ForumGarden

I have finally had enough, sufficiently to complain in public.

There is absolutely no meaning whatever in the word cup, tablespoon or teaspoon other than as a translation into a unit of mass or volume. The pint, ounce, litre and gram exist for a very good reason - they're repeatable. I have no cup which is remotely a standard cup. My cutlery varies from one piece to the next.

No recipe using cup, tablespoon or teaspoon is fit for any purpose whatever in my kitchen and any book or person using these arcane medieval units of measure will be barred from entry. I do not use groats, drachms, grains, leagues, fathoms, bushels, minims or scruples either, though they made far more sense than cups, tablespoons or teaspoons did - they were at least consistent.

A cup is simple. Half a pint.

Unless, of course you are speaking of a coffee cup, as measured by the Mr Coffee machine, in which it is 5 fl oz. So a 12 cup Mr Coffee produces 60 ounces of coffee which is just shy of eight cups.

I don't see the problem.

It would help if your blasted pint bore any resemblance to the UK pint, of course.

Over here we even mark baby bottles with UK and US fluid ounces, alongside more useful millilitres.

https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/ ... yUnits.jpg

Wow. It never occurred to me that a Fluid Ounce in the UK was not the same as a Fluid Ounce in the US

So, my pint is bigger'n your pint. Imagine that.

Ya learn sumpin new every day.

LarsMac;1503910 wrote: So, my pint is bigger'n your pint. Imagine that.Well, no.

The US fluid ounce is bigger than the UK fluid ounce by around 4%, yes. But the UK has 20 fluid ounces to the pint and the US has 16, like ounces in pounds. We use the 5-ounce gill and you have the 4-ounce gill, which is relevant to bar staff.

So the UK pint is, in fact, 1.16 US pints.

Your gallon is 16% smaller than ours too.

All this is part of why I want my recipes in unambiguous precise grams and litres. I can scale grams and litres far more easily too.

Have you caught the Bake Off bug Spot ?

Who would have thought it ?

spot always gets more bah humbug around this time of year. Yo entiendo y simpatizo. Pobrecito!!!!!!!!!!!

imperial cup = 8 fluid ounces

cups, table spoons, and teaspoons are all still used in the USA

I think in the mid to late 70's Canada ditched Imperial measure and went to metric (this messed many of us up)

I measure driving distance and speed in metric. KM. We had no choice over time our Odometers on our cars phased out the Mile.

I still use inches and Feet in shorter distance measure, and our rulers are marked with both and I never really grasped the metric (inches was ingrained into our minds by the time the change happened)

I use cups and Tea and Tablespoon in cooking See above. I use mostly imperial recipes, so need imperial measuring devices. but like the ruler we have both marks on our cups (not our spoons)

so Ann if you think you are confused......

AnneBoleyn;1503917 wrote: spot always gets more bah humbug around this time of year. Yo entiendo y simpatizo. Pobrecito!!!!!!!!!!!


How would that translate to Britspeak Anne?

ZAP;1503922 wrote: How would that translate to Britspeak Anne?


Oops, sorry, I've been hanging around so many hispanics lately & I enjoy the realization I remember so much. I said that I understand & sympathize with poor dear spot.

Zap, there are so many different languages spoken around me. I can't tell you how many times I am/was the only English speaker in a group.

Just looked up your profile, Zap----I thought you were American. I see you live in California (lucky, lucky), so you must hear a ton of Spanish, yes?

In my neighborhood, Russian is the most spoken language. Years ago I thought I should learn it, but then I thought "Let them learn English like my grandma!" She never spoke Russian again when she arrived here in the early 1900's, because she was pissed she had to leave because the cossacks were trying to rape, murder & rob her. Thin-skinned, hey? Holding a grudge. I don't like the sound of Russian, but I like Spanish.

AnneBoleyn;1503924 wrote: Oops, sorry, I've been hanging around so many hispanics lately & I enjoy the realization I remember so much. I said that I understand & sympathize with poor dear spot.

Zap, there are so many different languages spoken around me. I can't tell you how many times I am/was the only English speaker in a group.


I hear you talkin' Anne. My town has a 74.6 % Hispanic or Latino population. In my doctor's office there usually isn't another English-speaking patient in there. Some of the stock clerks in Walmart don't speak English and they run when they see me coming. (They don't think, because of my blonde hair, that I speak fluent Spanish.)

AnneBoleyn;1503925 wrote: Just looked up your profile, Zap----I thought you were American. I see you live in California (lucky, lucky), so you must hear a ton of Spanish, yes?

In my neighborhood, Russian is the most spoken language. Years ago I thought I should learn it, but then I thought "Let them learn English like my grandma!" She never spoke Russian again when she arrived here in the early 1900's, because she was pissed she had to leave because the cossacks were trying to rape, murder & rob her. Thin-skinned, hey? Holding a grudge. I don't like the sound of Russian, but I like Spanish.


I would like to have met your grandma.

ZAP;1503928 wrote: I would like to have met your grandma.


:-6 :yh_hugs :yh_kiss

Very kind of you to say!

I'm not a speaker of Spanish but the phrases were instantly meaningful. It's surprising how words like those ignore cultural boundaries.

Returning to cups for a moment, I bought a church hall a while back and inherited the mismatched crockery. I just put a random dozen on the scales and the millilitres they can each measure is

204

192

202

229

161

156

215

213

194

95

83

143



I left out a silly cup which holds 509ml as obviously not suitable for measuring a cup of anything.

The average is 175ml, with a standard deviation of 45ml. As a means of measuring for a recipe it doesn't strike me as appropriate.

Lars' half a US pint occupies, in contrast, 284ml. My cup size is a lot less than his.



Bruv;1503915 wrote: Have you caught the Bake Off bug Spot ?I've been trying to recall why I needed this translation from crockery to volume, it certainly wasn't baking.

Brewing, that was it. Site after site after site of inane Americans putting tablespoons of unsavory ingredients into their wash.

spot;1503935 wrote: I've been trying to recall why I needed this translation from crockery to volume, it certainly wasn't baking.

Brewing, that was it. Site after site after site of inane Americans putting tablespoons of unsavory ingredients into their wash.


For your information Google is pretty handy in such circumstances....HERE......sorted.

I suspect the 'active' ingredients are the only critical ones in brewing, any others are flavouring, an extra half a cup either way should be acceptable

spot;1503935 wrote: I'm not a speaker of Spanish but the phrases were instantly meaningful. It's surprising how words like those ignore cultural boundaries.

Returning to cups for a moment, I bought a church hall a while back and inherited the crockery. I just put a random dozen on the scales and the millilitres they can each measure is

204

192

202

229

161

156

215

213

194

95

83

143



I left out a silly cup which holds 509ml as obviously not suitable for measuring a cup of anything.

The average is 175ml, with a standard deviation of 45ml. As a means of measuring for a recipe it doesn't strike me as appropriate.

Lars' half a US pint occupies, in contrast, 284ml. My cup size is a lot less than his.



I've been trying to recall why I needed this translation from crockery to volume, it certainly wasn't baking.

Brewing, that was it. Site after site after site of inane Americans putting tablespoons of unsavory ingredients into their wash.


Well I have one coffee cup that was given to me after my MD advised me that I should cut back to 1 cup of coffee a day.

It holds 64 Fluid Ounces (US) - about 1893 ml

This discussion has led me to wonder, though - do you guys have UK Teaspoons, and tablespoons, as well?

A couple of hours ago I went into the bathroom where I filled a sink just cup my hands and splash my face with water.

tude dog;1503945 wrote: A couple of hours ago I went into the bathroom where I filled a sink just cup my hands and splash my face with water.


Did you measure the volume first? Im concerned the amount of water used isnt enough to sufficiently cover the surface area of your face. This could have deteimental affects on your hygeine and therefore your health and the health of an entire nation. I suggest you do the physics and chemical investigation in this matter. Your lack of measurement could cause an epidemic, and you wouldnt want to be responsible for that!

Doesnt everyone have measuring cups, jugs, scales and a conversion table in your kitchens!

magentaflame;1503951 wrote: Did you measure the volume first? Im concerned the amount of water used isnt enough to sufficiently cover the surface area of your face. This could have deteimental affects on your hygeine and therefore your health and the health of an entire nation. I suggest you do the physics and chemical investigation in this matter. Your lack of measurement could cause an epidemic, and you wouldnt want to be responsible for that!

Doesnt everyone have measuring cups, jugs, scales and a conversion table in your kitchens!


Don't know about everyone, but I do.

