Here are 3 examples:
Fried egg, fried rice, fried chicken

All these “fry” are different. If you were to use the “fry” in fried rice to fry an egg, you’d get scrambled egg. Fried chicken is done by submerging it in oil, which you won’t do with fried egg or fried rice.

This post is made from the perspective of a Cantonese/Chinese speaker. We have different words for these different types of “fry” (煎, 炒, 炸 respectively)

(Turns out I did post it in the wrong sub and I didn’t realize, and now I feel very stupid. Photon UI has once again screwed me over. Got mad for no reason.)

2 points

English cooking vocabulary matches the sofistication of their cuisine

permalink
report
reply

Nope, nothing ambiguous to me.

To fry means to cook in a fat. That is all.

That’s like saying “blue” is ambiguous simply because there’s also 13 different Pantone blues.

permalink
report
reply
18 points

No, it isn’t.

permalink
report
reply
94 points
*

Fry means to cook with oil.

You have pan frying, deep frying, shallow frying, they all have additional descriptors, and you can usually infer the type from the product. You can always say deep fried chicken, but that’s also assumed when you say “fried chicken” already. If it’s fried different you would maybe say “pan fried chicken” instead.

permalink
report
reply
5 points

Maybe with hot oil?

I don’t think confit would be considered frying.

permalink
report
parent
reply
0 points

Slow frying would be an apt description for a confit duck breast.

permalink
report
parent
reply
28 points
*

There’s also “air fry”, which is just an aggressive convection oven

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

Usually you need to spray or toss the stuff with a small amount of oil first, or stuff has natural oils. The term is usually for using “another oil” so I would say adding oil would be a must instead of its own oils myself.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

I wouldn’t say it’s always true. If i fry a duck breast in a pan only with fat from it’s skin i would still classify it as frying even when all the fat is from the duck breast.

permalink
report
parent
reply
8 points

Usually, the food has it’s own oil, which is heated by the air around it. That’s how air-frying gets food crispy (but it doesn’t always work).

permalink
report
parent
reply

In your opinion, what’s the difference between pan frying and sautéing?

permalink
report
parent
reply
-2 points

English and French terms?

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

I thought pan fried was with a lot of oil, like pan fried chicken, and sautéed was with a small amount of oil.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Ok, so they are different??

Let’s say I want use a a small amount of olive oil to lightly fry pressed garlic, chopped onions and green bell pepper enough to make the onion translucent and release the oil from the garlic into the olive oil. The amount of olive oil used is a little more than enough to wet the mix in oil. That would be considered sautéing, not pan frying, correct?

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

I think they can be used synonymously; sautéing may imply stirring or shaking the ingredients in the pan similarly to stir-frying.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Ah, thank you! I always found those terms confusing. I learned to cook in Spanish, so when I would describe a recipe that included “sautéing” to Anglophones, I would say that I “fried” it because that’s how it’s said in Spanish, and I guess the context helps if you are familiar with the cuisine. Anglophones would think something like deep frying, which would cause confusion or hesitation. Whereas any Latino would know that no one is deep frying sofrito.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

“Saute” is french for jump, or jumped. Sauteing is this action: https://media.tenor.com/EHn5Kuiw39MAAAAM/cozinhando-cooking.gif

It’s a method of frying in the sense that “stir frying” is a method of frying. Sauteing is frying in a pan, such that you’re turning the stuff over regularly by this tossing action.

One of the outcomes of sauteing is that your stuff gets browned in a randomized, pleasantly-varied manner, since with each toss-and-catch some items flip over and others end up on the same side again.

permalink
report
parent
reply
12 points
*

We have some oddly obtuse language for cooking in English.

We use the same phrase to describe foods that are high in temperature and contain lots of capsaicin (hot). We can use spicy, I suppose, but it gets a little odd describing foods with lots of spices that aren’t chili pepper. I generally say “well-spiced” and that gets the message across. We hardly have a way to distinguish “types of spicy” flavoring, such as that from chili, horseradish or peppercorns. I’ve seen some people start to say mala (loan word, 麻辣) for numbing spice, but that’s uncommon and new.

That’s just a few examples.

Most of our more precise language for cooking comes from other languages, like French. To saute, to braise, bain-marie, julienne, sous vide, etc. I’m not sure why English has so many lexical gaps specifically around cooking.

It’s gotten WAY better. Some recipes from, like, the colonial era, have instructions like “cook well in a cold oven until done”, so progress has been made, it’s still often imprecise and clumsy.

permalink
report
reply
6 points

I’m not sure sure why English has so many lexical gaps specifically around cooking

Have you seen British “cooking”?

permalink
report
parent
reply

Lol, have my upvote.

Now baking… The Brits seem to get that.

It’s all a result of history.

Hell, Brits were still under austerity through the 60’s, and didn’t really recover financially from WWII until the 80’s.

There are some great shows on Amazon done by historian Ruth Goodman and friends. Victorian Farm, Tudor Farm, etc. “War Farm” really shows how difficult the Brits had it until post-WWII. I’d watch them in sequence, because it’s great insight to the different periods.

permalink
report
parent
reply
6 points

The English royal court became french speaking after the normands invaded, around 200 or 300 years ago. Nobles and royalty can afford lavish meals and dishes.

They can also regularly afford meat, whilst it was the peasants who tended to the animals. Thus pork (from porc) vs pig, beef (from boeuf) vs cow, poultry (from poulet) vs chicken.

It doesn’t explainall of the gaps, but it’s an important part of the explanation.

permalink
report
parent
reply

And the well-heeled like keeping the distinction between them (French-speaking) and commoners (English-speaking).

It’s interesting, because that’s part of why Shakespeare was such a big deal - not only writing and performing in English for the Common Man, but was skewering the well-heeled while also expanding English.

Neat stuff.

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Around 2 or 3 hundred years ago? William the Conqueror was 1066 homie.

permalink
report
parent
reply
1 point

You’re right, thanks for the correction

permalink
report
parent
reply
7 points

“cook well in a cold oven” at least makes sense in the context of the time. Ovens then were not supplied continuous heat - instead, they were fired up to a high heat, and then as it slowly cooled food was baked in them according to the current temperature. A cold or slow oven would be at the low end, and a hot or quick oven would be shortly after it was first heated.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

This is a great point. It wasn’t like every home had a thermometer in the oven and therefore they had to use different terminology and identifiers for indicating oven temperature. Similarly, this is why American recipes measure in volume vs weight, most homes didn’t have scales, they had cups and spoons.

These were also “precise enough” for the era. Perhaps these lexical gaps form as more styles of cuisine become more common and other cooking methods are used.

I’ve noticed this with some Indian recipes. The instruction “to grind” specifically refers to using grinders, either mill or wet grinders, that just aren’t common in the US and that can create some ambiguity in how finely to chop or grind something.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Showerthoughts

!showerthoughts@lemmy.world

Create post

A “Showerthought” is a simple term used to describe the thoughts that pop into your head while you’re doing everyday things like taking a shower, driving, or just daydreaming. The best ones are thoughts that many people can relate to and they find something funny or interesting in regular stuff.

Rules

  • All posts must be showerthoughts
  • The entire showerthought must be in the title
  • Posts must be original/unique
  • Be good to others - no bigotry - including racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia
  • Adhere to Lemmy’s Code of Conduct

Community stats

  • 6K

    Monthly active users

  • 1.3K

    Posts

  • 41K

    Comments