To: Fred Hoffman; posted to all Fred: I’ve tripped across a new path upon which I can explore a potential family lead. You may not recall, but on my Mother’s side of the family we have many Kulick’s. Now, some time ago you mentioned to me that the name could be Kulig or Kulik; that in Polish, Kulig sounds pretty much like COO-Lick, as does the name Kulik. When my Great Grandfather Thomas Kulick came to America in 1890 he entered the country as Kulick. Several of his subsequent children used the spelling Kulik as their surname. While Thomas used Kulick for most of his “American life” he used Kullick (2 "L's") on his naturalization papers. Now I have come across a potential lead using the surname Kuligowski. There are many people who use the names Kulik and Kulig in Poland. I’m fairly certain that my Thomas is from Ozimek. I guess my questions are these: Are there any differences in the two names? Also, is Kuligowski different from either Kulig or Kulik except for the obvious different ways of spelling the name? In otherwords, are they all interchangeable and, therefore, this new path might be worth chasing for a few blocks? Thank you, John

Hi, John Ruther <chicagojohn@comcast.net> wrote: ===== You may not recall, but on my Mother’s side of the family we have many Kulick’s. Now, some time ago you mentioned to me that the name could be Kulig or Kulik; that in Polish, Kulig sounds pretty much like COO-Lick, as does the name Kulik. When my Great Grandfather Thomas Kulick came to America in 1890 he entered the country as Kulick. Several of his subsequent children used the spelling Kulik as their surname. While Thomas used Kulick for most of his “American life” he used Kullick (2 "L's") on his naturalization papers. Now I have come across a potential lead using the surname Kuligowski. There are many people who use the names Kulik and Kulig in Poland. I’m fairly certain that my Thomas is from Ozimek. I guess my questions are these: Are there any differences in the two names? Also, is Kuligowski different from either Kulig or Kulik except for the obvious different ways of spelling the name? In otherwords, are they all interchangeable and, therefore, this new path might be worth chasing for a few blocks? ========== According to Polish surname expert Prof. Kazimierz Rymut, both KULIG and KULIK come from the same word, a term for a bird, the curlew; these days it's written _kulik_, but in older Polish it was _kulig_. They sound exactly the same, like "KOO-leek." The only way you can tell them apart, if you're going by sound, is when endings are added. When endings are added to KULIG, the final G is no longer pronounced like a K but like a hard G as in "go," whereas KULIK retains the K sound even when endings are added. So KULIG sounds like "KOO-leek," but KULIGA sounds like "koo-LEE-gah." Similarly, KULIGOWSKI sounds like "koo-lee-GOFF-skee," whereas KULIKOWSKI sounds like "koo-lee-KOFF-skee." It's kind of a subtle difference, and it doesn't help that the word these names come from has changed slightly over the course of time. Incidentally, there is a word _kulig_ in modern Polish that means "sleigh ride." But Prof. Rymut does not mention it as a source for these names. I'm not sure on what basis he drew this conclusion, but he was too good a scholar to overlook such an obvious connection. I can only assume he looked into it and decided the ultimate source of these names was the term for the bird, not the term for a sleigh ride. Obviously, further research may change that. Given human imprecision and sloppiness when it comes to names, it is natural to expect KULIG and KULIK to get mixed up. KULIGOWSKI means "one from Kuligi" or "one from Kuligow," according to Rymut. He says that name appears in Polish records as early as 1580, and adds that there are several villages named Kuligi and Kuligow. I looked it up, and in Poland today there are 3 Kuligi's, a Kulig, 3 Kuligowo's, a Kuligow (as well as a Kulik, a Kuliki, a Kulikow, and a Kulikowka). From the surname alone, you can't tell from which one a given Kuligowski family took its name. Only research into the family history might clarify that. I should add, however, that KULIGOWSKI might also sometimes mean "of the kin of Kulig" or "one from the place of Kulig." More often than not, X-owski names refer to places with names beginning with the X part. But that isn't always true -- when it comes to languages, nothing is ALWAYS true! An X-owski name means literally "of the _ of X," and you fill in the blank with something so obvious it didn't need to be spelled out. Usually it's either "kin" or "place." So X-owski can mean "of the kin of X" or "one from the place of X." My point is that KULIGOWSKI could also have started out meaning "of the kin of Kulig" or "one from the place of Kulig" (which ties in with places named Kuligi and Kuligow). Now we're back to dealing with two names that sound the same, so that it could also mean "of the kin of Kulik" or "one from the place of Kulik." If everyone always spoke with perfect diction, and there was no such thing as dialect variation or change in language over time, and everyone heard perfectly and wrote down exactly what they heard correctly, then perhaps these names would not be confused. But on planet Earth, it would be very easy for them to be confused. Thus the same family might show in one record as KULIG, in another as KULIK, in another as KULIGOWSKI, in another as KULIGOWICZ, in another as KULIKOWICZ, in another as KULIKOWSKI, and so on. That sort of inconsistency is something you have to learn to deal with when you do genealogical research. Maintaining perfect consistency of surnames was just not very high up on our ancestors' list of priorities. They didn't realize that their inconsistency in this regard would one do frustrate descendants living on a different continent! I notice that in 1990 there were some 4,070 Kuligowskis, and 4,748 Kulikowskis. It would be one hellacious mess trying to straighten out who is and is not related, and who came from which place with a name beginning Kulig- or Kulik-. So practically speaking, yes, these names are interchangeable, in that the same family might have their surname recorded a dozen different ways; and no, they're not, in that one family with a name beginning Kulig- or Kulik- might have no connection whatsoever with another. That's why you focus on the individual family more than the name. Whenever you run across anyone with a name beginning Kulig- or Kulik-, they MIGHT be related. But they might also be from a completely different family that took its name from a different ancestor or a place name beginning Kulig- or Kulik-. I'd say your best bet is to keep an open mind regarding these names, recognizing that there CAN BE a connection -- but you can't assume there IS one until you get some proof. The name, by itself, just isn't enough to go on, precisely because there is so much potential for confusion. I hope I've helped, instead of making things worse. Fred Hoffman Author of _Polish Surnames: Origins & Meanings_ www.fredhoff.com