Re: Way off list for wordsmiths

["David B. Kronenfeld" kfeld@xxxxxxxx]

"Correct" is a funny term. As an anthropologist and linguist I tend
to ask for and accept my native speakers' judgements about
correctness. But, here, the first two English systems I described
both have significant histories. One, I think, comes out of civil
law while the other, I think, comes out of religious law.
My third system (no "first", "second", "third", etc. modifiers to
"cousin") has no official precedents, but seems to express the
knowledge of many of my students. Their knowledge reflects the usage
that they have been exposed to, which in turn, reflects the
importance (or non-importance !) of the relevant distinctions to the
world of their experience. The distinctions of genealogically driven
inheritance and/or degrees of relationship which were important in
the culture from which the first two systems came seem not much
relevant to their lives--maybe because there isn't that much to
inherit, maybe because they aren't going to get it from collateral
lines anyway. (Carl Distefano's observations about New York law are
maybe relevant here).
My fourth "incorrect" system is indeed a "courtesy" or "respect for
elders" one. It is relevant to our discussion, though, because it is
systematic and because it does give us some evidence about what is
functionally important or noteworthy (to my students) about uncles and aunts.
                Cheers,
                        David


At 03:04 PM 6/30/2008, Patricia Godfrey wrote:
David B. Kronenfeld wrote:
    In one system, the children of two first cousins are
second cousins to each other. The child of my first cousin is my
first cousin once removed.
This is the only such schema (apart from the last, which is in a
slightly different category) that I would call correct. It is
certainly the one we used when counting kin of European royalty in
discussing dynastic squabbles when I was editing encyclopedias. It
was also, IIRC, that used by Tolkien in discussing Hobbit genealogy
(which is probably the only exposure to genealogy most people have
had). Do the various genealogical societies recognize the other two schemas?
    An "incorrect" system, but one that has shown up in ca. 14
% of classes in which I have probed this is one in which cousins
who are one's parents' age, and with whom one interacts, are
sometimes referred to as "uncle" or "aunt".
I would say this is more a matter of courtesy (respect for elders)
than of genealogy; I believe it has a long history among
English-speaking peoples (and may even have an antecedent in the
Hebrew scriptures). So long as the persons involved are aware of the
real genealogical relationship, it's OK.

--
Patricia M. Godfrey
priscamg@xxxxxxxx