designated or understood whole). Particular stress is then laid by the Greek Government on the phrases given by Robert to illustrate the use of the word notamment, in the majority of which the word is preceded by the word et, but still denotes merely a particular instance of a wider genus or category. The Greek Government also cites sirnilar exarnples of this use of "et notamment" given in the Dictionnaire de IAcadémie française and in Littré, Dictionnaire de. la langue française. On the basis of this linguistic evidence, it maintains that the natural, ordinary and current meaning of this expression absolutely precludes the Greek reservation from being read as covering disputes regarding territorial status in addition to, and quite separately from, disputes regarding matters of domestic jurisdiction. 52. The grammatical interpretation of reservation (b) advanced by Greece leads to a result which is legally somewhat surprising. Disputes conceming matters of "domestic jurisdiction" and disputes relating to "territorial status" are different concepts which, in treaty provisions, including Article 39, paragraph 2, of the General Act, and in reservations to treaties or to acceptances of jurisdiction under Article 36, paragraph 2, of the Statute, have been kept quite separate and distinct. Furthermore, the integration of "disputes relating to territorial status" within the category of disputes concerning matters of "domestic jurisdiction", largely deprives the former of any significance. Consequently, only if the grammatical arguments were compelling and decisive would the Court be convinced that such is the effect which ought to be given to the words "et, notamment," in reservation (b). But those arguments do not appear to the Court to be so compelling as has been suggested. 53. In the first place, the grammatical argument overlooks the commas placed both before and after "notamment".To put the matter at its lowest, one possible purpose of these commas rnight have been to make it clear that in the phrase "et, notamment, les différend'' etc., the word "et" is intended to be a true conjunctive introducing a category of "différends" additional to those already specified. 54. Another point overlooked by the argument is that the meaning attributed to "et, notamment," by Greece is grammatically not the only, although it may be the most frequent, use of that expression. Robert's Dictionnaire itself goes no further than to Say of the word notamment that it is "most often" used to draw attention to one of several particular objects forrning part of a collectivity previously indicated or implied. The question whether in the present instance the expression 'kt, notamment," has the meaning attributed to it by Greece thus depends on the context in which those words were used in Greece's instrument of accession and is not a matter simply of their preponderant linguistic usage. Even a purely grammatical interpretation of reservation (b), therefore, leaves open the possibility that the words "et, notamment, les différends ayant trait au statut territorial de la Grèce" were intended to specify an autonomous category of disputes additional to those concerning matters of domesticjurisdiction,