23 ms·
Bananas Are Berries, Strawberries Aren't
- tgb 7y agoSimilarly, the botanical definition of "nut" excludes basically everything we think of nuts. Pedants seemed to have learned that peanuts are "not nuts" but have yet to pick up on that almonds, pistachios, walnuts and pecans are also "not nuts."
- bena 7y agoBecause most people who like to throw around such pedantic facts only want to appear informed and by extension intelligent.
- jerf 7y agoI've developed a rule of thumb about matters culinary: "The answer to 'is X a Y?' is 'no'." Betteridge's Law of Culinary Classification, I suppose. The answer seems to be to not care at all, and aggressively ignore anyone who suggests otherwise.
- mehrdada 7y agoPotato plant produces a berry too, but the actual fruit is toxic. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potato_fruit https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potato_fruit
- 8note 7y agoif I remember correctly, the potato itself is toxic raw
- mnw21cam 7y agoNo. Cooking doesn't reduce the amount of toxin in potatoes very much. Potatoes are toxic when green, although this varies massively among the varieties. But a general rule to follow for potatoes is if they are green then don't eat them.
- leeshire 7y agoany reason why rasberries and strawberries have the words berries in them then?
- dvh 7y agoFor the same reason Stonehenge have henge in it's name
- thaumasiotes 7y agoFor reference, the "henge" in Stonehenge means a gallows, and is thought to be a reference to the shape of the structures. (What do you do on a gallows? You hang.)
- blowski 7y agoAnother theory is that it refers to the way the top stone "hinges" on the bottom two. Nobody is certain about the etymology.
- gherkinnn 7y agoBoth are red, small, sweet, and grow in bushes and shrubs. It’s fair to assume they’re related. Before science came along.
- JamesBarney 7y agoThe world "berry" and "fruit" have both a technical botanist definition, and a culinary definition. Like okra is a fruit from a botany perspective but not a culinary one. If you asked for a fruit smoothie and received an okra smoothie on I imagine you wouldn't be happy.
- blowski 7y agoMy gosh - Okra smoothie is actually a thing! That must taste... interesting. https://www.thespruceeats.com/juice-and-smoothie-recipe-with-okra-2078327 https://www.thespruceeats.com/juice-and-smoothie-recipe-with...
- monadic2 7y agoIs anything actually gained from rigid definitions like this? People clearly use berry in a different way than botanists do.
- blowski 7y agoIt's just wordplay, a basic pun, because the same word, "berry", appears in two different contexts. In everyday usage, a strawberry is a berry, but in botany it's not. If you're doing botany, you should probably use the latin term Fragaria instead of strawberry. Edit: If you like this, you'll also find interesting that many nuts (hazlenuts, walnuts, Brazil nuts, pecans, almonds) are not nuts but seeds. One of the few actual nuts is a chestnut.
- mcv 7y agoI know peanuts weren't nuts, but hazelnuts and walnuts?!
- blowski 7y agoIf you can find it, there's an episode of the BBC comedy panel show "Unbelievable Truth" where they list all the nuts that aren't nuts. Entertaining and surprising. The bit we eat is usually a seed or fruit - the shell encasing it is a nut. At least, that's what I understood.
- barrkel 7y agoHazelnuts are also botanical nuts.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- gumby 7y agoAnd Tomatoes, by ruling of a Massachusetts court, “are a vegetable for tax purposes”
- ovi256 7y agoAnd Congress ruled that tomato pizza sauce is a vegetable for nutritional purposes. Don't you feel well legislated ? https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/post/did-congress-declare-pizza-as-a-vegetable-notexactly/2016/04/01/95bbbe3a-13f6-11e1-9048-1f5352187eed_blog.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/post/did-congr...
- dTal 7y agoNothing in particular about putting tomato sauce on pizza should make it less nutritious. Legislation should be targeting nutritional facts, not presentation. The article you link shows that nutritionally speaking, it wasn't an unreasonable ruling.
- monadic2 7y agoHonestly this doesn’t bother me much, tomato sauce is going to be more nutritional than the raw tomatoes that went into it. It’s just not roughage.
- swebs 7y agoWow did you even read the title of the article you posted? Here it is: >No, Congress did not declare pizza a vegetable Congress decided that 1/8th of a cup of tomato puree counts as a SERVING of vegetables. Not A vegetable. You're just intentionally saying something stupid in order to attempt to project that stupidity on someone else.
- gumby 7y agoActually ovi256 explicitly did refer to the sauce.
- dmos62 7y agoI find the article pleasant in its writting and humour. For me this goes to show that thin clickbait articles can be interesting, it's just that most people who can write don't usually do clickbait. Excerpt: > The technical definition of a berry is "a fleshy fruit produced from a single ovary." If you're not too familiar with botany, this definition probably isn't helpful at all. But once you learn that oranges and tomatoes fit that definition to a T and could therefore be considered berries, you may start to question reality. > Go a step further and find out that strawberries — yes, those delicious red fruits with "berries" literally in the name — aren't officially berries either. They're "accessory fruits," meaning the flesh that surrounds the seed doesn't actually come from the plant's ovaries but from the ovaries' receptacle. Didn't think we'd be talking so much about ovaries in this article, did you? By the way, raspberries aren't really berries either. I'll let you take a minute to collect yourself.
- mikorym 7y agoAnd of course the technical definition supersedes the use of the word "berry" in the English language...
- Koshkin 7y agoForget about English - > you may start to question reality
- darkwater 7y agoIn botanic this may only apply to Latin, and even in this case it would be stretched IMO. But taking English as the only reference point is a bit imperialistic to say the least.
- edflsafoiewq 7y agoI'm curious how the botanical definition came about. I believe "berry" comes from a word that means "grape" (which are berries in the botanical sense). In Middle English, everything that wasn't a berry was an "apple". A banana was an appel of paradis, apple of paradise.
- rob74 7y agoOne of the many questions the article leaves open is what (if any) fruit called "berries" are actually berries? I did some quick research, and apparently cranberries, blueberries, lingonberries and huckleberries are also "botanical berries" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berry#Botanical_definition https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berry#Botanical_definition)...
- mrleiter 7y agoThere's a very good video on this [1] by Innuendo Studios on why this discussion is more or subjective, since it matters in what context you say it and what you mean by it. He does this with the example of a tomato, which by botanical defintion is a fruit. But in culinary terms, it is a vegetable. So when someone says "haha, did you know that a tomato is actually a fruit", it's subjective and can almost have no added value in a discussion. Botanists know it's a fruit. Cooks know the taste of the tomato and will use it accordingly. Hence, nothing is gained. Except confusion and unnecessary discussion. [1]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmxIK9p0SNM https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmxIK9p0SNM
- hnhg 7y agoThere is one thing to gain: an easy lesson in how things can be subjective. I believe the world suffers because many people profoundly reject this.
- bernardlunn 7y agoPeople who write code for robot compilers (aka programmers) often make this mistake. People who write code for human compilers (aka writers) embrace the subjectivity/variability of those human compilers
- toyg 7y agoYou forget one subcategory of writers: lawyers (and their subcategory legislators). They definitely reject variability of interpretation as much as they can, or at least try their hardest to.
- GavinMcG 7y agoI think lawyers fundamentally premise their work on the variability of interpretation. They make arguments in favor of certain interpretations, and take pains in the texts they write to preempt any undesirable interpretations. Legislators may or may not think like writers/lawyers, but even if they do they're constrained by those who don't, the need for compromise, and the incentive to have gotten something done even if it's not perfect. So they sometimes end up doing a bad job of legal writing.
- theBobBob 7y agoI remember hearing some super cliched but kinda funny saying one time: "Knowledge is knowing that tomatoes are a fruit. Wisdom is knowing that you shouldn't put it in a fruit salad."
- w-m 7y agoThat makes me wonder how tomato in a fruit salad would actually taste.
- singlow 7y agoNot bad actually. But if you mix grapes and little tomatoes that look like grapes it can be fun not knowing what you'll taste on each bite.
- mywittyname 7y agoI like it. Tomatoes aren't very sweet naturally, so they work well when combined with other very sweet items.
- cmurphycode 7y agoAnd being a chef is knowing how to make it work anyway :)
- Digit-Al 7y agoI saw a chat show once where there was a debate as to whether a tomato was a fruit or vegetable. The person arguing for them as a fruit challenged the other party to eat them with custard. The producers then got someone to make up some custard and brought it in bowls with some tomatoes for them to eat. They ended up quite enjoying them, but I have never been tempted to try it lol
- elcomet 7y agoIn french, we have the word "Baie", which means berry, but is not widely used for fruits, and we also have another expression which is much more used, "Fruits rouges", literally "red fruits". I think it covers more accurately fruits like raspberries, strawberries, and others. I don't know if "red fruits" is also used in english.
- simonh 7y agoYp, we have that as well but it's very informal, you won't usually see it on product packaging but at home I'll ask one of my kids for a glass of 'red juice'. 'Forest Fruits' is a common generic name for a mix of red berry juices or fruits.
- elcomet 7y agoI see. Here, it is usually on the packaging (and we never see berry). We say 'Forest fruits' as well.
