With our apologies to Nintendo’s famous Italian plumber Mario, this idiom originally had nothing to do with pipes — so let’s explore why people tend to get it mixed up.
In 1929, René Magritte painted “The Treachery of Images,” featuring an image of a pipe accompanied by a French phrase that translates to “This is not a pipe.” Carrying that logic over to the English language, we’re here to alert you that the idiom “down the pipe” actually has nothing to do with pipes at all — it’s always been “down the pike.” So, why are the words “pike” and “pipe” so commonly mixed up? Is it just a misinterpretation based on similar sounds? Let’s dive in and look at the history.
The term “turnpike” refers to an expressway on which tolls are usually charged. Throughout history, people have often used turnpikes to travel between cities, encountering new and unfamiliar things along the way. By the early 20th century, this gave rise to the idiom “down the pike,” which can be used in a couple of ways. You can say something “came down the pike” when referring to something that happened in the course of certain events, or you can say something is “coming down the pike” if it’s anticipated to happen sometime in the future.
Advertisement
One major historic event also contributed to the idiom’s popularity: the 1904 World’s Fair in St. Louis. One of the main attractions was a mile-long carnival midway called “the Pike.” During the event, visitors were encouraged to come “down the Pike” to witness the many stunning exhibits and amusements. Thanks to the fair’s immense popularity, the phrase quickly caught on among those who attended the exposition or who perused newspaper reports about the proceedings.
That midway is long gone, though, and not everyone is familiar with the word “turnpike,” as those roads are located in only certain parts of North America. This has likely contributed to people confusing “down the pike” for the similar-sounding phrase “down the pipe,” which has come to be accepted as meaning the same thing. The confusion also may be a conflation of “down the pike” and “in the pipeline” — the latter of which is a similar idiom that refers to things in development. So even though it’s impossible to conclusively say exactly where or how “down the pipe” originated, some argue it’s the more popular option today.
But should you use “down the pike” or “down the pipe” going forward? Well, the former option is technically correct, and you’d be right to use it. But the English language is also constantly evolving, and “down the pipe” is widely accepted today. No matter which you choose, the people around you will likely understand what you mean.
Bennett Kleinman is a New York City-based staff writer for Optimism. He is also a freelance comedy writer, devoted New York Yankees and New Jersey Devils fan, and thinks plain seltzer is the best drink ever invented.
When I’m having an off day, saying I’m “feeling blue” is the easiest way to quickly communicate my state of mind. It works as an explanation because I might not want to get too deep into why I’m sad, but it helps to explain that I’m not at my best. As a color, blue has different connotations, but “feeling blue” is a general sentiment of sadness, which comes from many sources.
Advertisement
In color theory, blue generates feelings of calmness and relaxation — maybe calling to mind a tranquil body of water or a calm sky. Since scientists have also found that blue inspires feelings of reliability, businesses often choose to use blue in their company logos. And yet at the same time, the word “blue” representing a feeling of sadness dates back to Chaucer’s poetry in the 1300s. The physical condition of black and blue skin, caused by a bruise, could be an origin of the metaphor of feeling blue, and writers used to call a depressive or melancholy feeling the “blue devil,” all the way back in the 1700s.
“The blues” referred to sadness as far as back 1741, but the expression really took off with the rise of the blues music genre. In the 1860s, several musical styles coalesced to form the blues, which developed in the rural U.S. south out of African American folk songs. The genre found a wider audience in the 1940s as Black people migrated to cities. A blues song has a characteristic sad sound, built on the blues scale with minor notes on the third and fifth. The thudding bass line and percussion also give the genre its signature groove. Blues lyrics tended to focus on general hardships and the things in life that were getting the singer down emotionally.
When the events of the day have you feeling blue, play some music from one of the blues greats — Robert Johnson, Muddy Waters, Ma Rainey, Bessie Smith — or a modern practitioner such as Eric Clapton, Bonnie Raitt, or Susan Tedeschi and Derek Trucks. You may still be feeling blue, but the music will be singing to your emotions.
Julia Rittenberg is a culture writer and content strategist driven by a love of good stories. She writes most often about books for Book Riot. She lives in Brooklyn with a ton of vintage tchotchkes that her cat politely does not knock over.
