Untitled

Consonantal interaction35ever, Scheer (1999a, 2004), in opposition to Cyran (2003), arguesfor the leftward relation as depicted in (8) above. This simply means thatit is a sonorant that is a governor of the preceding obstruent (cf. Kayeet al. 1990, Harris 1994, Harris and Lindsey 1995). The argumentsput forward by Scheer (1999a, 2004) in order to change thedirection of the interconsonantal relation are threefold. Firstly, hepoints out that in GP all interconstituent relations are regressive orleftward (see Kaye at al. 1990, Harris 1994). Since in the Strict CVapproach there are no constituent relations, as there are no branchingconstituents at all, it means that what was a progressive relation withina constituent in GP must now be represented as a regressive relationbetween two constituents. Secondly and more importantly, Scheer(1999a) indicates that sonorants are actually more complex than whatthey might appear to be in the previous proposals (see also van der To r -r e 2003). He proves his point by looking at the results of phonologicaloperations (element spreading and segmental decomposition) involvingsonorants. The general picture emerging from his analysis is that sonorantsare richer in place-defining elements than obstruents, e.g. [r](A, I); [l] (/, A, I) or [n] (/, N, A, I). Moreover, the cross-linguistic surveyleads him to the conclusion that velarity and roundness are two distinctphonological elements. Very briefly, Scheer (1996, 1999a) claims thatthe prime defining velarity (U) is present in all velar articulations (roundedand unrounded). On the other hand, the prime that carries informationconcerning labiality/roundness, that is (B), is present in all roundand bilabial articulations. This fact may explain why in certain systems[w] interacts with both labials and velars. This is so because [w] is claimedto include two elements, that is, (U, B). The final argument putforward by Scheer (2004) in favour of the leftward consonantal relationsconcerns the headedness in vocalic expressions. To simplify, he indicatesthat in the previous theories only one of the place definers can bethe head of the vocalic expressions. Note that neither the nasal element(N) nor the low or high tone elements (L), (H) can acquire the role ofa head in vowels. According to Scheer (1999a) the same should holdtrue in the representation of consonants. What is more, the laryngealelements, i.e. (L) and (H), are present only in obstruents but never appearin the representation of sonorants, 25 which simply means that sonorantsare doomed to play the role of governees because the complexitywill always be greater in obstruents when compared with sonorants.Scheer (2004) concludes that place is the only feature that is shared25Sonorants are claimed to be spontaneously voiced or voiced by default, and hence,this characteristic is never represented in the elemental make-up of sonorants.3*