not that risking unusual usages or new terms etc is a
bad idea either
so long as the user anticipates & accepts
responsibility for any miscomprehension
like i positively love
dont you
the way the solomon islanders have taken such
advantage of their own predictably imperfect english &
famously wise ethnicity
for purposes of cleansing
ethnically
even the very idea of ethnic cleansing itself
& this little self parody of theirs really did confuse
at least 1 otherwise fairly discerning reader for
awhile
unless i am mistaken
such a good & cosmic joke
could ultimately clean the clocks of the entire human
race
& really would be ethnically cleansing & well as
ennobling
--- aletheia kallos <
aletheiak@...> wrote:
> again
> in normal english usage
> there were of course the 4 substantive & specific
> occupation zones in germany
> namely the fr & gb & su & us sectors
>
> but to call an individual area or parcel of land a
> zone at the same time
> whether it is situated within or without any of
> these
> 4 occupational zones
> & notwithstanding the pervading influence of the
> extremely general german word gebiet
> which indeed can but neednt necessarily be
> translated
> as any or all of the following english words among
> others
> zone
> territory
> sector
> area
> site
> tract
> field
> department
> district
> domain
> realm
> province
> clime
> sales area
> etc
> etc
> invites confusion to say the least
> & ultimately requires a complete suspension of
> discrimation
>
> aka random translation
>
>
> in the case of
> extraterritoriales gebiet
> if a diligent translator felt compelled for some
> reason to superimpose the german extraterritorial
> idea
> onto the fairly uneasy & ambiguous english cognate
> word extraterritorial
> which is after all a possibility & not necessarily a
> bad one
> then clearly she must especially avoid in that case
> territory zone sector & other english words of that
> ilk
> in favor of
> site area tract & others of this ilk
>
> & indeed the concept & mouthful of an
> extraterritorial area
> is reasonably understandable if not entirely
> comfortable
> so long as it is referring to a true clave or other
> separate territory
> de jure or de facto
>
>
> & of course also
> & again only in english
> the question of whether there is therefore some
> extraterritorial status inhering to such or any
> other
> extraterritorial parcel site tract or area
> aka extraterritoriality in the sense of
> inviolability
> is yes of course de facto
> but thats just military & not legal reality
> & of course not at all de jure
> since at least 1961
> as previously discussed
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com