ChattyCathy wrote:
>Sqwertz wrote:
>
>> The prices on the menu for "Starters" and "Appetizers" were all within
>> $3 of each other.
>>
>> It was an honest question.
>
>In this part of the world we usually refer to a 3 course meal as having a
>starter, a main and then dessert - but there's a couple I know who do
>refer to a starter as an appetizer and they're actually quite snobby i.e.
>they only eat at the most expensive restaurants/shop at the most expensive
>stores, drive shockingly expensive cars - just to show off how much money
>they have - which is why I found Marty's comment funny).
>
>But then again the word 'appetizer' rings another bell - think in some
>parts of the world it might be an alternative term for a main course?
>Dunno, just too lazy to google it right now.

I've never seen a menu in NY with the term "Starter"... In the US I'd
think that's a trailer trash term. When a la carte there are
Appetizers, Entrees, Desserts, and Beverages. Full meals will say
includes cup of soup or salad, entree with choice of sides, and
dessert... beverages and appetizers are a la carte. Most meals
include bread n' butter. Actually I've never seen the term "Starter"
on a menu anywhere in the US... perhaps in some localities they use
Starter because they can't spell Appetizer.