Hi,
of course I know that my message would attract some rambling from
you, but here are short replies:
--- In
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "aletheiak" <aletheiak@y...>
wrote:
> if it doesnt exist
> then how can you presume to translate it
> hahahahaha
Haha, extremely hilarious. I've had better laughs - but then again,
I'm probably not as infinitely funny as you appear to be.
And if you read my message correctly I was guessing as to what was
meant - I imagine that whoever put up the sign was trying so say
something, and I tried to interpret it.
> & i would buy extraterritorial waters for example in english
> but only if territorial waters are being implied or discussed in
the same breath
>
> but again
> extraterritorial area
> in english
> could at best just mean an area that is out of the regular bounds
in some sense
> & not at all necessarily an area with any specially constituted
legal status
Well, the word exists, so deal with it. I'm sorry that it does not
fit your philosophy.
> so far as i know
> since 1961 such a status as you are groping to express is just
called inviolability
Unfortunately, English is not my mother tongue, so I am naturally
inferior to you linguistically as well and can only "grope", but at
least I try to make my messages intelligible (unlike yourself, may I
say so).
It is not just inviolability, there are certain other aspects as
well, but then again, how should I know? I have only studied
international law for several years at several universities, which
obviously does not qualify me. Too bad.
And one last word:
Sometimes various BP members wonder why we lose members and why old
members seem to disappear. I venture to say that one reason may lie
in the fact that you apparently love to ridicule and attack those who
do not hold your opinion. I find especially distasteful how you
sometimes poke fun at those who do not have English as their first
language and therefore may have trouble expressing themselves.
Cheerio,
Anton
PS: Don't expect any further replies, I have better things to do
(e.g., work).
> --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Anton Zeilinger"
<anton_zeilinger@h...> wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> > Funnily enough, the word "extraterritorial" does not really exist
in
> > German, the correct word would be "exterritorial", which
translates as
> > the English "extraterritorial"; but I guess that is what was
meant here.
> >
> > "Gebiet" is indeed "area", and I concur with Len that the
> > phrase "extraterritorial area" is not redundant at all!
> >
> > And Len has also touched upon the fact that it has been well
settled in
> > international law that all so-called
extraterritorial/exterritorial
> > areas like embassies, missions, military cemetaries, monuments,
> > military bases and the like remain part of the state they are
situated
> > in; all that happens is that certain immunities or promises of
> > inviolability are granted - sovereignty is only transferred if
this is
> > explicitly stated in the relevant treaty (which has extremely
rarely,
> > if at all, happened in these cases).
> >
> > Any other speculations in the direction of mini-enclaves or other
> > peculiarities are, of course, great fun, but not based on
international
> > law.
> >
> > Cheerio,
> > Anton
> >
> >
> >
> > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "L. A. Nadybal"
<lnadybal@c...>
> > wrote:
> > > It isn't a redundant phrase - "Extraterritorial" means the same
as it
> > > does in English - the "es" is only a grammatical suffix.
> > >
> > > Gebiet is not solely "territory" as in a political way except
in the
> > > sense of a "place we posses and rule that has dimensions", but
more as
> > > an "area" or "grounds", as in "mein Fachgebiet" which is "my
area of
> > > expertise". Or, as after the end of WW II, when the British
and US
> > > sectors of W. Germany were economically merged and became the
> > > "Vereinigte Wirtschaftsgebiet" a.k.a. "Bi-Zone", where "Gebiet"
was
> > > officially translated to mean "Zone" in the German equal of the
US
> > > Federal Register (the "Gesetzblatt").
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Len