To the average person, “Wi-Fi” appears to be an abbreviation. Those in the technical know might already know the secret meaning behind the title of wireless internet.
When you set up your home internet, do you stick with the internet provider’s router name or do you re-name your Wi-Fi signal to something clever, like “Pretty Fly for a Wi-Fi” or “Tell My Wi-Fi Love Her”? Whichever camp you’re in, if you’re not an IT person you might never have thought about the meaning of “Wi-Fi.” At first glance, you might assume it’s an abbreviation of the phrase “wireless fidelity,” on the pattern of “Hi-Fi”/”high fidelity” and “Lo-Fi”/”low fidelity.” But you may be surprised to learn that “Wi-Fi” isn’t an abbreviation and it doesn’t stand for anything — it’s just a name for wireless internet.
Advertisement
In the late 1990s, work rapidly progressed on a new wireless technology that utilized radio waves instead of cables for the purpose of internet connectivity. This became known as the “IEEE 802.11b Direct Sequence” — a phrase that doesn’t exactly roll off the tongue. The developers of this new tech were in need of a more marketable term for commercial use. So in 1999, the newly formed Wireless Ethernet Compatibility Alliance (WECA) unveiled a simplified and much catchier alternative: “Wi-Fi.”
This trademarked term is now synonymous with wireless internet, and according to the official trademark, it should always be written as “Wi-Fi” (not “wifi” or “WiFi”). If you don’t believe us, just ask Phil Belanger, a founding member of WECA who presided over the selection of the title: “Wi-Fi doesn’t stand for anything. It is not an acronym. There is no meaning.”
In an attempt to explain the term and give it more depth, the group briefly attached the tagline “The Standard for Wireless Fidelity” to it, although this doesn’t seem to have cleared up the confusion. Instead, this is largely why so many people still mistakenly assume “Wi-Fi” is short for “wireless fidelity.” Though “Wi-Fi” doesn’t have a deeper meaning, the fluidity of the rhyming sounds has likely enabled the term’s lasting appeal — and allows questions such as “Is the Wi-Fi out?” and “What’s your Wi-Fi password?” to roll off the tongue so easily.
Bennett Kleinman is a New York City-based staff writer for Optimism. He is also a freelance comedy writer, devoted New York Yankees and New Jersey Devils fan, and thinks plain seltzer is the best drink ever invented.
There’s no clear-cut path to pluralization for some English nouns, forcing us to memorize grammatical oddities. Are you guilty of these pluralization faux pas?
Pluralization can be unexpectedly complex. While updating my writer’s bio recently, I found myself tangled in the semantics of “alumna.” It’s a Latin-origin noun that takes different forms when referring to genders and in the plural: “Alumna” refers to a singular female graduate, “alumnus” is a male graduate, and “alum” is a gender-neutral casual choice. But “alumna” seemed like the plural form to me at first, because I was thinking of other Latin plurals, such as “phenomenon” pluralized to “phenomena.”
In this case, however, there’s another Latin pattern at work, which turns “alumna” and “alumnus” into “alumni,” just as one cactus becomes many cacti. Why invite one fungus to the party when you could have several fungi? (Sorry for the dad joke.) The more I dug into the possibilities of plurals, the more I realized that this section of English grammar rules requires navigating a minefield of irregularities.
Advertisement
Plural words ending in “f,” for example, can cause grammatical grief. The appropriate plural form of “roof” is “roofs” — but “rooves” is an archaic alternative that sounds at home in a Shakespearean drama. And then there’s the deceptively simple word “beef.” It would make sense for the plural form to be “beefs,” in line with “chefs” or “reefs” (or the aforementioned “roofs”), but the proper form is actually “beeves” (promise!), following the same pluralization pattern as “leaves” or “hooves,” which swap out the “f” in “leaf” and “hoof” for the suffix “-ves.”
Of “beeves,” language Professor Roly Sussex explains, “It’s archaic and dialectal and not really used very much nowadays,” though it is still correct. The word “beef” is most commonly used today to refer to the meat that comes from cows, rather than the farming usage of the word, which is “a cow, bull, or ox fattened for its meat.” It’s the latter sense that would use the plural “beeves,” so unless you’re a farmer selling cattle, it’s OK to use “beef” as a collective noun on your grocery list.
