Editing 2040: Sibling-in-Law

Jump to: navigation, search

Warning: You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you log in or create an account, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.

The edit can be undone. Please check the comparison below to verify that this is what you want to do, and then save the changes below to finish undoing the edit.
Latest revision Your text
Line 8: Line 8:
  
 
==Explanation==
 
==Explanation==
−
This comic shows the complicated way that English refers to {{w|sibling-in-law}} family relationships. As shown in the comic, your sibling's spouse would be called your "sibling-in-law" (brother-in-law for male, sister-in-law for female). However, your spouse's sibling is also called the same way.  
+
{{incomplete|Created by a BOT-in-law 6 times removed - Please change this comment when editing this page. Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
  
−
The confusion lies with your siblings-in-law's siblings. [[Randall]] says they may be "also siblings-in-law, I think?" and further relations are also "possible ''additional'' siblings-in-law".
+
This comic shows the complicated way that English refers to {{w|sibling-in-law}} family relationships. As shown in the comic, your sibling's spouse would be called your "sibling-in-law" (either brother-in-law, or sister-in-law). However, your spouse's brother or sister is also called the same way (brother-in-law or sister-in-law).  
−
According to Wikipedia, "sibling-in-law is one's spouse's sibling, or one's sibling's spouse, or one's spouse's sibling's spouse"; therefore Randall would be correct with the "also siblings-in-law" on the right (his 'spouse's sibling's spouse') but would be incorrect regarding the one on the left (his 'sibling's spouse's sibling' would not generally be considering a sibling-in-law).
 
−
Wiktionary lists a more restrictive definition: siblings-in-law are either "the sibling of one's spouse" or "the spouse of one's sibling". This definition includes only those whom Randall calls siblings-in-law, and none of those he calls "also siblings-in-law, I think?".  The spouse of the sibling of one's spouse or the sibling of the spouse of one's sibling are to be referred as co-siblings-in-law. If anything, this shows that the definition of a sibling-in-law is loose, justifying the "I think ?" sentence of the comic.
 
−
Many families also use the term "out-law" to jokingly refer to the distant sibling+spouses which Randall seems uncertain about.
 
  
−
The caption compares "sibling-in-law" to "<X>th cousin <Y> times removed". This family relationship, for example, {{w|Cousin#Basic_definitions|1st cousin once removed}}, is used to describe your 1st cousin's child or the first cousin of one of your parents. The "once removed" indicates that the family relative is one generation above or below yours.
+
The confusion lies with your siblings-in-law's siblings. [[Randall]] says they may be "also siblings-in-law, I think?" and further relations are also "possible ''additional'' siblings-in-law". According to Wikipedia, "sibling-in-law is one's spouse's sibling, or one's sibling's spouse, or one's spouse's sibling's spouse"; therefore Randall is correct with the "also siblings-in-law" on the right (his 'spouse's sibling's spouse') but is incorrect regarding the one on the left (his 'sibling's spouse's sibling' would not generally be considering a sibling-in-law).
  
−
The title text  describes a scenario in a traditional wedding in most English-speaking regions. Prior to the wedding being completed, the officiant will provide a final opportunity for anyone in the audience to speak a reason to object to the wedding. This intended for reasons why they cannot ''lawfully'' be wed -- such as that one of the participants is already married to someone else or is too young to marry, that the couple are so closely related that the marriage would be incestuous, or that the marriage license is expired -- or other serious emergencies -- such as evidence of infidelity (sexual or otherwise) that might change one of the participants' minds about their continued commitment to their spouse-to-be. In movies and fiction, this is usually a dramatic moment used for the climax of a critical scene. Regardless, it is an incredibly serious objection to raise, and should not be done so lightly. However, the title text describes a confusing and mundane scenario where the only reason the speaker is objecting to the wedding is because they're unsure whether the marriage would make one of the participants their brother-in-law and thus wouldn't know what to call the groom after the wedding.  In order to avoid their own confusion, they attempted to stop the wedding altogether. The officiator rightly ruled that this objection was neither just cause to object nor a reason that the wedding would be unlawful, and is therefore no reason the couple should be prevented from their own chance at wedded bliss.
+
The caption compares "sibling-in-law" to "<X>th cousin <Y> times removed". This family relationship, for example, {{w|Cousin#Basic_definitions|1st cousin once removed}}, is used to describe your 1st cousin's son or daughter or your second cousin's father or mother. The "once removed" indicates that the family relative is one generation above or below yours.
  
−
Since the title text begins with a FYI (for your information) it is implied that Randall has actually tried to stop a wedding using that reason and has been overruled, and thus he wishes to help others avoid that socially-awkward experience.
+
The title text  describes a scenario in a traditional wedding in most English-speaking regions. Prior to the wedding being completed the officiant will ask whether anyone in the audience has any reason to object to the wedding. In real life this is to allow, for example, someone to aver that one of the participants was already married to someone else, or present evidence (of infidelity? a shameful secret?) that might change one of the participant's mind about their continued commitment to their spouse-to-be. In movies and fiction this is usually a dramatic moment used for the climax of a critical scene. Regardless it is an incredibly serious objection to raise, and should not be done so lightly. The title text however describes a confusing and mundane scenario where the only reason the speaker is objecting to the wedding is because they're unsure whether the marriage would make one of the participants their brother-in-law and thus wouldn't know what to call the groom after the wedding.  In order to avoid their own confusion, they attempted to stop the wedding altogether. The officiator rightly ruled that this objection was improper and no reason the couple should be prevented from their own chance at wedded bliss.
 +
 
 +
Since the title text begins with a FYI (for your information) it is indicated that Randall has actually tried to stop a wedding using that reason and has been overruled, and thus he wishes to help others avoid that socially awkward experience.
  
 
==Transcript==
 
==Transcript==
 +
{{incomplete transcript|Do NOT delete this tag too soon.}}
 
:[A single layer of a family tree with 15 people depicted as sticky figures side by side is shown. They are connected alternated either by a bracket on top or a short line between them. The four outermost figures on each side are faded out in gray.]
 
:[A single layer of a family tree with 15 people depicted as sticky figures side by side is shown. They are connected alternated either by a bracket on top or a short line between them. The four outermost figures on each side are faded out in gray.]
 
:[In the middle is Cueball and from below an arrow points at him:]
 
:[In the middle is Cueball and from below an arrow points at him:]

Please note that all contributions to explain xkcd may be edited, altered, or removed by other contributors. If you do not want your writing to be edited mercilessly, then do not submit it here.
You are also promising us that you wrote this yourself, or copied it from a public domain or similar free resource (see explain xkcd:Copyrights for details). Do not submit copyrighted work without permission!

To protect the wiki against automated edit spam, we kindly ask you to solve the following CAPTCHA:

Cancel | Editing help (opens in new window)

Templates used on this page:

Retrieved from "https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/2040:_Sibling-in-Law"