On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 23:58:47 +0200, Victor Sack wrote:

> blake murphy > wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 28 Jun 2009 08:27:50 +0200, Victor Sack wrote:
>>>
>>>> Victor Sack > wrote:
>>>
>>> It is not about a validity of anything; it is about "bulk sausage" being
>>> semantic nonsense. The term is perfectly well understandable by anyone,
>>> but is semantically ridiculous.
>>>>
>>>>>The "term" was probably first used by someone with a limited knowledge
>>>>>of both English and cooking (and it was surely the very same harmful
>>>>>drudge who started to use "hamburger" in a similar sense). "Sausage" is
>>>>>defined by its casings. The minced meat that goes into the casings or
>>>>>is used for many other related or unrelated products and dishes is
>>>>>correctly called "forcemeat" throughout the English-speaking world,
>>>>>America including.
>>
>> ...and everyone in america seems to know what it means. i fail to see the
>> problem, or 'semantic nonsense' involved.
>
> Explained above.
>
> Besides, using terms such as "sausage" or "hamburger" for things that
> are neither sausage nor hamburger only shows one's limited vocabulary,
> laziness, or a lack of respect to one's own language - and maybe leads
> to general moral turpitude. Ha!
>
> Really, this particular case may be a triviality,

ya think?

> but even here there is
> more to English than "sausage" and "hamburger". There is no good reason
> to imitate what is effectively pidgin English, or the language of a
> five-year-old child. A language that limits itself to just getting a
> general idea across would be a very poor language indeed.
>
> Victor

if google fails, you can always ask.

for that matter, 'pidgin' developed because it was effective in basic
communication. we're not writing poetry or engineering specifications
here.

your pal,
blake