When pluralizing other nouns, the most common rule is “add an ‘s'” — but with words ending in certain letters (“y,” “f,” “ch,” “x,” “s”), there are additional general guidelines. Plural nouns for names of animals are often confused because there is no blanket rule for when they change form. “Sheep,” “deer,” and “moose” remain the same in singular and plural, while “goose” turns into “geese.” But perhaps one of the most flip-flopping animal names is “fish.” Generally speaking, “fish” is the correct singular and plural version, as in, “Look at those beautiful koi fish.” But in some literary, poetic, or scientific contexts (primarily when referring to multiple species), “fishes” gets the nod — as heard in the iconic line from The Godfather, “Luca Brasi sleeps with the fishes.”
Even familiar phrases for groups of people can be bewildering, especially in compound nouns. It’s essential to pluralize the principal noun and not other parts of the word. For example, you’d call a group of people walking on the street “passersby,” not “passerbys,” because “passer” (the base noun) must be pluralized. Similarly, “sisters-in-law” properly pluralizes the noun, not the suffix. However, you’ll still find an occasional compound noun that tacks an “s” onto the end, regardless of the noun placement, such as “forget-me-nots.” Just remember that English is full of exceptions that make the rule.
Rachel is a Washington, D.C.-based freelance writer. When she's not writing, you can find her wandering through a museum, exploring a new city, or advocating the importance of the Oxford comma.
When I catch myself talking a bit too much or too loudly because I’m excited, I gently tell myself to put a sock in it. It’s a silly mental image, so if it’s said with a jovial tone instead of with a harsh bark, the phrase can disarm, not offend. This lighthearted way of telling someone to quiet down comes from our friends across the pond.
“Put a sock in it” is an informal British phrase used to tell someone to stop talking. However, it’s not just for a chatty pal — it also works when someone is being too loud or causing a ruckus. To explain the phrase, a reader wrote to the London literary magazine The Athenæum in 1919: “The expression ‘Put a sock in it,’ meaning ‘Leave off talking, singing or shouting,’ should be included in the lists of ‘Slang in War-Time.’” Indeed, Paul Dickson wrote a book about wartime slang and pinpointed “put a sock in it” to World War I, with the definition of “be quiet (as if one had a sock stuffed into one’s mouth).”
Advertisement
In the 1925 bookSoldier and Sailor Words and Slang, however, the writers explain the sock idiom as such: “suggested by the handiest method of gagging a gramophone.” A century before Spotify and Airpods, a gramophone played records by projecting sound through a horn. Stuffing a balled-up sock into the horn would successfully muffle the music from the gramophone.
Still, the author of A Concise Dictionary of Phrase and Fable(1993)thought it was unlikely discarded socks would be found around the gramophone in the drawing room (clearly they haven’t lived with teenagers) and put more credit into the soldier-slang origin story: “In a barrack-room, however, socks would certainly be lying around at night and one can imagine a heavy snorer being shouted at and told to ‘put a sock in it’ (in his mouth).” It’s easy to imagine soldiers playing the prank of stuffing a sock in someone’s mouth in a joking threat: “Stop talking or I’ll put a sock in it!”
Whether the origin is a drawing room or barracks, the meaning is the same: We’re putting metaphorical socks in someone’s mouth to muffle their voice. The wry imagery of “put a sock in it” makes it feel like a kinder way of telling someone to stop talking. So if someone does tell us to put a sock in it, we can assume they mean it with love.
Julia Rittenberg is a culture writer and content strategist driven by a love of good stories. She writes most often about books for Book Riot. She lives in Brooklyn with a ton of vintage tchotchkes that her cat politely does not knock over.
We know there’s more than corn in Indiana and more reasons to visit Wisconsin than the state fair cow made of butter, but do you know this Midwestern slang?
Ask any Midwesterner and they’ll give you a list of activities that are quintessential to living in the middle of the United States: playing cornhole, eating casserole, and taking 30 minutes to say goodbye at a social gathering, just to name a few. Another requisite is the use of terms such as “pop” and “Naptown” that may sound strange to folks from other places. Natives of the Midwest have an endearing lingo all their own, and we’re here today to shed some light on this unique vernacular. You’ll be saying “Ope!” and making puppy chow in no time.
