19:54 Nov 11, 2009 

Thanks Rothig

17:44 Nov 11, 2009 

I didn't pay full attention to the field, as you may have understood from the examples I presented. I understood "confrontar" as "confront", which in English uses either "by" or "with" as preposition and, in this sense, I choose "with".

In the sense of "to border" "something is bounded by, of course, because it is passive -- allthough the verb "to border" itself does not use any preposition, as it is active: "Chile borders Argentina."
But now I understand that the meaning is that another real estate of the same owner borders the mentioned one. So, yes, I would just say something like "it borders to the West and East himself/themselves", "another area of his/theirs", "another property of the same owner(s)" and so forth, or the passive voice similars.

16:35 Nov 11, 2009 

It´s not so much the grammar that bothers me its the legality of how a property can have itself as its boundary. This is why I was leaning towards bounded by its own area ( BTW its bounded "by" not bounded "with" in English)

18:57 Nov 10, 2009 

I think "by itself" sounds quite appropriate. Think of "shaded by itself", "facing itself", etc.