Shrimp(s) and prawns

Wed Mar 11 19:46:56 UTC 2009

In addition to gamba, which I find translated as "shrimp" and
"prawns" in one on-line dictionary, there also are "gambera", which
come back as "shrimp" , "prawns", and "CRAYFISH".  A long time ago I
received crayfish when I was expecting shrimp/prawn.  I must have
missed a qualifier.

Joel

At 3/11/2009 12:08 PM, Laurence Horn wrote:
>Wow!  Non-definitive perhaps--but who knew we had such an
>accomplished cephalopodologist on call?!  This is all consistent with
>my encounters with squid/calamares~i/calmars/seppias/cuttlefish on
>menus with various provenances, but with considerably more of the
>blanks filled in (or should I say with much of the black ink
>removed).   As they say, to the victor goes the squid!  Since I can't
>offer you any calamares en su tinta, you'll have to settle for an
>eggcorn:
>
>http://encyclopedia.farlex.com/Cuddlefish
>http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Cuddlefish
>http://www.redditall.com/2008/02/when-cuddlefish-attack.html
>
>LH
>
>At 4:46 AM -0400 3/11/09, Victor wrote:
>>Not to compare them to pornography, but if you see these cephalopods
>>side-by-side, the distinction is fairly obvious--the shape and body
>>morphology are rather distinct. Generally, much confusion on the subject
>>is created by Chinese culinary culture that uses both but in different
>>ways and, for some reason, does not respect that difference when
>>translating names into English. I've found Mediterranean terms,
>>generally, to be less confused and confusing. Most European languages (I
>>could not find the equivalent in German) distinguish between the two
>>very clearly. French and Portugese have simple short words for each,
>>apparently because both are used in cooking on the Atlantic Coast. You
>>certainly won't be served cuttlefish when ordering "calamari", although
>>similar dishes with cuttlefish do exist. Other than the three languages
>>mentioned, most Western European languages (including Scandinavian) use
>>variations on "sepia" to describe cuttlefish. Google suggests "zeekat"
>>for cuttlefish in Dutch, although, during last year, whenever I saw
>>cuttlefish fresh at the fish market in Groningen, it was always labeled
>>"sepia" or "sepia inktvis". In contrast, all sizes and varieties of
>>squid were labeled "inktvis". If you are wondering if there is any
>>relationship between these animals and sepia dye, the answer is yes.
>>
>>About the only place you are going to find cuttlefish in the US (as
>>food) is in dry goods section or dry snacks (next to beef jerky) in
>>Chinese stores. So when you see "cuttlefish" on the menu in an
>>Anglophone country, you can be 99+% sure that it's actually squid that
>>is being served. (Chinese dishes with dried cuttlefish are rarely served
>>to American customers--perhaps the situation is different in the UK.)
>>One exception is Risoto al nero di Seppia, which should use cuttlefish,
>>if properly prepared. You may also occasionally find cuttlefish "steak"
>>in Japanese restaurants, particularly as sushi.
>>
>>I am not entirely sure of the source of the color in black pasta, but, I
>>believe, it could be either one--both Italian and Spanish cuisine use
>>them somewhat interchangeably, so it may depend on the manufacturer (or
>>the chef, if made fresh). What you may find on the plate in Spain,
>>Portugal, Italy, Croatia or Turkey (and the French Atlantic Coast) is
>>another matter--you are on your own there.
>>
>>Cuttlefish are generally the more interesting animals of the two. They
>>are roughly as intelligent as octopus (which is saying quite a bit),
>>while squid are closer to lemmings--at least the smaller variety that
>>usually finds itself on your plate--although the intelligence is still
>>fairly high for invertebrates. Giant squid is an entirely different
>>creature and I'll skip it for the moment. The same goes for colossal squid.
>>
>>Cuttlefish look more flat of the two, with distinct top and bottom sides
>>and a continuous "fin" running along the body. Their arms and tentacles
>>are somewhat differentiated and highly developed eyes are on the top
>>side. In contrast, squid is generally conical, with rather larger dual
>>fins at the tail end, with simple eyes clearly bilaterally opposed, two
>>longer tentacles, and eight fairly undifferentiated "arms" (the "things"
>>with suction rings on them--some species do not even differentiate
>>between tentacles and arms, as all 10 look identical). Cuttlefish have
>>a  porous buoyancy organ, usually referred to as "cuttlebone" (which is
>>sold in pet stores as a nutrition/exercise source for parrots).  Squid
>>does not have a cuttlebone, although both have soft cartilage that
>>serves an entirely different purpose (rigidity), but is occasionally
>>confused for cuttlebone (it's actual name is the pen).
>>
>>My description is fairly primitive and is not meant to be definitive.
>>
>>    VS-)
>>
>>Laurence Horn wrote:
>>>But on the topic of seafood lumpers vs. splitters:  there's also the
>>>squid vs. cuttlefish distinction that I've never quite understood,
>>>but shows up in English translations of menus whose original is
>>>Spanish, Italian, or various Asian languages, so I assume it's a real
>>>distinction that I just neutralize.  Different species? Different
>>>sizes?  It all tastes good to me, so it's not like I *really* care,
>>>but I am curious.
>>
>>------------------------------------------------------------
>>The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>
>------------------------------------------------------------
>The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org

------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org