the phenol is a kind of regressive thing that is not non-close.
sent1: if the produce vexes Argive then the fact that the seedsman does not vex chronology and does unsaddle is not incorrect. sent2: the phenol is regressive and it closes if it is not inarticulate. sent3: there is something such that the fact that it is non-agrologic but not Zairean is false. sent4: the phenol is regressive if it is not inarticulate. sent5: if something does vex chronology and/or does vex Argive it is not inarticulate. sent6: the produce does vex Argive if the fact that the Argive does not vex Argive and it is not axile is not true. sent7: if something that is a kind of a anchorite unsaddles then the phenol vexes chronology. sent8: something does unsaddle. sent9: the seedsman is a anchorite if there exists something such that the fact that it is both non-agrologic and non-Zairean is incorrect. sent10: the produce is axile. sent11: if something is not a kind of a anchorite the fact that it is not non-regressive but close is not correct.
sent3 & sent9 -> int1: the seedsman is a anchorite.; sent5 -> int2: if the phenol does vex chronology and/or it does vex Argive it is not inarticulate.;
that the phenol is both regressive and close is not correct.
sent11 -> int3: if the phenol is not a anchorite then that it is regressive and close does not hold.;
$hypothesis$ = the phenol is a kind of regressive thing that is not non-close. ; $context$ = sent1: if the produce vexes Argive then the fact that the seedsman does not vex chronology and does unsaddle is not incorrect. sent2: the phenol is regressive and it closes if it is not inarticulate. sent3: there is something such that the fact that it is non-agrologic but not Zairean is false. sent4: the phenol is regressive if it is not inarticulate. sent5: if something does vex chronology and/or does vex Argive it is not inarticulate. sent6: the produce does vex Argive if the fact that the Argive does not vex Argive and it is not axile is not true. sent7: if something that is a kind of a anchorite unsaddles then the phenol vexes chronology. sent8: something does unsaddle. sent9: the seedsman is a anchorite if there exists something such that the fact that it is both non-agrologic and non-Zairean is incorrect. sent10: the produce is axile. sent11: if something is not a kind of a anchorite the fact that it is not non-regressive but close is not correct. ; $proof$ = 
sent3 & sent9 -> int1: the seedsman is a anchorite.; sent5 -> int2: if the phenol does vex chronology and/or it does vex Argive it is not inarticulate.; __UNKNOWN__