Ope!
Pronounced like “hope” with the “h” dropped, this is the Midwestern flavor of “whoops” or “my bad.” The origins of this interjection are unclear, but it comes in handy when you’ve bumped into someone, dropped your keys, or made a wrong turn. Essentially, “ope” is the way Midwesterners apologize to anyone for anything.
Hotdish
Hailing from the Minnesota-Dakotas-Wisconsin corridor, “hotdish” is usually considered a synonym for a casserole, although there’s a key difference between the two words. Casseroles are versatile enough to be considered a main course, side dish, or even a dessert. A hotdish, on the other hand, is always a standalone main dish because its ingredients encompass all the food groups. It must contain either a “cream of” soup or a tomato base, a starch, veggies, and typically some form of meat. Then there’s a topping with some crunch to it (such as Tater Tots, breadcrumbs, or cornflakes), and, of course, cheese — because it wouldn’t be a Wisconsin dish otherwise.
Advertisement
Pop
You know what would go well with that hotdish? A pop! Though folks in other parts of the U.S. may also say “pop,” the term is most closely linked to the Midwest. In most regions, people order sodas — except in the South, where folks collectively (and somewhat confusingly) refer to any kind of soft drink as a “Coke.”
You betcha!
Possibly the most delightful way to agree with someone, reassure them you’re on the same page, or even just show acceptance of another person’s point of view, this Midwestern expression works well as an affirmation in just about any situation.
Advertisement
Dontcha know?
In Minnesota, this is commonly tacked on to the end of sentences as a way to elicit a response. “You betcha!” and “Dontcha know?” make for a harmonious combo in conversation.
Brewski
To unwind after a long day, you might head to the bar and grab a brewski — a combination of the word “brew” and an ending perhaps inspired by the common Slavonic suffix -ski. According to the New Oxford American Dictionary, it’s a combination of “brew” and “the pattern of Russian surnames ending in -skiĭ.” This term originally spilled out of frat houses in the Midwest and made its national debut in a 1977 Saturday Night Live “Coneheads” sketch with the line, “Yes, we were extremely upset to find six-packs of brewski in the children’s trick-or-treat bags.” Speaking of beer, a “red beer,” a Nebraskan specialty, is a brewski mixed with tomato juice and a shot of hot sauce.
Naptown
It’s also a nickname for Maryland’s capital city, Annapolis, but “Naptown” is what Hoosiers call Indianapolis — a town once considered sleepy because of its slower pace of life in the early 20th century. Club musicians may have coined the nickname to avoid saying the six syllables of “Indianapolis,” and area radio stations such as WNAP popularized the term by featuring it heavily on their airwaves in the 1960s. Indianapolis is now the 16th most populous city in the U.S. (and home to the Indy 500 automobile race), so it seems to have outgrown its “sleepiness,” but the moniker is here to stay.
Also called “muddy buddies,” this snack — especially popular in Iowa — consists of Chex cereal coated in a mixture of peanut butter, chocolate, and confectioner’s sugar. Puppy chow got its name because, at first glance, it looks a lot like dog food.
Jennifer A. Freeman is the Senior Editor of Word Smarts and Word Daily. When she's not searching for a perfect synonym or reaching "Genius" level on Spelling Bee, she's playing with her Welsh Terrier in Greenville, SC.
Just like an instruction manual to assemble an IKEA dresser, the manuals for the English language (dictionaries and grammar textbooks) can be hard to decipher. Ask an English teacher and they’ll tell you that certain grammatical mistakes are easily overlooked and regularly repeated. One common error that people make is saying words that sound right, despite the actual meaning being different than what was intended. Words are constantly evolving and changing over the decades and centuries, so a word that was intended to be used in one way might mean something new in 100 years. Let’s dive a little deeper to examine some of the most commonly misused English words today.
Travesty
People often misuse the word “travesty” as a synonym for “tragedy,” implying a situation is filled with suffering or distress. But the true usage of “travesty” is better suited to describe an absurd or distorted representation of something. If a lenient sentence is a “travesty of justice,” for instance, that doesn’t necessarily mean it will cause distress. Rather, it suggests that it’s a mockery of the expected result.
