Interesting discussion of menu language

[balex]

There is an interesting and perceptive article about menu language on a linguistics blog I read: read it here.

[Jinmyo]

Thanks. Very nicely put.

[Suzanne F]

Yes, indeed.

Another article of possible eGullet interest on that site is here.

[Mabelline]

YUM...Cheese Steak Spring Roll!!! Why didn't one of us think that up?

[bleudauvergne]

Thanks for sharing that with us.

[Chad]

George Perrier's minions at Le Bec Fin know exactly where each ingredient in each of their dishes comes from, but they don't feel the need to tell us the names of farms and fishing techniques, or even the complete list of ingredients. Instead, they name only the core substances, preparation methods and flavors. This is not out of any concern for secrecy -- there are Le Bec Fin cookbooks -- but because we are meant to take it for granted that we can trust them to use an appropriate number and variety of appropriately selected ingredients. To go into details on the menu, either about what the ingredients are or where they came from, would be infra dig. And to state that something is crunchy or crispy or fresh -- unless this is unexpected -- would be unthinkable, because it would suggest that there might be some doubt about something about which there should be no doubt at all.

Nice find. I, too, find it extremely annoying when the menu goes into excrutiating detail, including ". . . garnished with hand-picked chervil, lightly taunted by our saucy little Equadoran prep cook."

Chad

[bleachboy]

"I never knew words could be so confusing," Milo said to Tock as he bent down to scratch the dog's ear.

"Only when you use a lot to say a little," answered Tock.

-- Norton Juster, The Phantom Tollbooth

[Fat Guy]

Many of the best chefs in the world believe that producers, regions, and special products should be celebrated on menus. The expression of this belief can range from Georges Blanc's menu specifying "L’Aile ou la Cuisse de Poulet de Bresse Naturellement Rôtie" rather than just "Poulet" to a draft of a Cafe Gray menu I saw where the dishes are described simply but the bottom of the menu contains a list of producers, to Daniel Boulud's menus naming Tim Starck as his tomato supplier, to Alain Ducasse producing an entire book, Harvesting Excellence, containing photographs, bios, and other details about the American producers with whom he has relationships. There's not an insecure chef in that bunch -- they set the standards; they are the standards -- and I see no basis for complaining about being provided with this information. Certainly to call it "infra dig" is to reveal a lack of familiarity with menu writing at the top levels of cuisine today. There are menus that overdo it, and it's especially ridiculous when menus add meaningless modifiers that attempt to make ingredients sound better than they are ("ahi tuna" "USDA beef"), but real information, in moderation, can be a good thing.

[balmagowry]

There is an interesting and perceptive article about menu language on a linguistics blog I read: read it here.

Cool! I love Mark Liberman's stuff - yes, even when he isn't quoting Me. The White Dog business reminds me of Terry Jones describing his chocolates: "only the finest BABY frogs, lightly killed, delicately garnished with lark's vomit..." which strictly speaking is not TMI, I guess, so much as a warning not to eat the thing.

[Chad]

Milton:  We use only the finest baby frogs, dew-picked and flown from Iraq, cleansed in the finest quality spring water, lightly killed, and then sealed in a succulent Swiss quintuple smooth treble cream milk chocolate envelope, and lovingly frosted with glucose.

Praline:  That's as may be, but it's still a frog!

Milton:  What else?

Praline:  Well don't you even take the bones out?

Milton:  If we took the bones out it wouldn't be crunchy would it?

I'm all for identifying specially sourced ingredients if they're vital to the dish, but to cite the provenance of every last garnish is simply too much. I have read the argument (though I can't recall where at the moment) that part of the problem is that America lacks a standard vocabulary for naming dishes. So while Chef Chad might describe his dish as "Braised free range top sirloin medallions with red wine reduction and Fall vegetable medley flavored with Nieman Ranch bacon and hand-picked chantarelle mushrooms," Chef Jacques would simply say "Boeuf Bourguignon" on the menu, trusting his audience to know what it was.

Chad

[Chad]

Apparently Mr. Liberman reads eGullet. He quotes Fat Guy's post above and responds

I'm just pointing out that elaborate language is often displayed as a symbol in itself, on menus as well as in novels and essays. There are a number of reasons for such displays, and one is as an index of status. And among the motivations for indexing status, one is a concern that it might otherwise be evaluated as too low.

He makes an excellent point about menu language as an attempt a conveying status.

I'm hoping Mark Liberman will join the conversation here. I tried to find a way to contact him through his website, but for someone who's passionate about simplicity, his site is a nightmare to navigate.

Chad

edited to correct spelling of Mark Liberman's name. Sorry 'bout that, Mark.

CDW

[balmagowry]

I'm hoping Mark Lieberman will join the conversation here. I tried to find a way to contact him through his website, but for someone who's passionate about simplicity, his site is a nightmare to navigate.

To be fair, it isn't just his - not only does he share the language blog with other people, but it's on a university server, so you can imagine....

His e-mail address is there somewhere, though - I know because that's how I first contacted him about the marthambles question. Actually, I have to e-mail him today anyway, to see if he's still planning to come to my lecture thingy on Thursday - while I'm at it will be glad to bring up eG and this thread, and invite him to join both.

EDIT to add: Hokay, have sent the invitation; nothing beside remains but to wait and see....

Edited May 17, 2004 by balmagowry (log)

[Al_Dente]

From same site-- on Foodspeak

[balmagowry]

Man, I just can't wait to say to someone, "Excuse me, you have a slightly poopy nose."

Where's my dog?

And imagine... Yak Cheese Tasting Notes. What's not to love?

