SC - Where's the beef, or, where's the sacrificial lamb?

[Philip & Susan Troy]

rcmann4 at earthlink.net wrote:

> I looked into this further.  The RAE says it's the part of the body
> opposite the chest, down to the shoulders.  So perhaps "upper
> back" would be a better translation, but that would still be chuck,
> right?

Ayuh.

> I have a piece of "shoulder roast" pressing in the fridge, even as I
> type.  I was going to roast it at 325-350F.

That should do it, but I wouldn't serve it too rare. You might try
frequent bastings.

> > I had assumed "no mayores" to help solve the riddle; I read it as "not
> > adult", rather than "no more [than]". Somehow I had the idea that if the
> > beef were young enough, you could easily roast a piece of the chuck. In
> > theory, not impossible by any means, but just not evidently supported by
> > the language.
 
> No, "mayores" is plural, and modifies "pedazos" (pieces).  There's
> nothing to say that it couldn't be a young cow, but it would have to
> be beef, not veal.

Yeah, I figured to be sure not to use the calf-word, but there may have
been some inermediate stage of bullock or something that would provide
something that was demonstrably beef, but young and tender, even at the shoulders.

> I'll report back after dinner.

Oooh, baby! I've got some cubes of beef shin simmering in stock with
black mushrooms, ginger and a scallion, to serve with egg vermicelli and
plucked cilantro, probably with sauteed snow-pea greens on the side. 

Adamantius
- -- 
Phil & Susan Troy

troy at asan.com