NORWAY-L Archives

Archiver > NORWAY > 1998-03 > 0890301814


From: Michael Bugge <>
Subject: [Fwd: Relatives]
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 20:03:34 +1000


This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
--------------31877614EC198E75F2447E51
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Dear List,

This reply to Lyle is now a little anachronistic, especially as Karl
N-F has also replied. I sent it this am (Thursday) Eastern Australia
Standard Summer Time (10 hours + GMT).

However, I send the copy to list as I support mostly Karl's comments
but and interested other views on Lyle's third part of the question.

By the way, Lyle, the grandson/daughter of your
grandfather/grandmother's brother/sister is your second cousin - and so
on. The term "removed" implies "removed generation" and may refer in
ascendancy or descendancy so must be referenced in context.

regards, Mike Bugge
--------------31877614EC198E75F2447E51
Content-Type: message/rfc822
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

Message-ID: <>
Date: Thu, 19 Mar 1998 07:06:26 +1000
From: Michael Bugge <>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.04 [en] (Win95; I)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To:
Subject: Re: Relatives
References: <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Hi Lyle, hi List.

Lyle J. Haugen wrote:
> I am confused about what we call some of our relatives. Would someone
> please help me out?
>
> 1. My father's father is called my grandfather. What do we call my
> grandfather's BROTHER?

He is your father's uncle or your great-uncle.

> 2. What would we call the SON of my grandfather's brother?

He is your father's first cousin or your first cousin once removed.

> 3. Is there such a thing as "grand-uncle"? or "great-uncle"? what would
> be the difference?

Lyle, here I cannot be so confident in my answer. I believe that in
this case "grand-uncle" and "great-uncle" are the same but the "great"
being the accepted usage.

I have seen (or heard) "grand-uncle" but never gave it any thought in
the past as it sounded correct within the context. It's the sort of term
that I would expect in reference to the Romanovs or Hapsburgs than with
regular old Joe Blow.

Interesting point, though. As I said earlier, if it fits the context we
often do not question something.

Regards, Mike Bugge

--------------31877614EC198E75F2447E51--

This thread: