3 ms·
> as otherwise the largest island would be the Americas, or perhaps mainland Asia + Africa + Europe. Isn't that the point though? North America is not an islan
by manojlds 4y ago
> as otherwise the largest island would be the Americas, or perhaps mainland Asia + Africa + Europe.
Isn't that the point though? North America is not an island. Asia is not an island. If NA and SA were one, they would be an island, but they are not.
If the point is Australia is a continent and hence not an island fine. But it's not because Americas will then become island because Americas is not a continent.
- anamexis 4y agoThere is no singular definition of continent. In some uses, the Americas are a singular continent. (One odd example is the five Olympic rings, which represent the "five inhabited continents": Asia, Europe, Africa, Australia, and the Americas.)
- manojlds 4y agoPrecisely the point that these are arbitrary definitions. Making a point that making Australia a island would make Americas also island is silly. And the ring represents Oceania and not Australia, and this makes Australia an island in Oceania.
- CRConrad 4y agoContrary to the point made somewhere here about how "Oceania is an outmoded espression", it is actually the newer concept: The word "Australia" has meant something about that part of the world for longer than has "Oceania". (At a guess, the Olympic rings symbol was designed and acquired the description of what it stands for before "Oceania" came into widespread use.) The whole probelm here is that the English word "continent" actually means two different but closely related things, namely the older cultural-geographical concept "part of the world" (cf Ger. "Erdteil", lit. "part of the Earth") on the one hand, and the more narrowly geological idea of continental shelves &c. "Hello, so which part of the world are you from?" is a much older question than the idea of tectonic plates, so Europe and Asia being different things has been thoroughly cemented into the public conciousness although geologically, they're one and the same. Contrariwise, the Americas both got the same name even though they're (apparently, AFAIK) actually two different things. So, it would help immensely to keep these two different categorisations separate. "Erdteil" is often called "region" in English, but that word is also already overloaded with quite enough meanings, so this usage probably doesn't exactly bring any increased clarity on the whole. Unfortunately, contemporary colloquial English uses the word "continent" for both concepts, so confusion like yours is only all too common. To come back to your specific points: * The ring represents Oceania and not Australia In modern politically correct parlance it represents a part of the world ("Erdteil"), not a single geological entity. Saying it represents only the actual continent of Australia would leave New Zealanders and Micronesians without any representation at all, so that would be rather un-PC. My guess is that back when the rings symbol was adopted, PC details like this just weren't on the agenda, so they simply said "Australia". * and this makes Australia an island in Oceania. No it doesn't. It makes Australia a geological-continent in the region-of-the-world Oceania; or, if you will: It makes Australia a continent-1 in continent-2 Oceania. (See how using the same word for different things kinda sucks?)
- isaacremuant 4y agoIt's not "The Americas". It's America. It's a continent. It was named after Amerigo Vespucci. The fact that English speakers, led by the citizens of the United States of America, in practice claim the name America for themselves and want to push the point of North and South (never quite agreeing what north is depending on the political point being made), doesn't mean that there's objective validity to it. Just a egocentric convenience and the superpower influence.
- jgwil2 4y agoYou're being very pedantic about something that's fundamentally arbitrary and culturally defined. What makes your preferred usage the correct one?
- isaacremuant 4y agoOP was categorical and wrong. I'm specific and right, but in the wrong place (HN is Reddit nowadays, preach to the choir or downvotes). It's not preferred. It's historically accurate and I'm not the one with the burden of proof. He asserted the wrong thing, but that didn't make you question him.
- jgwil2 4y agoHmm, I'd say the burden of proof is on you since you're the one arguing that one common usage among many is "right" and all others are wrong.
- isaacremuant 4y agoThen you're being purposely blind and not reading the comment that started it all https://news.ycombinator.com/context?id=35569350 https://news.ycombinator.com/context?id=35569350 This is so funny (and trivial). It really shows how people in this site and in most of these Reddit like forums operate nowadays. Hegemonic views can't be challenged and are the default and logic will not be used.
- 4y ago
- fsckboy 4y agoNorth and South America are isthmi