whole hearted agreement here peter
& i was especially glad to see your recognition of every mans land
while now that we definitely have a lady present
i would beg you to consider the alternative usage everyones land
which might also expressly include children & even pets
despite the apparent sacrifice of resonance with no mans land
which i trust was among your implicit points
& the right one to begin from imo
further if you are with me here about everyones land
& perhaps everyones water
& perhaps icecap etc
i am hoping you will join me also in feasting on the question of
who or what if anything is sovereign in & about everyones land
which i will not attempt to devour yet but only to present it at this point
in case you or anyone might like to indulge first
& whether we go there or not
i would still like to observe
in the case of equatorial guinea
that since everyones land also obviously belongs to all equatorial guineans
as well as to everyone else
their 2part country could fairly be considered to be bridged & integrated
by their participation in the intervening part of everyones land
in somewhat the same way as a common hole card in poker can fill in an
inside straight or flush within any hand at the table
tho i realize that rule may not apply to geopolitics
since everyone might then be able to claim a royal flush
& the whole world might claim the winning hand of omnisovereignty
m
>
>>
>
>My understanding of -claves runs along the same lines. Just to add to the
>discussion - and I'm open
>for arguments to the contrary:
>
>I think there are three parties here:
>1. The clave itself
>2. The 'mother' country ('belonging')
>3. The 'alien' country ('intrusion')
>
>The adjective used (e.g. 'Spanish') designates the mother country.
>The perspective of the situation can be both from the mother country and
>the alien country.
>And the meaning of enclave and exclave is the same as Michael's.
>
>If we take the example of Llivia, it is a Spanish clave and not a French one.
>It can be:
>1. A Spanish exclave from the Spanish perspective
>2. A Spanish enclave from the French perspective
>
>1 because it is totally detached from Spain
>2 because it is totally surrounded by France
>
>In this way Voeren is a Flemish exclave (i.e. from the Flemish
>perspective) and Nakhichevan an Azeri
>exclave (from the Azeri perspective). They are no enclaves, though.
>
>When sea comes into it, I tend to see territorial waters as territorial
>land, and the rest as
>juridically not defined territory, so 'every man's land'. This regardless
>of exploitation, fishing,
>and other economical rights that states might have.
>
>Peter S.
>
>
>> thank you brendan also for this partial concession to my ordinary
>> pedestrian usage of the clave words
>>
>> but neither my dogeared american heritage dictionary nor i can swallow your
>> simultaneous concession to davids fine point also given below
>> hahaha
>>
>> that books as well as my own beliefs & models are as follows
>>
>> enclave
>> a country or part of a country lying wholly within the boundaries of another
>> so in normal straight talk
>> san marino is an enclave in or within italy
>> & campione is an italian enclave in or within switzerland
>> & no need to even think about an enclave of anything
>> for that would technically be a abuse of the word of
>>
>> btw these correspond to rolfs types 1 & 3 respectively
>> tho when he says btw he usually means between
>>
>> exclave
>> a portion of a country which is isolated in alien territory
>> but not expressly or necessarily within a single alien territory
>> & it even adds a map with the legend
>> cabinda is an exclave of angola
>> tho it does commit the blunder of verbally placing it in congo kinshasa
>> & there is no real need to think about an exclave in anything
>> & to do so would technically be an abuse of the word in
>>
>> this entire exclave word corresponds to rolfs type 2
>>
>> & thats it
>> no distinctly different usages than these basic ones are even suggested
>>
>> & to me all of this simply says that in normally understandable parlance
>> an enclave may be an entire country or a part of a country
>> but it must always be surrounded by a single other country
>> & an exclave must always be a part of a country
>> but it may or may not be surrounded by a single other country
>>
>> so these words really do have a simple flipflop mutuality
>> but it is not the same simple flipflop mutuality sophisticated people like
>> us often expect them to have & frankly overburden them with
>>
>> really i swear there is no finesse or syntactical vagary at work here at all
>>
>> & indeed i can sometimes hardly figure out what you all & all your
>> authorities are talking about
>>
>> hahaha
>> just my 2 bits toward the general food fight
>>
>> nice smorgasbord jesper
>>
>> m
>
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
><"http://rd.yahoo.com/M=163100.1357384.2947150.2/D=egroupmail/S=1700126166:N/A=5
>24804/*http://www.classmates.com/index.tf?s=2629" target="_top">Cick here
>for Classmates.com Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the
><http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/> Yahoo! Terms of Service.