Advertisement
Poisonous
Snakes, spiders, and other critters can be both poisonous and venomous, but the terms mean different things. Something that’s poisonous may cause illness if a toxin enters the body through consumption or absorption. Something that’s venomous, however, will cause suffering if the toxin is forcefully injected through a bite or sting. In other words, biting into a toxic snake (as unlikely as that may be) makes it poisonous, whereas being bitten by that same snake makes it venomous.
Empathy
Showing empathy for another person is different from having sympathy, though many people use the words interchangeably. To have empathy for someone means to be able to understand the emotions they’re feeling, even if you haven’t been in their position. You can empathize with the sadness someone feels after losing a loved one, or the happiness they exude after a promotion at work, but you don’t need to have personally experienced similar situations. “Sympathy” has two common usages, the first being the counterpart to “empathy.” It means to understand the emotions someone is feeling because you have experienced a similar circumstance. Perhaps you can sympathize with your neighbor after they lose their job because you were laid off last year. The second usage of “sympathy” relates to misfortunes above all else, as it means to feel pity for someone.
Advertisement
Jealousy
Though they’ve come to mean the same thing in modern parlance, “jealousy” and “envy” aren’t quite identical. Historically, jealousy implies fear of losing something one already has; for instance, someone may feel jealous when their spouse receives flirtatious attention. “Envy,” on the other hand, implies a desire for something currently lacking, such as good health, money, or a partne
Ambivalent
Some people may not care about how to use the word “ambivalent,” but we sure do. People often say this term as a way to claim they’re indifferent, but to be ambivalent is to have mixed opinions on the topic in question. Let’s say someone is watching a TV show and they love certain episodes but hate others. In this case, the opposing feelings show true ambivalence, as they aren’t sure how they feel about the show on the whole.
Peruse
If a book lover goes to a bookstore and peruses the entire selection, they’ll end up there until close. That’s because while many folks use “peruse” as a synonym for “to skim,” it means the exact opposite. To peruse something implies to read it thoroughly, carefully, and in great detail — not to quickly glance over a few pages.
Advertisement
Irony
While irony can be humorous by coincidence, that’s not always the case. In reality, the word “irony” signifies the opposite of what was expected more than anything else. One example of irony would be a marriage counselor filing for divorce; in this case, it’s not inherently funny, but the situation is contrary to what might be anticipated. For humorous situations that don’t fit the bill, consider calling them funny coincidences rather than ironic.
Someone who says they have a chronic injury is implying they’re suffering from great pain all the time. But “chronic” has less to do with severity and more to do with the duration of an issue. Think of “chronic” as“habitual” instead of “very bad,” as it’s possible to have a chronic ailment that’s a mild discomfort.
One thing to keep in mind is that the English language is always evolving. Some of these “misuses” are based on centuries-old usages, and new meanings have become accepted in casual conversation and are even listed in the dictionary. We like to consider ourselves lifelong students at Word Smarts, and we’re always open to seeing how vocabulary changes.
Bennett Kleinman is a New York City-based staff writer for Optimism. He is also a freelance comedy writer, devoted New York Yankees and New Jersey Devils fan, and thinks plain seltzer is the best drink ever invented.
If you’ve ever watched a cooking competition or food documentary, you’ve probably heard a number of these culinary terms. Will you qualify as a master chef?
One of the best ways to relax on a lazy weekend is with a Food Network marathon. Watching these shows is not only a good way to decompress, but also helpful in expanding your culinary vocabulary. You might learn about a new ingredient to try in a recipe or hear your favorite celebrity chef use a term that you end up incorporating into your own vernacular. Here are 30 culinary words and phrases pulled straight from the kitchens of popular cooking shows.
Mise en place
Mise en place is French for “to put in place,” and it’s a preliminary step that involves cutting and sorting ingredients prior to cooking. This process allows a chef to have everything prepared in advance so that the actual cooking is more efficient.
