[email protected] wrote: > On Thu, 08 Jul 2010 21:07:15 +0100, > [email protected] wrote: > >[email protected] wrote: > >> On Thu, 08 Jul 2010 11:42:09 +0100, > >> [email protected] wrote: > >> >...assuming that '...in the country' means we can exclude Northern > >> >Ireland. > >> I think you can't. Do you want to exclude Wales too? > > > >Yes, quite possibly. I tend to take the view that England, Scotland and > >Wales are three countries which happen to come under the same government for > >some things. > So do you think that Catalonia, Burgundy, Saxony, Newfoundland, etc. > are countries?
No, not particularly. But I've never visited these places, nor really got to know any people from them, so there's always a chance that I might change my mind. That way madness lies IMHO. Quite possibly. If I ever wake up and suddenly find I'm starting to regard Burgundy as country, I'll immediately call Bruce out of retirement and ask him for a prognosis. I will, however, continue to regard England, Wales and Scotland as separate countries, and not worry too much about sanity. > I tend to take the view that a country ceases to be a country when it > merges with another country. So, at present, none of the following -- > England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales -- is a country. They are > all parts (i.e. regions) of a country - The United Kingdom of Great > Britain and Northern Ireland. They have regional, not national, > governments. Well, you can see it your way, and I'll see it mine. What a good job we're not all the same! Have a nice week. I'm off to help restore the Cotswold Canals. Or whatever you prefer to call them. I really don't mind... Martin L
