Thanks, everybody.
My take on this, having read your comments, is that
{lasANdjylys} would be it....but for the rules!
With both {la} and {ndj} disallowed, the closest we can
get there would seem to be {losANjylys}. It seems
close enough, and I don't think we should be going
to the original Spanish. Surely 'local' means 'local' now.
But all this brings up, yet again, the question of what is
meant by 'local' pronunciation.
If you overdo the 'local', you end up with problems. For example,
what is local in London? East End Cockney sounds nothing like
middle-class Mayfair. How about Zurich? There are several
dialects of Schweizerteutsch in that city alone. How should
Shanghai be pronounced? As in the local regional language Wu,
or in the urban Shanghainese dialect of Wu (spoken by only a
minority of the city's inhabitants - just like Cockney).
For me 'local' means the official or 'average' pronunciation
in the relevent country. In the case of Shanghai, that would be
based on the official Mandarin. In Canada, Montreal would have two
acceptable pronunciations: myntre,IOL (from English) and more,AL
(from French). India presents an interesting case, as the official
pronunciations are the ones based on the official languages
of the states in which the cities are located. So we have
Mumbai (in Marathi), Kolkata (in Bengali) and Dilli (in Hindi).
mu'o mi'e andrus