Since then is this opening called the "pseudo grunfeld"? It's part of English opening theory. A more logical name is Anglo Grunfeld or Grunfeld English.

I like a consistent terminology of all the anglo-indian systems:

Nimzo English (1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 e6 3. Nf3 Bb4)
Queens English (1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 e6 3. Nf3 b6!?)
Kings English (1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 g6 3. Nf3 Bg7 4. 0-0 0-0 and a later d2-d3)
Grunfeld English (1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 g6 3. Nf3 d5)

By the way I don't regard the Mikenas system (1. c4 Nf6 2. Nc3 e6 3. e4!?) as an anglo-indian, it has not the feel of an "indian" system nor has it a true indian counterpart.

There was a fairly recent survey in NIC YB that was offered as a free sample, still available at:

http://www.newinchess.com/Archives/PDFs/YB_82EO_61_08.pdf

This properly belongs here and not under "Daring Defenses."   

Have you played or played against the "Pseudo-Gruenfeld," which arises (among several possible move orders) after 1.Nf3 Nf6 2.c4 g6 3.Nc3 d5?    If so, what is your opinion of its merit?  The e-book here seems to disapprove of it after 4.Qa4+ or 4.cxd5 Nxd5 5.Qa4+, but when I look at the resulting positions in my database, they look moderately playable for Black.

Relatedly, is 1.c4 Nf6 2.Nc3 d5 playable for Black?