- staz 7y agoAll the "fruits rouges" are not red and it confuse me a lot (e.g. Blueberries)
- elondaits 7y agoExactly the same in spanish with "bayas" and "frutos rojos" (also sometimes called "frutos del bosque", which is "fruits from the woods").
- JTon 7y ago> I don't know if "red fruits" is also used in english Can confirm it's not commonly used in North American english. I can't say I've ever heard it used like this before
- mcv 7y agoThat strawberries are not true berries becomes fairly obvious once you learn that tomatoes are berries. All berries seem to have fairly watery flesh surrounded by a thin but tough skin. Tomatoes have both, strawberries have neither. Raspberries superficially look like a collection of tiny berries from this perspective. Bananas have a skin, but it's not thin, and their flesh is not watery. That's just my layman's analysis, though. It's suited me well for many years, but if now eggplants and peppers are also berries, I'm starting to wonder whether the word berry even means anything.
- lordgrenville 7y agoThere's a deeper point here about how scientific taxonomies differ from folk taxonomies. Scientists might decide to classify something based on its genetic makeup or microscopic structure, whereas laypeople will classify based on macroscopic appearance or use or taste. Neither one of these is closer to the absolute truth, they are both just heuristics useful in different contexts. Scott Alexander has a somewhat related post: https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/21/the-categories-were-made-for-man-not-man-for-the-categories/ https://slatestarcodex.com/2014/11/21/the-categories-were-ma...
- ragazzina 7y ago>All berries seem to have fairly watery flesh surrounded by a thin but tough skin. The point of the article was that bananas are berries though, and your definition doesn't really describe bananas (maybe kiwis).
- mcv 7y agoI know. I'm just sharing my definition, which is completely subjective and holds no authorative value. It works for me, though. Kiwis are a bit hairy to be berries, but they feel closer to berries to be than bananas.
- d--b 7y agoThe scientific name is bad, it confuses everyone. Why not change that instead of telling people that berries aren't berries?
- maest 7y agoLegacy reasons, most likely.
- arrrg 7y agoBut from a culinary perspective strawberries are berries. So the name is correct for that context.
- Hermel 7y agoThe scientific definition of fruit follows its function. That’s why botanists like it.
- mrweasel 7y agoThen you'd have to redefine what a berry is. Do we just have a list of things that are berries? If so, who get to define that list? What if you forget one? Would that thing then not a berry anymore? You'd could also try to make so criteria that defines berries, but that's what we already have, even though it tells us that strawberries aren't berries. We could make new ones, but how do we ensure that bananas becomes fruit, strawberries should be a berry and peas and corn should definitively not become berries? For daily usage it fine that we don't see bananas as berries and that tomatoes certainly shouldn't go into a fruit salad, even if it's technically a fruit.
- zokier 7y ago> Then you'd have to redefine what a berry is. Why? I don't see pressing need for a waterproof definition. I'd think for general use "I know it when I see it" definition suffices, and for where exactitude matters having explicit list is better anyways
- xorand 7y agoBtw, you know that spiders are not insects?
- Koshkin 7y agoIs it because they taste different?
- peterwwillis 7y agoFunny, I never noticed..
- xorand 7y agoNo, all insects have 6 legs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insect https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Insect. Spiders have 8. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spider https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spider
- walterkrankheit 7y agoI wish this article went a bit deeper. I still don't feel like I have a primary grip on WHY the non-berry items ended up with berry names to begin with. Bananas, okay, late-period adoption, but the rest?
- loriverkutya 7y agoAnd strawberries are also not straws. It's all a lie.
- anotheryou 7y agoI'd like a line drawn between "wants to be eaten" and not :) Than strawberry would be a fruit, cucumber would be, roots salaa etc not.
- hansbo 7y agoI read up on these things some time ago, and what amused me the most is that while almost every vegetable is a fruit, the Juniper berry is, in fact, a cone.
- sammorrowdrums 7y agoThe distinction between different domain terminologies is prescient for software development. https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/a/359604 https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/a/359604 Especially when there is conflict between domain terminology and coding concepts. For example my company at large refers to Booleans (meaning search expressions that are vaguely Boolean in nature in our sense, that job boards enable for CV searching). Ultimately mutual understanding trumps being correct in my view. That said, when I have to weigh vegetables in supermarket I still pause before selecting the vegetable category to weigh tomatoes.
