SC - Re: non-messy, period, dayboard-type food

[Stefan li Rous]

LrdRas at aol.com wrote:
> 
> In a message dated 8/27/00 11:24:14 PM Eastern Daylight Time, troy at asan.com
> writes:
> 
> << Note also that shredding thin sheets may not be sufficient change of
>  essential nature, i.e. thin-sheetiness, to warrant changing the name
>  from qata'if to something else >>
> 
> Huh? Mind thoughts, please. Shredded and sheets are integrally different. How
> can they e viewed as one?

Not as one, but the process of shredding is applied to something that
has already been made into thin sheets. Think of it as shredding paper:
you feed sheets of paper into one end of the shredder and get, out the
other end, shredded sheets of paper. Assuming, for the sake of argument,
that paper means "sheets", does this process necessarily warrant
changing the name? Maybe by adding and adjective, but not by completely
changing it.

I was trying to reconcile the fact that older versions of qata'if may
have been named for the fact that it was made in sheets or layers,
_with_ the fact that modern qata'if, according to some sources, is a
shredded product. Usually there is at least some reason why a name can
evolve to be applied to something that appears quite different; often it
is because the similarities aren't immediately apparent, even if they
are there.

Adamantius
- -- 
Phil & Susan Troy

troy at asan.com