293 replies to this topic

[Mjx]

And yet other singular/plurals that bug me:

Momo, shrimp, squid, moose, and sheep are all their own plurals. No such thing as Momos, shrimps, squids, mooses or meese, or sheeps. And yet I see it all the time. Meh.

RE: shrimp and squid

I had always thought the same thing but then every dictionary I've looked in lists both shrimp and shrimps and both squid and squids as proper plural forms. I haven't checked the OED but I'm betting it's the same there.


Edited: grammar

The OED lists both options as acceptable (but the form with the terminal 's' always sounds so illiterate).

[Beebs]

Someone might have mentioned this one already, but caught it on Food Network this weekend & it's been bugging me ever since...

"With au jus" - arrrggh!!! It's "au jus" only. Or "with jus". Not "with with jus".

[patrickamory]

A waiter in an LA restaurant actually put down the gravy boat of jus three nights ago and remarked, "And here's more au jus on the side."

[Hassouni]

Shrimps seems to be standard in Britain..."potted shrimps," etc.

[Jaymes]

How about 'Calphalon'? I've always said KAL-fa-lon.

But a friend insists the first L is silent, and that syllable is supposed to be pronounced 'kaf' like a baby cow: calf.

[Hassouni]

Jaymes, I've never heard that. I mean your friend could be right, but I've always heard it as you say it.

[Jaymes]

Jaymes, I've never heard that. I mean your friend could be right, but I've always heard it as you say it.

Honestly, she's the only one I've ever heard say it that way as well. But she's so insistent (even rude) about it that I began to wonder if she might be right.

[Dave the Cook]

Michael Symon says -- in a Calphalon commercial -- CAL-fa-lon. Video here.

[Jaymes]

Michael Symon says -- in a Calphalon commercial -- CAL-fa-lon. Video here.

Wow, thanks! Ammunition.

This is going to settle it.

Heheh.

[Mjx]

Artful.

Not a food term, but one I see increasingly used in descriptions of food presentation to mean 'artistic'. Just say 'artistic', already; arranging your figs and prosciutto in the shape of a daisy may meet strike you as artistic, but by no stretch of the imagination is it particularly clever or skilful (i.e. 'artful').

[Heartsurgeon]

here is a combination "Mispronunciation and Misnomer"

pilaf.

for starters, it is pronounced pee-lav, NOT pee-laf

second, the translation of pilaf is rice.

so when a menu lists "rice pilaf", it literally means "rice rice".

STOP IT! IT'S STUPID!

call it rice, or call it pilaf, but stop calling it rice pilaf, it makes no sense.

[PrivateTim]

A waiter in an LA restaurant actually put down the gravy boat of jus three nights ago and remarked, "And here's more au jus on the side."

In a French restaurant that might be a faux pas, but in American English "au jus" is thought of as a side sauce, not its literal French meaning.

If you are at a deli and the waitress asked you "would you like jus, with your sandwich?", you would think her an idiot or pretentious. She is going to ask, "would you like au jus, with your sandwich?"

You can buy packets of "au jus" in any supermarket in the U.S., you are not buying a packet labeled "jus".

[Hassouni]

That doesn't make it any better, frankly

[Chris Hennes]

I asked some friends how to pronounce FAGE..spelling it out. I got three different pronunciations..can anyone help. It's the Greek Yoghurt Fage.

fa-yeh, from what I know.

I somehow missed this: according to the product packaging, it's pronounce "fah-YEH!" Don't forget the exclamation mark!

[gfweb]

Shrimp scampi actually translates as shrimp shrimp. But scampi has come to mean a garlicky sauce and we now see sole scampi etc.

RE au jus... Guy Fieri will burn in hell for his egregious misuse of the term on TV. I knew in third grade that prime rib au jus was "with juices" . Clearly hair bleach depletes grey cells.

[Mjx]

A waiter in an LA restaurant actually put down the gravy boat of jus three nights ago and remarked, "And here's more au jus on the side."

In a French restaurant that might be a faux pas, but in American English "au jus" is thought of as a side sauce, not its literal French meaning.

If you are at a deli and the waitress asked you "would you like jus, with your sandwich?", you would think her an idiot or pretentious. She is going to ask, "would you like au jus, with your sandwich?"

You can buy packets of "au jus" in any supermarket in the U.S., you are not buying a packet labeled "jus".

If a waitress knows enough to ask whether I want something with jus, she'll ask whether I want it 'au jus'; this isn't idiotic or pretentious, it's acknowledging a well-recognized convention.

I haven't seen packets of any substance marked 'au jus' in US supermarkets; where does this happen?

Mass misuse doesn't make something okay. If someone can't wrangle terms in other language, better to stick with what they know; there's nothing so damn special about being multilingual, so attempting it, only to fail, is silly.

[mkayahara]

While we're on the topic of superfluous French prepositions, can we talk about the number of times in the Alinea cookbook it says "cook en sous vide"?

[PrivateTim]

A waiter in an LA restaurant actually put down the gravy boat of jus three nights ago and remarked, "And here's more au jus on the side."

In a French restaurant that might be a faux pas, but in American English "au jus" is thought of as a side sauce, not its literal French meaning.

If you are at a deli and the waitress asked you "would you like jus, with your sandwich?", you would think her an idiot or pretentious. She is going to ask, "would you like au jus, with your sandwich?"

You can buy packets of "au jus" in any supermarket in the U.S., you are not buying a packet labeled "jus".

If a waitress knows enough to ask whether I want something with jus, she'll ask whether I want it 'au jus'; this isn't idiotic or pretentious, it's acknowledging a well-recognized convention.

I haven't seen packets of any substance marked 'au jus' in US supermarkets; where does this happen?

Mass misuse doesn't make something okay. If someone can't wrangle terms in other language, better to stick with what they know; there's nothing so damn special about being multilingual, so attempting it, only to fail, is silly.

It is not a well recognized convention, the well recognized convention is that "au jus" is a sauce in the U.S. so asking someone if they want the sandwich "with au jus" would be the correct, idiomatic U.S. usage.

You can buy Lawry's, or McCormick's or your store brand (Krogger, Safeway, etc.).

Here is an example from Red Robin. Their prime rib dip comes "with au jus", which is the correct, idiomatic American English usage.

[Mjx]

It is not a well recognized convention, the well recognized convention is that "au jus" is a sauce in the U.S. so asking someone if they want the sandwich "with au jus" would be the correct, idiomatic U.S. usage.

You can buy Lawry's, or McCormick's or your store brand (Krogger, Safeway, etc.).

Here is an example from Red Robin. Their prime rib dip comes "with au jus", which is the correct, idiomatic American English usage.

It is incorrect usage, no matter how common it may be, as documented in Common Errors in English Usage.

[gfweb]

It is not a well recognized convention, the well recognized convention is that "au jus" is a sauce in the U.S. so asking someone if they want the sandwich "with au jus" would be the correct, idiomatic U.S. usage.

You can buy Lawry's, or McCormick's or your store brand (Krogger, Safeway, etc.).

Here is an example from Red Robin. Their prime rib dip comes "with au jus", which is the correct, idiomatic American English usage.

It is incorrect usage, no matter how common it may be, as documented in Common Errors in English Usage.

Exactly right. Linguists have this asinine assumption that if enough people say something incorrectly, it then becomes acceptable (is it Farve or Favre?). This reflects a bigger problem in modern thought, that there are no absolutes. Fortunately this isn't the place for that rant.

[BadRabbit]

It is not a well recognized convention, the well recognized convention is that "au jus" is a sauce in the U.S. so asking someone if they want the sandwich "with au jus" would be the correct, idiomatic U.S. usage.

You can buy Lawry's, or McCormick's or your store brand (Krogger, Safeway, etc.).

Here is an example from Red Robin. Their prime rib dip comes "with au jus", which is the correct, idiomatic American English usage.

It is incorrect usage, no matter how common it may be, as documented in Common Errors in English Usage.

Exactly right. Linguists have this asinine assumption that if enough people say something incorrectly, it then becomes acceptable (is it Farve or Favre?). This reflects a bigger problem in modern thought, that there are no absolutes. Fortunately this isn't the place for that rant.

While I agree with part of your sentiment, the fact is that language changes because mass usage does eventually alter what is proper. It's why Shakespeare doesn't sound much like what we speak today and how different languages develop in the first place.

EDIT: too many Ss in the bard's name

Edited by BadRabbit, 15 March 2012 - 08:41 AM.

[Jaymes]

While I agree with part of your sentiment, the fact is that language changes because mass usage does eventually alter what is proper. It's why Shakespeare doesn't sound much like what we speak today and how different languages develop in the first place.

And that's the way of it, isn't it? One doesn't have much choice in the matter. There are a few words that I used to use all the time to mean what they originally meant that I can no longer use in that context at all. Often, there are other words one can substitute that mean the same thing as the original. But, for a few, there is nothing else that conveys quite the same message.

I feel sadder about the loss of some than others, but there's nothing to be done.

One example (about which I don't feel such sentimental sadness, I should add) is that every time I ask my children if they've seen my "thongs," they blanch, then redden. Keeping in mind that I am a granny "of size," I suppose that mental image is just too much.

When, of course, I'm only asking if anyone has seen my shower flipflops.

Edited by Jaymes, 15 March 2012 - 12:49 PM.

[PrivateTim]

It is not a well recognized convention, the well recognized convention is that "au jus" is a sauce in the U.S. so asking someone if they want the sandwich "with au jus" would be the correct, idiomatic U.S. usage.

You can buy Lawry's, or McCormick's or your store brand (Krogger, Safeway, etc.).

Here is an example from Red Robin. Their prime rib dip comes "with au jus", which is the correct, idiomatic American English usage.

It is incorrect usage, no matter how common it may be, as documented in Common Errors in English Usage.

