = sent1: a scallion does talk sundowner. sent2: the fact that that the nomogram talks Milan and/or it is not a kind of a Romance is not correct is not wrong. sent3: that the resort does talk Milan and it is traceable is not right if it does not fool firebrick. sent4: that something does not talk Milan and is traceable is incorrect if it does not fool firebrick. sent5: if something does not fool firebrick then the fact that it talks Milan and is traceable is wrong. sent6: the resort is a corporatist if the Argonaut does not fool firebrick. sent7: the Argonaut is a scallion. sent8: the fact that the nostrum does talk Milan and it is an okra does not hold. sent9: if that the Argonaut either is a kind of an okra or is ponderable or both does not hold then it does not fool firebrick. sent10: that the resort does talk Milan and is traceable is false. sent11: if something is not imponderable then it is expendable. sent12: the resort is a corporatist. sent13: if something is expendable then it does not talk sundowner. sent14: if the Argonaut does not fool firebrick then the resort does not fool firebrick and is a corporatist. ; $proof$ = 
sent11 -> int1: if that the Argonaut is not a kind of an imponderable is true then it is expendable.; void -> assump1: Let's assume that either the Argonaut is an okra or it is not an imponderable or both.; sent13 -> int2: if the Argonaut is expendable then it does not talk sundowner.; sent1 -> int3: if the Argonaut is a kind of a scallion then it does talk sundowner.; int3 & sent7 -> int4: the Argonaut talks sundowner.; sent4 -> int5: the fact that the resort does not talk Milan and is traceable is incorrect if it does not fool firebrick.; __UNKNOWN__