From - Wed Feb 14 12:50:31 1996
Received: from VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (vms.dc.lsoft.com [205.186.43.2]) by locke.ccil.org (8.6.9/8.6.10) with ESMTP id EAA10212 for <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>; Tue, 13 Feb 1996 04:09:45 -0500
Message-Id: <199602130909.EAA10212@locke.ccil.org>
Received: from PEACH.EASE.LSOFT.COM (205.186.43.4) by VMS.DC.LSOFT.COM (LSMTP for OpenVMS v1.0a) with SMTP id F3AAB92E ; Tue, 13 Feb 1996 3:36:41 -0500
Date:         Tue, 13 Feb 1996 10:25:53 +0200
Reply-To: Ivan A Derzhanski <IAD@BGEARN.BITNET>
Sender: Lojban list <LOJBAN@CUVMB.BITNET>
From: Ivan A Derzhanski <IAD@BGEARN.BITNET>
Subject:      Re: *old response on "moskvas"
To: John Cowan <cowan@LOCKE.CCIL.ORG>
In-Reply-To:  Message of Sun, 11 Feb 1996 01:52:50 -0500 from 
              <lojbab@ACCESS.DIGEX.NET>
Status: O
X-Mozilla-Status: 0011
Content-Length:  713


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