- ath0 7y agoBecause this is Hacker News, the discussion would be incomplete without a link to the Supreme Court case Nix v. Hedden[1]. After the Tariff Act of 1883 taxed vegetables (but not fruits), produce seller John Nix — no relation to the package manager — sued to get tomatoes classified as a fruit. The court held that the “common meaning” mattered more than the botanical one: “Botanically speaking, tomatoes are the fruit of a vine, just as are cucumbers, squashes, beans, and peas. But in the common language of the people, whether sellers or consumers of provisions, all these are vegetables which are grown in kitchen gardens, and which, whether eaten cooked or raw, are, like potatoes, carrots, parsnips, turnips, beets, cauliflower, cabbage, celery, and lettuce, usually served at dinner in, with, or after the soup, fish, or meats which constitute the principal part of the repast, and not, like fruits generally, as dessert.“ If you’re in New York, you can celebrate Nix’s memory by eating at a fancy vegetarian restaurant[2], or, of course, you can just use the package manager or operating system. [1] https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/149/304/ https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/149/304/ , or see the wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nix_v._Hedden https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nix_v._Hedden [2] http://www.nixny.com/ http://www.nixny.com/
- lhotiuerpoiu 7y agoI eat tomatoes like apples (with salt, I'm not a monster). No kink-shaming please.
- sdiq 7y agoRead the article and the botanical classifications of some of these fruits feels like a weirdly broken and clearly unacceptable "it-works-as-intended" bug. The classifications should in many ways align with the every-day use of the same words. That is, unless the language changes so much that most of the same words end up meaning an opposite of what they historically meant, or something completely different from the same. In that case, the botanical classification could be kept.
- willis936 7y agoI’m surprised this is news to anyone. Context always matters. Is the conventional wisdom that there is Not two dichotomies for produce: culinary and botanical?
- nmeofthestate 7y agoLooks like no-one has posted this yet: https://www.mrlovenstein.com/comic/643 https://www.mrlovenstein.com/comic/643
- robbrown451 7y agoYeah and cucumbers are fruit, birds are dinosaurs, ladybugs are not bugs, peanuts are not nuts, etc. Sometimes I think that scientists should just stick to taxonomic categories or other words that don't conflict with their "common usage" meanings. (and while we all seem to agree that whales aren't fish, they are certainly within the "bony fish" clade https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osteichthyes https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osteichthyes and are a lot closer relatives to a goldfish than are sharks :) )
- bustadjustme 7y ago.... whales certainly aren't bony fish. They're in class Mammalia, which is not within the superclass Osteichthyes. I.e. they're mammals, not fish.
- robbrown451 7y agoMammals are tetrapods, which are indeed under Osteichthyes (unless you consider Ostreichtyes to be paraphyletic). If you look at the cladogram on the wikipedia page I linked, you see a picture of a salamander near the top representing the category Tetrapodomorpha. We (and whales) are also on that branch. Sharks are outside of that whole cladogram, as they are cartilaginous fish. ( * ) In other words, any clade which includes all bony fish also includes mammals. [*] which means that the most recent common ancestor of sharks and goldfish lived longer ago than the most recent common ancestor of whales and goldfish
- stjohnswarts 7y agoNo one considers whales to be bony fish. No one.
- robbrown451 7y agoWell, go to this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bony_fish https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bony_fish That will redirect from "bony fish" to "Osteichthyes", the name of the scientific category that represents bony fish. And there is a cladogram on that page. And it includes whales, by virtue of including tetrapods (it shows a picture of a salamander). It also says on that page "Osteichthyes can be compared to Euteleostomi. In paleontology, the terms are synonymous." And "Euteleostomi presents a cladistic view which includes the terrestrial tetrapods that evolved from lobe-finned fish". And yes, as mentioned, whales are tetrapods. So, while I didn't say "whales are bony fish", I said "whales are members of the bony fish clade", and I'd say wikipedia agrees with that statement. (to be clear, we humans are also members of the bony fish clade) And if you consider bony fish to be a paraphyletic group, well, then it isn't a clade.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- Digit-Al 7y agoAn example of why creating classification systems is such a PITA.
- zby 7y agoThe classic: Strange Times for the Berry Club: https://meme.xyz/meme/21615 https://meme.xyz/meme/21615
- tomphoolery 7y agoA banana is a sandwich. Change my mind.
- jmull 7y agoNot really a great article because it mostly perpetuates the confusion rather than clears it up. Context determines whether a strawberry is a berry or not. In common usage it is. Using a scientific horticultural definition it is not. Context usually determines which definition of berry applies implicitly, though if you're communicating in a context where you think it's reasonably ambiguous, you can be explicitly about which definition you're using.
- rasz 7y ago2010: EU subsidizes fisheries. France wanted in on the action. European Commission has officially categorized snails as "inland fish" in order to allow French snail farmers to receive subsidies. 2002: Fruit jams are subsidized in EU. Portugal makes carrot jams. Guess what, carrot is a fruit in EU. Let me cite that for you: 'tomatoes, the edible parts of rhubarb stalks, carrots, sweet potatoes, cucumbers, pumpkins, melons and water-melons are considered to be fruit'