Spoonula
A favorite term of TV chef and talk show host Rachael Ray, “spoonula” refers to a curved spatula. It can perform the stirring and spreading tasks a normal spatula can, but as an added benefit, the curved nature of the utensil makes it easy to scoop out food bits from the bottom of any jar.
Soggy Bottom
Fans of The Great British Bake Off know that “soggy bottoms” are an absolute nightmare for bakers. This term refers to any underbaked base on a pie, tart, or similar pastry, often due to the wet filling seeping into the crust.
Basting
The surest way to avoid a dry turkey on Thanksgiving is by basting it, a process that involves soaking up and reapplying the juices to the meat as the cook progresses. This prevents the bird from drying out and becoming too chalky.
Advertisement
Al Dente
Giada De Laurentiis — star of the smash hit show Giada at Home — will be the first to tell you that al dente is the best way to prepare pasta. Al dente is Italian for “to the tooth,” and it means the pasta maintains a firm texture without being overly hard or mushy.
Chiffonade
French chefs such as Jacques Pépin are familiar with a technique called “chiffonade.” This comes from the French chiffon, referring to fine adornments used by women in the 18th century. The knife skill involves slicing herbs or greens into long, thin ribbons.
Heard
While it’s not explicitly a cooking term, fans of The Bear have heard chefs yell “heard” while in the kitchen. This is another way to say “understood” and convey you got the message, which is particularly helpful in loud, busy kitchens.
Blanch
Not to be confused with boiling something, “blanch” is an adjacent term that refers to briefly cooking food in rapidly boiling water and then dipping it into cold water to stop the cooking process. Chefs may commonly blanch nuts or fruit to help remove the skin.
Advertisement
Deglaze
Any chef worth their muster knows how to deglaze a pan, by adding wine or stock to a hot pan to loosen browned bits of food. Those caramelized bits (called “the fond”) are packed with flavor, and after the deglazing they can be mixed into a sauce for added depth.
Emulsify
To emulsify something in the kitchen means to create a smooth mixture of multiple ingredients that normally wouldn’t combine so easily. Mayonnaise is an emulsion of oil, egg yolk, and an acidic agent such as vinegar or lemon juice.
Aubergine
If you’ve ever watched a show centered around British chefs — for instance, Masterchef UK — you may have seen them prepare an aubergine-based dish. Americans will recognize the main ingredient as an eggplant.
Mandoline
Not to be confused with the musical instrument known as a “mandolin,” a mandoline is a kitchen tool that’s perfect for slicing thin strips of food. Many people use mandolines to portion ingredients like potatoes and zucchini into equally sized strips to ensure an even cook all around.
Eighty-Six
If you hear someone in the kitchen yell “eighty-six,” it means that a menu item is no longer available. During busy dinner services, restaurants may have to eighty-six specials or popular dishes as they run out of ingredients.
Shortening
Baking shows commonly refer to an ingredient called “shortening,” which is a fat that turns into a solid at room temperature. Adding shortening to flour results in a crumbly, flakier crust by reducing the elasticity of the dough.
Advertisement
Behind
Active kitchens are full of people moving in every direction, which can result in disastrous collisions and spills if people aren’t careful. That’s why you’ll hear many chefs yell “behind” to alert fellow chefs of their presence when walking behind someone, or “corner” when turning a blind corner.
Dredge
To dredge up a ship means to remove it from the seabed, but in the context of cooking, “dredge” means something entirely different. Dredging involves coating a food in a dry ingredient like flour or breadcrumbs, usually prior to frying it or cooking it over high heat. This helps seal in moisture and results in a crispy exterior.
Sous Chef
This term is French for “under chef,” as sous chefs serve as the main assistants in all aspects of food preparation. Every great TV chef has a sous chef working under them behind the scenes, providing the support that’s essential to run an efficient kitchen.
Pinch
A pinch of salt is often added to a dish at the end of cooking to perfect the flavor. But it’s not just any old pinch. To chefs, a pinch is a precise measurement — one-sixteenth of a teaspoon, to be exact. Furthermore, a dash is one-eighth of a teaspoon and a tad is one-fourth.
Butterfly
What some TV chefs call “butterfly,” others may call “spatchcock.” Both are terms used in reference to cooking poultry — the method involves cutting into the backbone and laying the bird flat so that it cooks more evenly. The term “butterfly” comes from the fact that the bird will look vaguely like a set of butterfly wings.
