In a recent YouTube posting, the host of InternetShaquille made an argument about certain food terms being repetitive. He mentioned, in particular, Shrimp Scampi, Chai Tea, Naan bread, and Paella pan. Why are these food terms repetitive or redundant? Does it matter? In this article, I will explain why these terms are not repetitive in English, why we use them, and why these types of arguments present a central misunderstanding of the way food words are borrowed into English.
According to the video, the terms mentioned are even more repetitive than ATM machine or PIN number. That certainly is not the case, but this is a good place to start as there is actually no comparison between repetition with acronyms and the repetition found in these food terms.
Repetition With Acronyms
In case it’s not clear, the acronym ATM means “automatic teller machine” and the acronym PIN means “personal identification number.” So saying ATM machine or “automatic teller machine machine” is repetitive. Saying PIN number or “personal identification number number” is also repetitive. Technically, ATM is not an acronyms, but an initialism, but let’s not be pedantic! if I wanted to go that route I could have brought up the word “repetitive” itself.
There are many other examples of repetition with acronyms such as PDF format, LCD display, UPC code, etc. This type of repetition, where we repeat a term that is already part of an acronym is so common that a fellow named Stanley Newman coined a humorous name for it in a 2001 article in New Scientist. He called it RAS syndrome, where RAS stands for “Repetitive Acronym Syndrome syndrome.”
Why do we do this? Well, many times it’s because we never learned what these acronyms or initialisms stood for. When they entered the common language, people knew what the labels referred to but not what they stood for. I could argue that this is as much a fault of the originators of the technology being eager to coin short and easy-to-use acronyms. I’m old enough to remember when ATMs were introduced and the initialism was heavily used by the banks adopting the devices.
At other times, we use this repetition to be clear. Simply using the word PIN, at least early in the history of the term, could have caused confusion with other common words like pen. Once this type of repetition became common, it was not likely to go away.
But these food terms brought up in the video as being repetitive are not redundant for the same reasons that repetition happens in acronyms or initialisms. Let’s go over the words mentioned in the video and decide whether we are using them incorrectly.
Is Shrimp Scampi a Repetitive Term?
In Italian, “scampi” is the plural form of scampo. Scampo refers to a shellfish that is similar to a small lobster or large shrimp, also called langoustine, Norway lobster, Dublin Bay prawn, and other names.
As the term entered English, it could sometimes refer to langoustine but the term scampi also entered the language as a way to refer to the typical Italian preparations made with langoustine. Since langoustine wasn’t widely available in the U.S., shrimp was substituted, leading to dishes made in this manner using shrimp to be called “Shrimp Scampi.”
The argument often heard, “Since in Italian scampi refers to crustacean very similar to shrimp, the name basically means “Shrimp Shrimp” is curious since it seeks to correct English speakers by citing incorrect facts. Langoustine are not shrimp, therefore shrimp scampi does not mean “shrimp shrimp.” Instead, by this logic, it means “Shrimp Langoustine.”
While a term can and does enter English in different ways independently, in the case of the dish we call scampi, it entered the language as a way of referring to a preparation primarily instead of a type of shellfish. This borrowed term, then, scampi, refers to a dish in English. Therefore, shrimp scampi is not repetitive, especially since the word scampo never referred to a shrimp but a completely different shellfish species. Although they are quite similar from a culinary standpoint, langoustines are part of the Lobster family and are not related to shrimp.
While they are also called Dublin Bay Prawns, langoustine or scampi are also not prawns, which are part of the shrimp family. For most of us, the names shrimp and prawn are interchangeable, although many use the word prawn to refer to larger shrimp.
While it would be incorrect to use the word scampi as the full name of a dish in Italian, it is not incorrect to use the English word scampi in the way it has long been used. In Italy, dishes made with scampi have such names as Risotto di Scampi (Rissoto with Scampi), Scampi in Umudi (stewed scampi), Scampi alla Busara (scampi with tomato, garlic, white wine), etc.
Is Chai Tea a Repetitive Term?
The word chai means tea in various languages, including Hindi, Urdu, Persian, Turkish, Arabic, Russian, and others. When I was in the Middle East during my military service, I was treated to a very sweet “chai” several times. We often use the term “chai tea” in English, however. This would literally translate to “tea tea.”
Today in America, the term chai is used almost exclusively to refer to Indian spiced tea. While the Hindi word for tea is indeed chai, in India tea is enjoyed sweet, milky, and heavily spiced, i.e. “Masala chai.”
So, yes, the term “chai tea” is entirely repetitive but we developed this habit when Chai tea mixes entered the American market and used the term Chai Tea on the package labels. Otherwise, the word “chai” was never widely used to mean tea. Although the word “cha” had earlier entered the language from Chinese, it is not clear that the term “chai” was ever known as anything else but a word for spiced tea.
Either way, I could argue that the result is “spiced spiced tea” since black tea is served spiced by default in India. So, while many people are learning otherwise, most of us acquired the term as it was introduced. Chai tea became the default way to refer to Indian spiced tea because we simply didn’t know any better.
Frankly, I don’t think many Indian folks would be upset if you used the term Chai tea. They would probably be amused, instead. The word chai used alone is now becoming more common and has begun to replace Chai tea on labels. However, this is again the case of a term entering English in a specific way, this time as introduced by the tea market in America. Marketers were attempting to educate us that the word chai meant tea. Instead, they created a repetitive term.
