Return-Path: LOJBAN%CUVMB.BITNET@vms.dc.LSOFT.COM Received: from SEGATE.SUNET.SE (segate.sunet.se [192.36.125.6]) by xiron.pc.helsinki.fi (8.7.1/8.7.1) with ESMTP id KAA11744 for ; Tue, 13 Feb 1996 10:36:34 +0200 Message-Id: <199602130836.KAA11744@xiron.pc.helsinki.fi> Received: from listmail.sunet.se by SEGATE.SUNET.SE (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id 3951B6DC ; Tue, 13 Feb 1996 9:36:32 +0100 Date: Tue, 13 Feb 1996 10:25:53 BG Reply-To: Ivan A Derzhanski Sender: Lojban list From: Ivan A Derzhanski Subject: Re: *old response on "moskvas" To: Veijo Vilva In-Reply-To: Message of Sun, 11 Feb 1996 01:52:50 -0500 from Content-Length: 711 Lines: 14 On Sun, 11 Feb 1996 01:52:50 -0500 Logical Language Group said: [re Moscow's Russian name and its possible lojbanisation] >Thus the choice is presumably between "mazg,VAS." or "mask,FAS." and the >former seems more true to the Russian pronunciation scheme than the latter. Actually, neither is close. That /v/ acts as a sonorant; it doesn't envoice (is that a word?) preceding consonants. Of course, it doesn't get devoiced either; assimilation doesn't work in that direction. The closest thing Lojban has to a sonorant /v/ is, I reckon, non-syllabic /u/, so {mosKUA} (or {mysKUA} if you need to reflect the vowel reduction) would be my entry. (Though it doesn't beat {zoi rus. Moskva rus.". :-)) --Ivan