Language, like food, does not stand still. It evolves and what was once unacceptable becomes acceptable with common usage. If it did not we'd all sound like characters from Beowulf, or the Canterbury Tales, or whatever time period you feel freezing the language is appropriate. To quote Professor Brians, "When you reach the point that nobody seems to agree with your standard of usage any more, you may have simply been left behind." It may not be "nobody" on that "au jus" island yet, but the population is getting thin.

[annabelle]

I've seen "apple pie ala mode with ice cream" on a menu before.

[Hassouni]

It is not a well recognized convention, the well recognized convention is that "au jus" is a sauce in the U.S. so asking someone if they want the sandwich "with au jus" would be the correct, idiomatic U.S. usage.

You can buy Lawry's, or McCormick's or your store brand (Krogger, Safeway, etc.).

Here is an example from Red Robin. Their prime rib dip comes "with au jus", which is the correct, idiomatic American English usage.

It is incorrect usage, no matter how common it may be, as documented in Common Errors in English Usage.

It is not a well recognized convention, the well recognized convention is that "au jus" is a sauce in the U.S. so asking someone if they want the sandwich "with au jus" would be the correct, idiomatic U.S. usage.

You can buy Lawry's, or McCormick's or your store brand (Krogger, Safeway, etc.).

Here is an example from Red Robin. Their prime rib dip comes "with au jus", which is the correct, idiomatic American English usage.

It is incorrect usage, no matter how common it may be, as documented in Common Errors in English Usage.

Exactly right. Linguists have this asinine assumption that if enough people say something incorrectly, it then becomes acceptable (is it Farve or Favre?). This reflects a bigger problem in modern thought, that there are no absolutes. Fortunately this isn't the place for that rant.

Hell yes and concurred!

[Mjx]

Language, like food, does not stand still. It evolves and what was once unacceptable becomes acceptable with common usage. If it did not we'd all sound like characters from Beowulf, or the Canterbury Tales, or whatever time period you feel freezing the language is appropriate. To quote Professor Brians, "When you reach the point that nobody seems to agree with your standard of usage any more, you may have simply been left behind." It may not be "nobody" on that "au jus" island yet, but the population is getting thin.

But the US is not the only island where 'au jus' crops up (for example, there are entire countries where they speak French correctly), it isn't even your own language you're mucking about with.

There's a substantial difference between trying to freeze a language at a point in time (a few countries have made that effort), and avoiding the perpetration of wilful mistakes. I'm a copyeditor, so I hear the argument you've made all the time; it's as though people believe that no nation exists other than their own. You might argue that with the many idiotic terms that are are tolerated in the culinary world, this is nothing, but if you visit France, and ask for your whatever 'with au jus', and your waiter rolls his or her eyes, are you then going to complain the French are rude and arrogant?

Language shifts, it's natural. But if you know that something is incorrect, it just makes no sense to defend the mistake, you suck it up, and avoid it in the future. I know what I'm talking about, because for a lot of my life, I've been learning one new language or another. Some of my mistakes (e.g. 'snot papir' to mean tissues) have been adopted by friends in a joking way, because they're funny and communicate clearly; most are dinner stories (my confusing the Danish for 'bra' and 'necessity').

Most countries do odd things to culinary terms from other languages, I've heard some beauts in Italy (I once spent most of a day trying to figure out 'peenat batr') and Denmark (Danes use 'grape' to mean 'grapefruit', which makes for some confusion when they travel outside DK); this isn't unique to the US. But regardless of where you are, or whose language you are attempting to use/incorporate into your own, it just makes no sense to run with what you know to be incorrect, then say 'Eeverybody is doing it' (unless you're 14 or so, then you get a pass ). That's not an argument: It's a really weak excuse for laziness.

[Shalmanese]

au jus isn't a French word any more, it's an English word with French origins. I think we've all pretty much given up on "paninis" and au jus is about at the same point.

[Mjx]

Saying 'paninis' if you know it's incorrect is ridiculous (what's wrong with the words 'roll' or 'sandwich'?); so is 'with au jus'. There may be no way to get people to get their shit together about these things, but they're incorrect. It all makes me think of Miss Piggy using 'moi'. Absurd.

[Nayan Gowda]

au jus isn't a French word any more, it's an English word with French origins. I think we've all pretty much given up on "paninis" and au jus is about at the same point.

It's at times like this I wish you Americans would find another word for the language you use and abuse. "Au jus" is not an English word (or even a word) it's a phrase...

[Mjx]

au jus isn't a French word any more, it's an English word with French origins. I think we've all pretty much given up on "paninis" and au jus is about at the same point.

It's at times like this I wish you Americans would find another word for the language you use and abuse. "Au jus" is not an English word (or even a word) it's a phrase...

Well, to be fair, the tendency to misuse/mispronounce foreign lanaguage terms isn't unique, or even most pronounced in the US, it's prevalent the world over (e.g. upthread, I mentioned the use of the word 'grape' for 'grapefruit' in Denmark; I could also mention 'expresso' pronounced as 'exPRAHso', and heaps of other misuses and mispronunciations... and don't get me started on the things that happen to foreign language terms in Italy). But for better or worse, the American language is still English.