In this case, I agree with the video that Chai is a technically repetitive term but I do not agree that it matters. If the term had not been replaced so soon (this is relatively soon, historically speaking) then the term “chai tea” would have eventually cemented itself as a standard borrowed English term.
However, to argue that the term is repetitive and therefore incorrect begs the question. Could you order “tea tea” from a restaurant and make sense? In other words, language conventions depend on being understood. Chai tea, though redundant, is understood. Therefore, it does not truly mean “tea tea.” It means spiced tea. What a term translates to and what it means are not always the same.
If it sounds like I’m saying, “So what if it’s repetitive,” I am. Either way, chai tea or chai, it’s still tasty. Today, you will likely be understood no matter which term you use.
Is Naan Bread a Repetitive Term?
Here, we have a similar case. Naan means bread in Hindi. It comes from a Persian word meaning “bread” or “food of life.” So, Naan bread means “bread bread.”
The most common word for bread in Hindi is roti. There are several others. On Indian restaurant menus, you’ll find breads like naan, roti, paratha, puri, kulcha, bhakri, and others. These all refer to different types of bread. Hindi speakers will think of them as different types or categories of bread.
The most basic unleavened flatbread is roti. It is what is typically served as an accompaniment to mop up sauces. Naan is a leavened flatbread and, ironically, while it seems synonymous with Indian food in America, is not an everyday bread but something you’d most often find in restaurants or made for special occasions.
So, to pretend that naan simply means ‘bread’ is incorrect. It is a certain very special kind of bread. If you were in India and asked for bread (yes, they use the word bread), you would probably not get naan!
And where did we get the repetitive seeming term “naan bread?” From Indian restaurant menus. Again, the restaurants were differentiating this type of “bread” from other breads on the menu. This kind of confusion happens when other languages have many words for foods that we try to translate literally. Naan does not truly translate to “bread.” It refers to a specific bread. So, to borrow the term for a specific bread into English and call it Naan bread makes perfect sense.
I doubt Indian people would be upset by the term ‘naan bread.’ When I asked a longtime Indian friend about it, he said that it was “cute and funny,” exactly what I expected he would say.
As we learn more about these Indian food terms, we may all begin to imagine a certain bread when we say “naan” and have no need to use the word bread. But when Indian restaurants started appearing in America, they had to inform us that these different types of bread were bread.
If someone were to translate “whole wheat bread” from English to another language and render it simply “bread,” this translation would not be correct, even though it is indeed bread. This argument can be “summed up” by asking, “Is naan bread?”
- If “naan = bread” then “bread = naan.”
- Bread ≠naan
- Therefore, naan ≠bread
Same verdict: get over it. Naan bread is a type of Indian flatbread that is leavened and eaten on special occasions. Naan is not a generic word for bread. Our use of the term “naan bread” makes perfect sense. If we stop using it and start to say naan, that will only be when this also makes perfect sense. Indeed, the Indian person who made the image below of Naan had no problem labeling it “naan bread” as they were perfectly aware of what we call it.
Is Pealla Pan Repetitive?
Paella is one of the best-known Spanish dishes in America. It is a dish of rice, chicken, seafood, saffron, and vegetables. You may have eaten Paella or even made it for yourself. But do you own a paella pan? If you wanted to make paella, would you purchase a paella pan? I’m going to assume that, for most of you, the answer is no.
According to the video from InternetShaquille, paella means a pan used for cooking paella and the word for the dish itself. While the word is used differently by Valencian speakers, let’s talk about how it’s used in Spain and other Spanish-speaking countries, since we are concerned with the Spanish paella rice dish. The term paella is used for both the pan used to make it and for the dish itself in some parts of Spain. In other parts, the term paellera is used for the pan and paella only for the dish.
In English, while we can certainly purchase pans called Paella pans, the word Paella used alone is reserved only for the dish. Again, this word was borrowed into English to refer to this specific dish. When we use it in English, we are generally not referring to a pan. This reference would be so uncommon that we would probably use the term “paella pan” just as most marketers of such pans do.
Pretend you are searching for a Paella pan to buy but just Google “paella. “You’ll quickly see my point. Why argue about a term being repetitive when it introduces needless difficulties? If you Google Paella, you’ll get Paella recipes. If you want a pan, you have to Google “paella pan.”
I’ll never understand why people get upset over the way terms are used versus how they think they should be used. In all these cases, arguments can be made as to why we use these terms and why they are not entirely redundant from an English standpoint. Other food terms are argued to be repetitive where the same arguments can be applied.
How Did Refried Beans Get Their Name?
For example: Rice Pilaf. Pilaf means “balls of rice” so rice pilaf means “rice balls of rice.” In English, rice pilaf does not refer to a ball of rice, it refers to a cooked rice mixture not served as a ball.
Another example is “Ahi Tuna.” Since “ahi” means Tuna in Hawaii, “ahi tuna” means “tuna tuna.” Ahi tuna does not refer to all tuna in English. It refers to one specific type of tuna. Not repetitive. Or rather, not repetitious. There I go getting pedantic1
