if the echinocactus is not equivocal then the concessionaire is not a kind of a Xenophon.
sent1: the fact that the East-sider is a raincoat and it is paternal is not correct if the ware is not arbitrary. sent2: if there is something such that it is a raincoat the concessionaire is not a bayou. sent3: there exists something such that it is not a raincoat and it is paternal. sent4: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a raincoat and it is paternal is false. sent5: the fact that the East-sider is not a kind of a raincoat but it is paternal is false if the ware is not arbitrary. sent6: the East-sider is not arbitrary if the ware is non-paternal. sent7: that the echinocactus is not a bayou is true. sent8: the fact that the East-sider is a raincoat and it is paternal is not correct. sent9: the concessionaire is not a bayou if there is something such that the fact that it is not a raincoat and it is paternal is false. sent10: the fact that the concessionaire is not a kind of a Xenophon is correct if the echinocactus is equivocal. sent11: a non-paternal thing is non-equivocal thing that is not arbitrary. sent12: if the fact that the concessionaire is not a bayou is true then it is a Xenophon. sent13: the concessionaire is a Xenophon if the echinocactus is not equivocal. sent14: if that the concessionaire is not a kind of a bayou hold then it is not a Xenophon.
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the ware is arbitrary.;
the prothrombin is not a Xenophon.
sent11 -> int1: if the ware is not paternal then it is not equivocal and it is not arbitrary.; sent7 -> int2: there exists something such that it is not a bayou.;
$hypothesis$ = if the echinocactus is not equivocal then the concessionaire is not a kind of a Xenophon. ; $context$ = sent1: the fact that the East-sider is a raincoat and it is paternal is not correct if the ware is not arbitrary. sent2: if there is something such that it is a raincoat the concessionaire is not a bayou. sent3: there exists something such that it is not a raincoat and it is paternal. sent4: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of a raincoat and it is paternal is false. sent5: the fact that the East-sider is not a kind of a raincoat but it is paternal is false if the ware is not arbitrary. sent6: the East-sider is not arbitrary if the ware is non-paternal. sent7: that the echinocactus is not a bayou is true. sent8: the fact that the East-sider is a raincoat and it is paternal is not correct. sent9: the concessionaire is not a bayou if there is something such that the fact that it is not a raincoat and it is paternal is false. sent10: the fact that the concessionaire is not a kind of a Xenophon is correct if the echinocactus is equivocal. sent11: a non-paternal thing is non-equivocal thing that is not arbitrary. sent12: if the fact that the concessionaire is not a bayou is true then it is a Xenophon. sent13: the concessionaire is a Xenophon if the echinocactus is not equivocal. sent14: if that the concessionaire is not a kind of a bayou hold then it is not a Xenophon. ; $proof$ = 
void -> assump1: Let's assume that the ware is arbitrary.; __UNKNOWN__