Advertisement
Binder
No three-hole punch necessary here. A culinary binder is essential for keeping ingredients adhered to one another. For instance, egg is a binder in a meatball recipe, as the wetness keeps the meat and breadcrumbs stuck together so the meatball doesn’t fall apart during cooking.
Harissa
This popular Mediterranean paste is made from peppers, spices, garlic, and olive oil, resulting in a decadent spread full of flavor and heat. You can mix harissa into a falafel recipe, or spread it onto a lamb chop for some incredible depth of flavor.
Runcible Spoon
Coined by poet Edward Lear in 1871’s “The Owl and the Pussycat,” the term “runcible spoon” describes a fork that’s curved like a spoon and contains three broad prongs (imagine a spork with an edge for cutting). Perhaps it doesn’t get a lot of traction while cooking, but toss one of these in your lunchbox or keep it in the car for emergencies.
Sweat
While the bright lights on a cooking set are sure to make anyone perspire, that’s usually not what TV chefs mean when they say “sweat.” This term often refers to putting veggies and a little bit of oil over heat and stirring to make any liquid evaporate, thus making them tender.
Macerate
The macerating process brings out the flavor of fruits and vegetables by soaking them in a liquid (water, citrus juice, vinegar, etc.). For instance, you may put berries into a bowl of citrus and sugar, let them soak, then add the macerated mixture into a pie.
Advertisement
Fire
Yelling “fire” in a crowded kitchen is different from yelling it inside a packed theater. Any chef who hears the term “fire” knows to get to work, as it means to begin cooking a dish ASAP so that it can be delivered quickly to the customer.
Coriander
British celebrity chef Gordon Ramsay might use the word “coriander,” but Americans will know the leafy green herb as “cilantro.”
Paring Knife
Compared to a cleaver or bread knife, a paring knife is a smaller tool that often measures less than 4 inches long. Its primary purpose is performing precise tasks, such as peeling fruits and veggies or deveining shrimp.
Phở
On his show No Reservations, the late, great Anthony Bourdain traveled around the world to sample the best international cuisine. One of his favorite places to visit was Vietnam, where locals enjoy a delicious soup called phở (pronounced “fuh”). A big bowl of phở usually features a hearty beef broth filled with noodles, meats, and vegetables.
A French term that translates to “mouth amuser,” an amuse-bouche is a little bite of food meant to tantalize the palate at the start of a dining experience. Competitors on Iron Chef might prepare an amuse-bouche for the judges to showcase their creativity and tease upcoming flavors.
Broken Sauce
The term “broken sauce” may not be as literal as a glass shattering into pieces, but it can be equally distressing. It references when the liquid and fatty components of a sauce separate, thus ruining the entire thing. This often happens when making hollandaise sauce, for example, as the oils may separate from the egg yolk, resulting in a sauce that’s grainy instead of creamy.
Bennett Kleinman is a New York City-based staff writer for Optimism. He is also a freelance comedy writer, devoted New York Yankees and New Jersey Devils fan, and thinks plain seltzer is the best drink ever invented.
“Would’ve, could’ve, should’ve” — this regretful refrain reflects on past actions, choices, or opportunities, suggesting that someone would have, could have, or should have done something differently. We love to use contractions in English, especially in casual conversation, which is why the expression is styled as such. However, the regular use of “should’ve” to represent “should have” has resulted in one of the most common and unfortunate grammar gaffes in the English language: “should of.”
We’ve all heard or seen it in action: “I should of called sooner” or “They should of known better.” This pairing — “should of” — is never correct, so how did this unwelcome imposter become so widespread? Grammarians believe it comes down to the pronunciation of the contraction “should’ve,” which sounds nearly identical to “should of,” causing this slip-up to become a permanent fixture in colloquial conversation. The mistake is often imperceptible in spoken conversation and is better caught in writing. Merriam-Webster dates the usage of the contraction “should’ve” to the mid-19th century, suggesting that “should of” has likely been around just as long. Its counterparts, “would of” and “could of,” are similarly confused and are also incorrect.
