52 States in America

The fact that one federal statute (or even many federal statutes) states that for the purposes of that statute, Alaska is not included within the definition of “continental United States,” does not logically lead to the conclusion that “is not legally continental.”

Even if you could conclusively demonstrate that Alaska “is not legally continental,” that would be irrelevant to the fact that Alaska is actually continental and that one would be free in all circumstances (except those explicitly governed by the statue in question) to include Alaska when speaking of the “continental United States.”

:confused: :confused: :confused:

Of course it does, according to the meaning of those statutes. In another thread recently, it was determined that I qualify as a legal state resident for certain purposes, even though I am not actually resident in any state. “Legal” does not equate to “real.”

Gimme a break. I’m not trying to “conclusively demonstrate Alaska is not continental.” In fact, I specifically said in a previous post that Alaska was geographically continental. I’m not contending that the legal definition makes sense - I was just referring to what the link says. If you want to dispute it, go argue with the U.S. Congess and with Wikipedia.

Sheesh.

“… is not legally continental” is a misleading way to express what the statute is doing. The statute is not trying to reform the definition of “continental” or change perceptions. It’s not deciding from the perspective of law where Alaska is locate. It’s just saying that “when ‘continental’ is referenced below, we’re not talking about Alaska.”

That’s not the same this as saying “Alaska is not legally continental,” which, to me, means “so far as the federal government is concerned, Alaska is not located on the continent of North America.”

There’s a difference here, and I think it’s an important one. “Continental” is not a word like “citizen,” which is fully subject to the definition of the law. It makes sense to say that “He is not legally a citizen,” because the entire concept of citizenship must be defined by the law – it’s a legal concept. However, the state of being located on a continent is a physical state, not a legal state. Therefore, it doesn’t make any sense to say “Alaska is not legally continental” – that implies that the government has the power to detach Alaska from the continental landmass.

ascenray, as much as I enjoy pedantic nitpickery myself, I think you’re going a bit overboard here. :slight_smile:

Like I said, your argument is with Wikipedia and the Federal government, not me.

Re your third paragraph, is this a distinction you are proposing yourself, or can you cite an actual legal authority that says this?

There are lots of terms that refer to “physical states” that common meanings, but may have different meanings in a legal sense, such as “person” or “resident.” Being a “resident” of somewhere is a physical condition (albeit a changeable one), in the common, everyday meaning of the word. However, although I am physically a resident of Panama, I am legally a resident of Washington D.C., for certain specific purposes. There is no reason that the government can’t formulate a legal definition of “continental United States” that is contrary to physical reality as well.

As noted above, the question of why people sometimes think there are 52 states has been discussed on this board before. I find it a little eerie that this error seems to be so prevalent.

My WAG is that a good deal of the confusion arises from the number 52 being the number of weeks in a year and cards in a deck; people are just sort of used to it being a number of constituent parts. The suggestion above about how people tend to think of Alaska and Hawaii as a pair may well have something to do with it too.

Speaking as 47-year-old lifelong resident of the state, I can say with some confidence that “Mizzouruh” is a proper pronunciation. It also used to be the predominant one within the state. I recall that as late as the 1970s people did jokes about people saying “Mizzouree”; there was a financial institution in St. Louis, for instance, which ran a radio commercil in which a game show
host introduces a contestant as being from “St. Louieee Missoureee” and tells her she’s wrong when she gves the name of the institution "Mizzouruh So-and-So in St. Louis. He says the correct answer was “Mizzouree So-and-So in St. Louieee”.

I’ve read various times that historians are generally agreed that “Mizzouruh” is the older, more traditional pronunciation. Harry Truman invariably said “Mizzouruh”. Various broadcasters who are particularly exacting in their pronunciation invariably say “Mizzouruh”. One is Aliester Cooke. Another was John Chancellor.

It’s my WAG that the levelling effect of television, which has tended to standardize pronunciation and usage in the U.S., has caused the “Missouree” pronunciation to become more prevalent, even within the state. The fact that television endorses something does not, of course, make it “right”. Television also appears to be responsible for such oddities as the pronunciation of “shiekh” and “shake”, “often” as “off-ten”, and “forte” when meant in the sense of a personal strength, as “for-tay”. Maybe it will even have us all saying “sal mon” someday.

On that subject, while I never had a teacher tell me there were 52 states, my fourth grade teacher marked me wrong when I wrote that the Norwegian flag was “blue, white, and red”. The only correct answer, she insisted, was “red, white, and blue”. My seventh grade science teacher was convinced she had disproven the theory of evolution “because all of the monkeys haven’t evolved into people”. My high school American History teacher taught that slaves were never abused or subject to threats or coercion because they were expensive to buy. It could have been worse; a high school classmate swore that one of his grade school teachers told him that most black people in the United States were the descendants of people who rowed there from Africa in birchbark canoes.

Earlier this year I taught a class to paralegal students. Their textbook, published just last year, said there are 26 amendments to The U. S. Constitution.

While we’re at it, has anyone heard that “everyone knows” there are Twelve Commandments? I know Mel Brooks used this as a joke in History of the World, Part I, but I had heard this said before.

… a suggestion which I made a full 8 hours before he did. But I’m not bitter. Oh no.

Fifteen, sir.

“The Lord has vouchsafed us his holy laws engraved on these three … CRASH … these two tablets…”