The notion of distinctive features has had a firm position in phonology since the time of the Prague Linguistic Circle and especially that of one of its representatives, Roman Jakobson, whose well-known delimitation of a phoneme as “a bundle of distinctive features” (Jakobson, 1962, p. 421), that is, a set of simultaneous distinctive features, has inspired many scholars. Jakobson’s attempt “to analyse the distribution of distinctive features along two axes: that of simultaneity and that of successiveness” (ibid., p. 435) helped cover several phonetic and/or phonological processes and phenomena. Distinctive features, although theoretical constructs (Giegerich, 1992, p. 89), reflect phonetic, that is, articulatory and acoustic, properties of sounds. In the flow of speech, some features tend to influence the neighbouring phonemes. Sometimes speech organs produce something that the brain just ‘plans’ to produce (anticipatory speech errors). There are situations where it seems as if the successive organization of phonemes went hand in hand with the simultaneous nature of certain articulatory characteristics of those phonemes (the transgression of consonants and inherence of vowels in Romportl’s theory), or the given feature seems to be anticipated by the preceding segment. This is the case with nasalization and/or anticipatory coarticulation, as well as regressive (anticipatory) assimilation. In addition, simultaneity/consecutivity is a decisive criterion for the difference between the so-called complex segments, as specified in Feature Geometry, and simple segments (Duanmu, 2009). Moreover, the phonological opposition of simultaneity- successivity (that is, consecutivity) itself functions as a feature making a difference between segmental and suprasegmental elements in the sound system of a language, as was first mentioned by Harris (1944), later indicated by Jakobson (1962) and then fully developed by Sabol (2007, 2012).