EDIT: Ha, busted! I see you there, Mark! Come on, post.

Edited May 17, 2004 by balmagowry (log)

[Gifted Gourmet]

From same site-- on Foodspeak

This is nothing short of brilliant, Al Dente! Thanks for your link!

Vintage 5764 from the Chateau d'Mullen is the result of firm, fresh fruit. The bouquet is startlingly arresting. With a beguilingly titanium core, the aroma is pugilistic. Devastatingly acidic aroma. Sensations of battery acid give way to a nuclear confiture in the mouth; ripe and full. Accents of earth, fire and arsenic followed by a crippling finish.

This is about horseradish, needless to say.

Edited May 17, 2004 by Gifted Gourmet (log)

[Daniel Rogov]

Alas, some of the menus one sees these days are so offensive or silly that no one could possibly take food seriously. The menu of a restaurant that I visited several years ago in the State of Maryland, not far from Washington, D.C., described one of their dishes as follows:

Finest Fresh River Trout Fillets, gently sauteed in breadcrumbs to a golden brown, with fresh garden peas simmered in butter, light and crisp French-fried potatoes, and a lemon wedge

There was even a photograph to whet the appetite for the dismal anticlimax of the reality. The "fresh trout fillets" were actually two firmly frozen rectangles of some unidentifiable fish that rattled when they hit the skillet; the fresh peas came out of a freezer bag; the butter had so little fat content that it would be illegal to call it by that name in France, Holland or England; and the soggy chips were made out of potatoes which had been boiled, mashed and reconstituted in some factory before being fried in oil that was far too old. With the exception of the lemon wedge, which was fine, this meal, like the menu on which it was listed was simply a bad joke.

Best,

Rogov

[balmagowry]

Mmmmmm.... Lemon wedge!

[Fat Guy]

part of the problem is that America lacks a standard vocabulary for naming dishes

In the fine-dining category, America had the standard French vocabulary for about as long as France had it -- maybe longer. But today neither country has a standard vocabulary to offer. You simply can't go into high-end restaurants in France today and order the old Escoffier dishes, where two or three words often told the whole story. Wherever cuisine is the creative expression of an individual chef, the choice is between detailed description and surprise -- there is little available in the way of shorthand code.

[Mark Liberman]

Hello, everyone. It's nice to greet balmagowry here, who is an old e-friend, and to have the opportunity to make some new ones. I'm glad that people posting here, who know so much more about food and food language than I do, have found some value or at least amusement in my comments on the subject.

Edited May 18, 2004 by Mark Liberman (log)

[Behemoth]

In White Dog's favor, they do have a political agenda -- sometimes it gets a little silly, but mentioning where their produce & meats come from is a part of that agenda.

Also, the cluttered & quirky menu kind of matches the decor. I have some ceramic white poodle bookends I've been meaning to donate to them...

[Chad]

Howdy, Mark, welcome to eGullet. You'll find some fairly serious linguists here (as well as some of us who just dabble for the fun of it -- like me, a refugee from the Great Semiotics Scare of the mid-80s).

So, what do you think? Menu writing as cultural posing? As necessary descriptor of tradition-breaking cuisine? As a substitute for a standardized cultural vocabulary of recognized dishes? Or maybe its nothing more than chefs and restaurateurs who say, "Thomas Keller does it, so we should, too" without recognizing Keller's sense of play -- with language as well as food.

Chad

[Jinmyo]

Welcome, Mark.

[Mark Liberman]

So, what do you think? Menu writing as cultural posing? As necessary descriptor of tradition-breaking cuisine? As a substitute for a standardized cultural vocabulary of recognized dishes? Or maybe its nothing more than chefs and restaurateurs who say, "Thomas Keller does it, so we should, too" without recognizing Keller's sense of play -- with language as well as food.

I started out to try to write about authors like Matthew Pearl, whose style I had discussed in this post. I wanted to make the point that sometimes style is content, so that an elaborated style and obscure words can be used to try to impress the reader with the author's knowledge and skill. I thought that the menu analogy might help to get this across.

It was a bit unfair to pick on the White Dog. They do have especially elaborate names of dishes, as I knew from frequent experience with their menu, and so it was a target of opportunity. And sometimes I'm pretty sure that their menu phrases are more of a ritual flourish than a real communication of content. For example "wild caught white albacore tuna" doesn't ring true to me, since as far as I know, farm-raised tuna doesn't exist. Perhaps in this case they mean "line caught" as opposed to netted.

However, I do recognize that some of the elaboration of names on the White Dog's menu is a calculated attempt to persuade their clientele that patronizing particular (often local) farmers matters, for social as well as culinary reasons.

As for playfulness, I guess it's also a form of showing off, but there's a difference between playful display of real linguistic skill, which I admire; ritualized unthinking reproduction of a standard cultural patterns, which I register for what it is; and tone-deaf deployment of fancy words to try to impress me, which doesn't work.

I'd characterize the White Dog's menu as an example of the second case. I'm prepared to believe that years ago, the original White Dog menu author contributed creatively to the development of the patterns, but it's pretty routine by now. The examples that I cited from Matthew Pearl's novel seem to be examples of the third type. The subject matter and the plot are interesting enough to keep me reading, but the ostentatious thesaurus-mongering makes it tough going.

[Fat Guy]

Welcome, Mark.

[Gifted Gourmet]

I'm glad that people posting here, who  know so much more about food and food language than I do, have found some value or at least amusement in my comments on on the subject.

Both value and amusement, Mark. I extend to you my sincerest welcome as well and look forward to more of your erudition and humor blend!