3/5/2018 0 Comments Conceptions of foodTo linguists, it is commonly known that the language people speak has an influence on the way they think about the world. As this concept should apply equally well to terms relating to food, I took an interest in looking at how food names are described in two very different languages that I am fluent in: Chinese and English.
What strikes me first is the difference in names for meats, with pork and beef being the most common ones. In Chinese, pork is described as “meat from the pig”, whereas beef is “meat from the cow”. The word signifies the origin of the meat and thus connects the food with its source. In English, “pork” bears little resemblance to “pig”, so someone who does not know the meaning of “pork” cannot possibly connect this word to an animal. The same goes with beef (there is no part in the word “beef” that suggests “cow”). This is even more intriguing when we look at the names for different parts of beef (e.g. sirloin, rib eye, porterhouse, rump roast). None of the names seem to include the concept of “cow” in English, but in Chinese the same parts are often mentioned with the word “cow” in the front (so “rump roast” would literally be “cow back rump”). Interestingly, “rump roast” in English seems to suggest the recommended method of preparing the meat, rather than the origin of the meat. So what is the matter? Does it make a difference whether the word/phrase indicates the origin of the meat or not? It is my conjecture that food names without the origin of the food serve to separate the concept of food from its origin, in this case, a breathing animal. “Beef” is food, whereas “cow” is a four-hoofed animal grazing in the meadowland, an animal that kids can go pet. It is as if the two are completely unrelated, and the fact “beef” is part of a “cow” has been unconsciously neglected. While from a vegetarian’s perspective, this separation would certainly relieve the guilt of meat-lovers when they consume the meat, I would argue from a different point of view, that the separation of food from its origin somehow reduces the appreciation that a living animal was sacrificed to provide the food on our dinner table. We humans are by nature omnivorous, and we thrive on eating a mixture of vegetables and meats. Before animals like cows and pigs were domesticated, it took great efforts of our ancestors to acquire meat, and the hardship people had to suffer in order to get meat, coupled with the clear realization of the origin of meat, naturally excited a feeling of gratefulness towards nature and a sense that humans and nature (including the plants and animals we eat) are inherently connected. Many tribes have rituals of thanking the nature for their harvest of food, crops and animals alike, and you may still find residues of these rituals in some parts of the world. While it is not necessary that people who live in the modern world replicate these rituals, the awareness of the origin of our food will remind us of our own connection with nature, and teach our future generations to respect and cherish food the same way as our ancestors did. In many countries in the world, food is so easily accessible that people often fail to realize how much effort/energy is required to produce such food. It is taken for granted by many, that when you want food, you can go to the grocery store and buy it, and the conception of food seems more linked to “money” (used to buy food) than “nature”. Leftover food is often disposed without hesitation, even if it’s steak. I understand that leftover steak is never nearly as good as fresh ones, but they can make perfectly fine stir-fries or soups. When a piece of steak is thrown into the trash, wouldn’t the cow that sacrificed itself be mourning in heaven? I have been using meats as an example, but vegetables are no exception to this separation. In a highly industrialized country like the U.S., unless you live in a farming community or you do some farming yourself, chances are you may not be consciously aware of the origins of various vegetables you see in the grocery store. I have read stories of people craving for pumpkin pies in October but unable to make one even after they just visited a pumpkin patch and brought home a couple of pumpkins. They finally made their pies after a trip to the grocery store, where they found canned pumpkin puree on the shelf and happily put those in their shopping cart. In their mind, “pumpkin pie” is “food”, and “canned pumpkin puree” is also food, thus the two go together. Those big, round-shaped, orange things that they found in pumpkin patches? They are for decoration only. When we remember that the vegetables we eat come from soil, that it takes nutrition, water, and sunlight to grow, we may perhaps be less wasteful for the vegetables on the table. Buying just enough so nothing goes bad, being creative about ways to cook different parts of vegetables (e.g. not just the tender leaves for salad, but the stems may be chopped up and added to soups), and being resourceful to use up food that we already purchased before getting more—there are many practices we can adopt to better show our respect for nature. We may be able to live on this planet in a more responsible way, and leave the world a better place for our future generations, and for ourselves
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |