4 ms·
If other languages can exist where pork and pig are the same word, doesn't it prove the opposite?
by jerrre 8y ago
If other languages can exist where pork and pig are the same word, doesn't it prove the opposite?
- yorwba 8y agoThose languages usually qualify pork as "pig meat" if necessary. (Schweinefleisch in German, 猪肉 in Chinese)
- zyx321 8y agoBut only if necessary. In most cases the "meat" either implied ("What kind of meat is that?" "Pig") or replaced by the specific name of the cut (Schweineschnitzel, Putenbrust, Lammkotlett).
- cm2012 8y agoThe "extra" english words succinctly add context then.
- zyx321 8y agoThey only exist because nobles wanted to pretend that the food they eat is so much fancier than that of the peasants, so they insisted on using French to describe it.
- boomlinde 8y agoAssuming that this is true, that also adds a distinct meaning to the word so that saying "pork" as opposed to "pig meat" would have served as an indication of class status in addition to e.g. what you'll be eating for dinner.
- mikeash 8y agoI think a better proof would be “chicken” in English. If we get by without the distinction for one animal, it doesn’t make sense that we’d need it for another.
- sornaensis 8y agoThe poster I replied to said there was 'no useful distinction' between the words, which is provably false. They are synonyms, not the same words, despite the fact that their usages might overlap in many contexts, there are contexts where only one is really appropriate.