Advertisement
So, why is “should of” deemed incorrect? It boils down to grammar rules and the appropriate sentence structure of English verbs. Verb phrases are made of one or more auxiliary verbs and a main verb. “Would,” “could,” and “should” are auxiliary verbs — also called “helping verbs” — and they require another auxiliary verb or a main verb (or both) to follow them in order to form a correct verb phrase. “Have” can function as an auxiliary verb, but “of” cannot — it is a preposition. Consider the example “I would havecalled sooner,” which includes the correct verb phrase “would have called” — no “of” here.
Interestingly, The Merriam-Webster entry for “of” lists it as a preposition (and rightfully so), but has added another part of speech: auxiliary verb. Does that mean “should of, would of, could of” IS correct? Not so fast. It’s listed as a nonstandard version of “have” and defined as being “used in place of the contraction ‘ve often in representations of uneducated speech.”
Dictionaries record the ways people use language, but they don’t dictate the rules of grammar. On this point we’ll remain grammar sticklers and say “should’ve” should always be used instead of “should of.”
Rachel is a Washington, D.C.-based freelance writer. When she's not writing, you can find her wandering through a museum, exploring a new city, or advocating the importance of the Oxford comma.
An enduring pronoun since the days of Old English, “whom” has graced the works of Shakespeare, Austen, Hemingway, and countless others. But does it have a place in modern English?
I don’t claim grammatical authority, but if I may humbly make one recommendation, I move to retire the use of “whom” — or at least stop reprimanding writers who’d prefer to use “who.” I’m not the first to suggest this; even Merriam-Webster notes that the demise of “whom” has been discussed by scholars since 1870. Many proponents of the discontinuation of “whom” point out that in most cases, “who” can take the place of “whom,” rendering the latter redundant. I agree that while “whom” sounds charming when used properly, it’s largely impractical.
To understand the fuss, let’s revisit the respective functions of “whom” and “who.” “Whom” is an object pronoun — much like “him,” “her,” or “me” — as seen in the example, “Whom did you see?” in which the subject is “you” and “whom” is the object of the verb “see.” On the other hand, “who” is used as a subject pronoun, akin to “I,” “he,” or “she.” For instance, “who” is the subject in the sentence, “Who was elected?”
Advertisement
Although this grammatical practice has endured for centuries, there’s now a tendency to excessively police the usage of “whom”/”who,” resulting in a linguistic landmine that causes distress to students, writers, and professionals who (erm — or is it whom? — no, definitely who) agonize over which one is correct.
Understandably, many people would rather do away with this grammatical dilemma, so “who” has begun replacing “whom” in casual conversation. “Who” feels more informal and intuitive in most scenarios. “Who did you see?” rolls off the tongue far more naturally than its technically correct counterpart. In a modern world that values fast, efficient communication over correctness, “who” often prevails.
With that said, a few reasonable arguments persist in favor of “whom.” The classic prepositional constructions “with whom,” “to whom,” or “from whom” have a rhythmic quality that can’t be adequately replaced by “who.” In these situations, you always have the option of rephrasing. For example, instead of asking someone, “With whom are you traveling?” you might rephrase and say, “Who are you traveling with?” because it feels more natural. This may make your high school English teacher cringe, but it’s what most people would actually say in casual conversation. (And we’re on the side of breaking the rule against ending sentences with prepositions.)
But before we officially send “whom” off on its farewell tour, we should note that the word seems to have developed another application as part of a new phrase: “whom of which.” It’s used like so: “My ethics professor, whom of which is my favorite teacher, writes many books.” In 2023, MIT linguistics professorDavid Pesetsky described the phrase as “brand new,” “very colloquial,” and “extremely law-governed.” Respectfully, I will be abstaining from this curious new construction — after all, do we really need another tangled usage of “whom” to debate?
Rachel is a Washington, D.C.-based freelance writer. When she's not writing, you can find her wandering through a museum, exploring a new city, or advocating the importance of the Oxford comma.
Enter your email to receive daily lessons that dive into what makes English so fascinating. Each email is packed with odd rules, etymologies, and the tools you need to be a better communicator.
Sorry, your email address is not valid. Please try again.
Sorry, your email address is not valid. Please try again.
