the tux does not intend and/or it does rerun PAYE.
sent1: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of neurasthenic thing that is propitious does not hold. sent2: if something is not supervisory the fact that the bang is a neurasthenic and is propitious is false. sent3: if the crankcase is a kind of a amnesic the tux does not intend and/or it reruns PAYE. sent4: if there exists something such that the fact that it is a neurasthenic and is not propitious is incorrect the crankcase is amnesic. sent5: if there is something such that that it is a kind of a amnesic and it does not intend is wrong then the tux is a neurasthenic. sent6: if the crankcase is a amnesic the tux intends and/or does rerun PAYE. sent7: there exists something such that it is a neurasthenic that is not propitious. sent8: the fact that the bang is a kind of a neurasthenic but it is not propitious does not hold if there exists something such that it is non-supervisory. sent9: either the tux does intend or it does rerun PAYE or both. sent10: that that the bang is not non-neurasthenic and not unpropitious does not hold is not wrong. sent11: if something is a kind of a amnesic then that it is propitious and it is not a neurasthenic is incorrect. sent12: the fact that there exists something such that it is supervisory is not wrong. sent13: if there exists something such that it is propitious then the crankcase is amnesic.
that the tux does not intend or does rerun PAYE or both is incorrect.
sent11 -> int1: that the crankcase is propitious and is not neurasthenic is not true if it is a amnesic.;
$hypothesis$ = the tux does not intend and/or it does rerun PAYE. ; $context$ = sent1: there is something such that the fact that it is a kind of neurasthenic thing that is propitious does not hold. sent2: if something is not supervisory the fact that the bang is a neurasthenic and is propitious is false. sent3: if the crankcase is a kind of a amnesic the tux does not intend and/or it reruns PAYE. sent4: if there exists something such that the fact that it is a neurasthenic and is not propitious is incorrect the crankcase is amnesic. sent5: if there is something such that that it is a kind of a amnesic and it does not intend is wrong then the tux is a neurasthenic. sent6: if the crankcase is a amnesic the tux intends and/or does rerun PAYE. sent7: there exists something such that it is a neurasthenic that is not propitious. sent8: the fact that the bang is a kind of a neurasthenic but it is not propitious does not hold if there exists something such that it is non-supervisory. sent9: either the tux does intend or it does rerun PAYE or both. sent10: that that the bang is not non-neurasthenic and not unpropitious does not hold is not wrong. sent11: if something is a kind of a amnesic then that it is propitious and it is not a neurasthenic is incorrect. sent12: the fact that there exists something such that it is supervisory is not wrong. sent13: if there exists something such that it is propitious then the crankcase is amnesic. ; $proof$ = 
__UNKNOWN__