there exists something such that if it is not unprotective the fact that it is taxonomic and/or it is syntagmatic is not true.
sent1: there exists something such that if it is not interdepartmental then that it idles and/or it is keyless is false. sent2: if the chrysomelid is not minimal the fact that it is taxonomic or is finite or both is false. sent3: the fact that the jam is taxonomic or it is syntagmatic or both does not hold if it is unprotective. sent4: there exists something such that if it is not unprotective then it is not taxonomic. sent5: there exists something such that if that it is not unprotective hold it is taxonomic and/or is syntagmatic. sent6: that the jam does not mow hold if it is not taxonomic. sent7: if something is not a Cercopithecus that it is taxonomic and/or astomatal is wrong. sent8: there is something such that if it is not unprotective then it is not syntagmatic. sent9: the aspirator is not syntagmatic if it is not a quid. sent10: there is something such that if it is not inconspicuous it teaches and/or is a Raphanus. sent11: the fact that either something is a Victorian or it is nontranslational or both is wrong if it does not unclothe Kissimmee. sent12: if the jam is not unprotective that it is taxonomic and/or it is syntagmatic does not hold. sent13: there exists something such that if it is not a quid then that either it borders or it is a denseness or both is false. sent14: if the jam is not unprotective it is not syntagmatic. sent15: that the jam is a gopher and/or unprotective is not true if it is a Bessera. sent16: if the jam is not Calcuttan that that it is syntagmatic and/or it is translational is right does not hold. sent17: the fact that that something is autolytic and/or it is a prothrombinase is right is false if it is not a forefoot. sent18: there exists something such that if it is unprotective then that either it is not non-taxonomic or it is syntagmatic or both is not correct. sent19: if the jam is not unprotective then it is taxonomic or is syntagmatic or both.
sent12 -> hypothesis;
if the eptatretus does not unclothe Kissimmee then that it is a kind of a Victorian and/or is nontranslational is wrong.
sent11 -> hypothesis;
$hypothesis$ = there exists something such that if it is not unprotective the fact that it is taxonomic and/or it is syntagmatic is not true. ; $context$ = sent1: there exists something such that if it is not interdepartmental then that it idles and/or it is keyless is false. sent2: if the chrysomelid is not minimal the fact that it is taxonomic or is finite or both is false. sent3: the fact that the jam is taxonomic or it is syntagmatic or both does not hold if it is unprotective. sent4: there exists something such that if it is not unprotective then it is not taxonomic. sent5: there exists something such that if that it is not unprotective hold it is taxonomic and/or is syntagmatic. sent6: that the jam does not mow hold if it is not taxonomic. sent7: if something is not a Cercopithecus that it is taxonomic and/or astomatal is wrong. sent8: there is something such that if it is not unprotective then it is not syntagmatic. sent9: the aspirator is not syntagmatic if it is not a quid. sent10: there is something such that if it is not inconspicuous it teaches and/or is a Raphanus. sent11: the fact that either something is a Victorian or it is nontranslational or both is wrong if it does not unclothe Kissimmee. sent12: if the jam is not unprotective that it is taxonomic and/or it is syntagmatic does not hold. sent13: there exists something such that if it is not a quid then that either it borders or it is a denseness or both is false. sent14: if the jam is not unprotective it is not syntagmatic. sent15: that the jam is a gopher and/or unprotective is not true if it is a Bessera. sent16: if the jam is not Calcuttan that that it is syntagmatic and/or it is translational is right does not hold. sent17: the fact that that something is autolytic and/or it is a prothrombinase is right is false if it is not a forefoot. sent18: there exists something such that if it is unprotective then that either it is not non-taxonomic or it is syntagmatic or both is not correct. sent19: if the jam is not unprotective then it is taxonomic or is syntagmatic or both. ; $proof$ = 
sent12 -> hypothesis; __PROVED__