quote: (post)

Originally posted by Bloigen
Ketchup was one of the earliest names given to this condiment, so spelled in Charles Lockyer’s book of 1711, An Account of the Trade in India: “Soy comes in Tubbs from Jappan, and the best Ketchup from Tonquin; yet good of both sorts are made and sold very cheap in China”. Nobody seems quite sure where it comes from, and I won’t bore you with a long disquisition concerning the scholarly debate on the matter, which is reflected in the varied origins given in major dictionaries. It’s likely to be from a Chinese dialect, imported into English through Malay. The original was a kind of fish sauce, though the modern Malay and Indonesian version, with the closely related name kecap, is a sweet soy sauce.

Like their Eastern forerunners, Western ketchups were dipping sauces. I’m told the first ketchup recipe appeared in Elizabeth Smith’s book The Compleat Housewife of 1727 and that it included anchovies, shallots, vinegar, white wine, sweet spices (cloves, ginger, mace, nutmeg), pepper and lemon peel. Not a tomato in sight, you will note — tomato ketchup was not introduced until about a century later, in the US, and caught on only slowly. It was more usual to base the condiment on mushrooms, or sometimes walnuts.

The confusion about names started even before Charles Lockyer wrote about it, since there is an entry dated 1690 in the Dictionary of the Canting Crew which gives it as catchup, which is another Anglicisation of the original Eastern term. Catchup was used much more in North America than in Britain: it was still common in the middle years of the nineteenth century, as in a story in Scribner’s Magazine in 1859: “I do not object to take a few slices of cold boiled ham ... with a little mushroom catchup, some Worcester sauce, and a pickle or so”. Indeed, catchup continued to appear in American works for some decades and is still to be found on occasion.

There were lots of other spellings, too, of which catsup is the best known, a modification of catchup. You can blame Jonathan Swift for it if you like, since he used it first in 1730: “And, for our home-bred British cheer, Botargo, catsup, and caveer”. [Caveer is caviar; botargo is a fish-based relish made of the roe of the mullet or tunny.] That form was also once common in the US but is much less so these days, at least on bottle labels: all the big US manufacturers now call their product ketchup.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by RogerRamjet
i hope you all die long and painful deaths...

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Piggle Humsy
I'm living a long and painful death right now

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Piggle Humsy
I'm living a long and painful death right now

quote: (post)

Originally posted by taft
Thats deep, like the ocean

quote: (post)

Originally posted by RogerRamjet
i hope you all die long and painful deaths...

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Bloigen
Ketchup was one of the earliest names given to this condiment, so spelled in Charles Lockyer’s book of 1711, An Account of the Trade in India: “Soy comes in Tubbs from Jappan, and the best Ketchup from Tonquin; yet good of both sorts are made and sold very cheap in China”. Nobody seems quite sure where it comes from, and I won’t bore you with a long disquisition concerning the scholarly debate on the matter, which is reflected in the varied origins given in major dictionaries. It’s likely to be from a Chinese dialect, imported into English through Malay. The original was a kind of fish sauce, though the modern Malay and Indonesian version, with the closely related name kecap, is a sweet soy sauce.

Like their Eastern forerunners, Western ketchups were dipping sauces. I’m told the first ketchup recipe appeared in Elizabeth Smith’s book The Compleat Housewife of 1727 and that it included anchovies, shallots, vinegar, white wine, sweet spices (cloves, ginger, mace, nutmeg), pepper and lemon peel. Not a tomato in sight, you will note — tomato ketchup was not introduced until about a century later, in the US, and caught on only slowly. It was more usual to base the condiment on mushrooms, or sometimes walnuts.

The confusion about names started even before Charles Lockyer wrote about it, since there is an entry dated 1690 in the Dictionary of the Canting Crew which gives it as catchup, which is another Anglicisation of the original Eastern term. Catchup was used much more in North America than in Britain: it was still common in the middle years of the nineteenth century, as in a story in Scribner’s Magazine in 1859: “I do not object to take a few slices of cold boiled ham ... with a little mushroom catchup, some Worcester sauce, and a pickle or so”. Indeed, catchup continued to appear in American works for some decades and is still to be found on occasion.

There were lots of other spellings, too, of which catsup is the best known, a modification of catchup. You can blame Jonathan Swift for it if you like, since he used it first in 1730: “And, for our home-bred British cheer, Botargo, catsup, and caveer”. [Caveer is caviar; botargo is a fish-based relish made of the roe of the mullet or tunny.] That form was also once common in the US but is much less so these days, at least on bottle labels: all the big US manufacturers now call their product ketchup.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Röland
[William Wallace]Every man dies, not every man truly lives...[/William Wallace]

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Darth Revan
"Yeah, that's right," Joe answered from under his hat. He tried to hide the fact that he knew her. "Uh... Do I know you?"

quote: (post)

Originally posted by taft

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Röland
Joe Thomas?

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Mr Parker
well spoken Bakerboy.Heck like you said,if we wanted to, we could stoop to their childish level and say all these man-spider fans who loves these stupid man-spider movies are all the same person but thats so idiotic its not worth stooping to thier childish level they display.the logic of the man-spider fans.

and please man-spider fans,stop with the lies that we hate the movies just because of organics.I have said COUNTLESS of times on this post and given many examples before of how these movies are horribly written with orrible performances by the main two stars tobey mcguire and dunst.Dunst especially.she needs to do what her character in that movie mary jane was doing,take acting lessons because she cant act.Raimi is clearly an idiot also becaus as i said,he had mary jane acting MUCH MUCH more like gwen stacy in the movie and hardly anything at all like mary jane,that is inexcusable poor screenwriting by the screenwriters and inexcusable direting by the director.Like Bakerboy said,from all the reports that have come from the set,it sounds like that idiot Sam Raimi is now making the actress who plays gwen stacy to act like mary jane from the comics now. stupid and inexcusbale screenwriting.simple as that.

as I mentioedn earlier,I wasnt completely happy wit what they did with the 90's cartoon show either because they ALSO did not portray mary janes character properly in that show making her like gwen stacy as well but the storys from the first season of that show were so great and good that unlike the man-spider movies they were enjoyable and fun because the positives in that show in the first season out weighed the negatives where with the man-spider movies,its just the oppostie,way more negatives about the films than positives.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by taft
Thats deep, like the ocean

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Bloigen
No, that was wide, if she went deep you couldn't find her.

quote: (post)

Originally posted by RogerRamjet
with Vegas on the way? how does that fit into the experience? i'd be upright in my bed every night if i was about to go to Vegas!

quote: (post)

Originally posted by taft

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Piggle Humsy
I was going to say that

quote: (post)

Originally posted by Bloigen
So was I, infact, I did.