Search

It is argued in this paper that regionalization is a similar process to classification. The terminology and procedures of the two are compared and it is concluded that there is a close similarity except that there is no direct analogy in regionalization with the individual of classification, it is suggested that operationally defined individuals partially overcome this problem. The histories of ideas about the nature and purpose of regional systems and classification systems are briefly compared and again found to be similar. Ten principles of classification derived from the work of logicians and taxonomists are then stated and the methods of constructing regional systems are examined in the light of these principles. It is shown that most of the points revealed by such an examination have been previously discussed by geographers, although they are arguing from different premises. Some of the principles, however, do raise problems which have hitherto received little attention. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Presents an excerpt of the paper on geographical and historical concepts in American history read at Plenary Session 56th Annual Meeting of the Association of American Geographers in Dallas, Texas.

When the scheme of morphological subdivision propounded is applied to Western Europe, the Central Massif of France appears as a physiographic province with a unity of major relief type and structural evolution. The geographical regions within this province have two other important features in common: they have a similar history and the majority are characterized by a "mountainous centrality" with regard to the rest of France. It is the purpose of this paper to examine the emergence of the general patterns of road and rail communications in these regions.