We reported on three studies that studied the consequences of a series of performance errors in understanding structures using intervention configurations. The manipulated structures shared similar superficial properties, but differed critically in their hierarchical configurations. Experiences 1 and 2 contrast between kinship clauses that include an intermediate position created by the movement of the object and which intervenes in the subject-verb contract relationship, and the clauses for supplementing sentences in which the object does not intervene at any time in the derivation of the hierarchical structure in the agreement report. Experience 3 contrasts with two structures with complex objects that also interfere in the object`s intermediate position on concordance, but differ from the hierarchical position of the number-failure function that is either in an intervention position with respect to c-Command on Agreement or in terms of linear classification. What is the mechanism behind interference in both experiments? We suggested that both experiments reflect the effects of intervention on the hierarchical structure; However, the two experiments use two different methods because of different techniques, highlighting two different types of intervention effects. Experience 1 reflects the subject`s intervention on the A`-Dependency object, experience 2 reflects object interventions on the dependence of the subject-verb chord. In particular, we argued that self-controlled reading was part of the process of structural construction in which the paralyzer must resolve dependence on the antecedent gap and assign the theta roles corresponding to the words of the verb. Experiment 1 data are consistent with recent developmental research, which demonstrates a better understanding of parents of objects in children when the subject and object do not match in numbers (Adani et al., 2010; Adani, unpublished). Similarly, differences were found in other features to facilitate understanding of the relative object clause: sexual conflict (Belletti et al., 2012), Animacy Mismatch (z.B. Mak et al., 2002, 2006; Traxler et al., 2002) or NP-type inruids (DP, Pronoun, proper name; z.B. Gordon et al., 2001, 2004; Warren and Gibson, 2002, 2005; Grillo, 2009; Belletti and Rizzi, 2013). Friedmann et al.
(2009) argued that the difficulty of constructing A` dependencies in object associates is due to the intervention of the DP subject in the path that connects the head relative to its trace in the object position. Difficulty is thought to be a function of the degree of overlap in the syntactic characteristics between the relative head and the interventionist. According to this theoretic approach to sentences, the minimum degree of distinction, identity, excludes the configuration of grammar, while the maximum degree of distinction, disjunction, makes the configuration fully accessible to children as well as adults. Incidents of inclusion or intersection would result in greater and lower difficulties, as the former manifested themselves in the form of an inability to develop addiction in children and a significant slowing of treatment in adults. In this context, the role of facilitating the numerical index in relation to the established theoretical relationship is taken into account in the speaker`s specifications in relation to the objective.