I was surprised by an apparent inconsistency of two of Brandon's recent
opinions about enclaves. He stated that to be an enclave a fragment of
territory must be surrounded by 'foreign' territory, but earlier claimed
that Culver City was an enclave. Since Culver City shares boundaries with
two other territories, I thought he was being inconsistent. But if
"surrounded" is taken to NOT mean "immediately surrounded" then Culver
City could still meet the definition of an enclave. But if we take enclave
to require "immediately surrounded by a single foreign territory", then
Culver City would not be an enclave. To use a more familiar international
example-- is Lesotho split into two countries, would they both still be
enclaves within South Africa, or would neither be an enclave since now
each has two neighboring countries?
David
On Mon, 5 Nov 2001, Peter Smaardijk wrote:
> It's a bit of an eternal discussion here. I understand Brendans
> arguments completely, and respect them, but I still differ. The
> exclave is landlocked for sure, but acc. to my opinion, Nakhichevan
> is an exclave to Azerbaijan, because it is detached from the homeland
> by foreign territory. Whose territory is irrelevant here.
>
> According to me!
>
> Peter S.
>
> PS: Yes, I agree that the words enclave and exclave are used very
> loosely, and too loosely, by "the media". But then again, who is
> that? Isn't it just that the meaning of the words are gradually
> shifting? (A tip (money for the waiter) is called "pourboire" in
> French, and "Trinkgeld" in German. But I wonder whether all waiters
> will spend their tips exclusively on booze.;-)) Me too, I don't like
> it. But I can't stop it, I'm afraid.
>
> --- In BoundaryPoint@y..., "Brendan Whyte" <brwhyte@h...> wrote:
> >
> > >Brendan Whyte wrote:
> > > > An exclave is a special type of fragment, one that is surrounded
> > > > by one other unit. It must be landlocked too.
> > >
> > >Well, that definition is not universally accepted:
> > >the American Heritage Dictionary illustrates "exclave" with
> Cabinda.
> > >
> >
> > The OED has a proper [ ;-) ] definition for both enclave and
> exclave.
> >
> > That plus notable exclave experts confirm 'my' definition above.
> >
> > This is one problem that 'enclave' and 'excalve' are used far too
> liberally
> > and slapdashically by the much of the media.
> >
> > Websters: "a small part of a country lying within the territory of
> another
> > country'.
> > Cabinda does NOT lie 'within' another country!
> >
> >
> >
> > _________________________________________________________________
> > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
> http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
>