Definition: In this task, you're given a sentence and your task is to generate a simplified sentence that focuses on lexical paraphrasing from the original sentence given in the input.

Positive Example 1 -
Input: a georgian inscription around the drum attests his name.
Output: there is a georgian inscription around the drum to confirm his name.

Positive Example 2 -
Input: it is particularly famous for the cultivation of kiwifruit.
Output: it is mostly famous for the growing of kiwifruit.

Negative Example 1 -
Input: a hunting dog refers to any dog who assists humans in hunting.
Output: a hunting dog is a dog that refers humans in hunting.

Negative Example 2 -
Input: in return , romania ceded three southern districts of bessarabia to russia and acquired dobruja.
Output: in return , romania ceded three southern districts of bessarabia to russia and acquired dobruja.

Now complete the following example -
Input: assuming good faith does not prohibit discussion and criticism , but instead editors should not attribute the actions being criticized to malice unless there is specific evidence of malice.
Output: 



Output:
editors should not attribute the actions being criticized to malice unless there is specific evidence of it.
assuming a critic has good intentions does not end discussion and critique . editors should not think that criticism is an attack unless there is evidence of malice.
assuming good faith does 'nt disallow talking and judging , but instead editors should not characterize the actions being judged as hostile unless there is clear proof of hostility.
assuming good faith does not prohibit discussion and criticism , but instead editors should not attribute the actions being criticized to cruelty and evilness unless there is specific evidence of cruelty and evilness.
assuming good faith does not prohibit discussion and criticism but instead editors should not attribute the actions being criticized to malice unless there is specific evidence of malice.
assuming good faith does not prohibit discussion and criticism , but instead editors should not attribute the actions being criticised to malice unless there is specific evidence of malice.
good faith does not prohibit discussion and criticism : editors should not think that criticism is mean unless there is real proof of malice.
assuming good faith does not prohibit discussion and criticism . instead editirs should not attribute the actions being critized to malice unless there is specific evidence of malice.