{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.02897196261682243, 'fraction_numerical': 0.008411214953271028, 'mean_word_length': 5.375, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Governing Domains are Head-Final

In recent work, analyses have been put forward which assume a "CVCV"-constituent structure allowing only for a strict sequence of non-branching onsets and nonbranching nuclei (Lowenstamm 1996). These analyses rely crucially on the assumption of a CVCV-structure and are not sustainable within a more traditional model recognizing branching constituents and codas. In this paper, I explore some of the consequences that a strict CVCV structure entails for phonological and government theory. The logical implications discussed will allow for an evaluation of the CVCV model in comparison with traditional views of constituent structure. It will be shown that the assumption of a strict CVCV structure leads to a unified model where all governing domains are head-final. After a short introduction to CVCV (section 1), the particular questions I address are Proper Government (section 2), interconsonantal relations (section 3), vowel length (section 4), and governing and licensing abilities of different phonological actors (section 5).