thanxx david for this subtle topological delicacy
as well as for consistently calling our old & super brendon brandon
yes i will eat your nits too
for you may well have struck here upon a rich recipe for distinguishing our
old from our new eponyms as we continue to multiproliferate
& to answer your rhetorical question
yes once again you are absolutely right
neither fragment of the prospectively former lesotho would be an enclave in
anything
except if it had disintegrated into a bagel shape
or possibly also into a bunch of baarle or bengal crumbs
for we know that is always a possibility too
& new peter is also absolutely right here below both about the eternality of
the discussion & about the respectability of all the opinions
& may i say peter that you are not only our new peter for some time but are
now looking like a newer & finer peter yet again
my own opinion is
the more novelty the better
& it is well worth the regular review both for our own recapitulations & for
the benefit of new members
but please remember above all
our clavers are only embedded here
& we wouldnt have it any other way
nor would they
even our bounders are but a lunatic fringe
yet an essential nay quintessential necessity
for all us other true boundary point believers
& peter if you really dont like booze & cant stop it
i would be afraid
but i know you are only teasing us
exquisitely as usual
& w h a t
did you just say you stood corrected on
m
>From: David Mark <dmark@...>
>Reply-To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
>To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [BoundaryPoint] Re: What is an enclave
>Date: Mon, 5 Nov 2001 13:52:00 -0500 (EST)
>
>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/
> >
> >
> >
>
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp