There
is another example: Central & Eastern Europe, loosely termed CEE. As it
seems this term was born in 1989 when the iron curtain was lifted, and while all
Europe West of the curtain was termed "West Europe", "central" appeared to be
the 15 or so "new" countries from Estonia in th North to Macedonia in the South,
and "east" was Ukraine and Russia.
What I
had learned in school was a bit different: "central" was Germany, "west" was
France and west of France, "east" was the Soviet empire.
It
seems that in 1989 the center of Europe in the "new speak" has shifted
eastwards. It would help if we
knew what Europe is at all.
Wolfgang
All such attempts at
dividing the world into artificial regions are subject to
poor definition
and contradiction.
Take, for instance, the once-common but
now-seldom-heard term Near East. The
Eurocentric part of the world
saw, when it looked eastward, a Near East, a
Middle East, and a Far
East. Where was the Near East? In what is now called
the
Middle East! In fact, modern journalistic usage sometimes includes in
the
Middle East some northern African countries that were too far west
even to be
included in the original Near East.
Lowell G.
McManus
Leesville, Louisiana, USA
----- Original Message -----
From: "Kevin Meynell" <knm@...>
To:
<BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 17, 2005 1:22
PM
Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] Hammerfest
or?
>
>>for example there doesnt appear to be any
member in 2 regions or
>>subregions which of course would be a
geographical absurdity in view of
>>the size & diversity of some
of them
>
> I don't see the point(s) in arbitrarily dividing the
world into continents
> in the first place (unless you just have
Afroeurasia, the Americas,
> Australia and Antarctica) not to mention
that Oceania isn't a continent at
> all, but some people just like to do
it.
>
> Regards,
>
> Kevin
Meynell
>
>
>
>
>
> Yahoo! Groups
Links
>
>
>
>
>
>
>