I thought it was like basic kitchen fair. No one has a work shed or garage then not own a hammer or screwdriver.

Don't look at me, I've preached for the U.S. to go entirely metric for decades... 5280 feet. Pfft.

Saint_;1503974 wrote: Don't look at me, I've preached for the U.S. to go entirely metric for decades... 5280 feet. Pfft.


5180 feet plus a furlong, equals? Lol

As I recall, when it comes to cooking, cups do not have a set measurement - nor are they meant to. They are a proportionate measure originally devised by Fanny Farmer for the recipes in her Cookbook. By using the same sized cup for all ingredients the measurements could be made much more precise - especially if you didn't have a set of scales.... 'x' cups of flour, 'y' cups of sugar, 'z' cups of milk. It makes no difference if it's an eggcup or a giant coffee mug - the proportionate ratio remains the same.

That's a fine approach until you have to fit all your ingredients into the five gallon fermenting tub.

spot;1504076 wrote: That's a fine approach until you have to fit all your ingredients into the five gallon fermenting tub.
Then you either use smaller cups or guage your fermenting tub by the cup volume.

magentaflame;1503984 wrote: 5180 feet plus a furlong, equals? Lol


When I was a kid, just to be a pain and cause the teacher to look it up, I answered a homework question in furlongs per fortnight instead of miles per hour. To my surprise, she actually liked my answer.

x2688.

spot;1504090 wrote: x2688.


Quite right.

LarsMac;1503907 wrote: A cup is simple. Half a pint.

Unless, of course you are speaking of a coffee cup, as measured by the Mr Coffee machine, in which it is 5 fl oz. So a 12 cup Mr Coffee produces 60 ounces of coffee which is just shy of eight cups.

I don't see the problem.


Then why don't they say half a pint?

Half a pint over here would be a mug - I've never seen a cup larger than a third of a pint

LarsMac;1503910 wrote: Wow. It never occurred to me that a Fluid Ounce in the UK was not the same as a Fluid Ounce in the US

So, my pint is bigger'n your pint. Imagine that.

Ya learn sumpin new every day.


No, the floz is the same size, you have sixteen of them to the pint to match oz to lb whereas we have twenty so my pint's bigger'n yours :-p

Bryn Mawr;1504112 wrote: Then why don't they say half a pint?

Half a pint over here would be a mug - I've never seen a cup larger than a third of a pint




500ml (0.88 pints)

Incidentally, a UK Fluid ounce is 1 / 20 Pint. A US Fluid Ounce is 1 / 16 pint.

The sooner everyone standardises the Metric system the better we'll all be.

Bryn Mawr;1504113 wrote: No, the floz is the same size
Check the picture in #3.

spot;1504121 wrote: Check the picture in #3.


I sit corrected

FourPart;1504117 wrote:

500ml (0.88 pints)

Incidentally, a UK Fluid ounce is 1 / 20 Pint. A US Fluid Ounce is 1 / 16 pint.



The sooner everyone standardises the Metric system the better we'll all be.


the pints are different, while the Fl Oz is nearly the same.

I don't disagree on the metric standard. A lot of countries apparently oppose the standardization.

We could still use gallons and pints and such.

A gallon could be set to four liters, a pint to half a liter.

works for me

LarsMac;1504130 wrote: A lot of countries apparently oppose the standardization.

A gallon could be set to four liters, a pint to half a liter.




No only 3........America Liberia and Myanmar........and it's a litre.........despite what the American spell checker's telling me.

LarsMac;1504130 wrote: the pints are different, while the Fl Oz is nearly the same.

I don't disagree on the metric standard. A lot of countries apparently oppose the standardization.

We could still use gallons and pints and such.

A gallon could be set to four liters, a pint to half a liter.

works for me


We can't be 'aving that! We'd be short changed up t'pub.

How big would that make a Firkin? Stick to nine gallons and we'd run out of an evening - we'd need to go to ten gallons, twenty for a Kilderkin and forty for a barrel. O.K., that would work but I'd still want my proper pint.

Bryn Mawr;1504134 wrote: We can't be 'aving that! We'd be short changed up t'pub.

How big would that make a Firkin? Stick to nine gallons and we'd run out of an evening - we'd need to go to ten gallons, twenty for a Kilderkin and forty for a barrel. O.K., that would work but I'd still want my proper pint.


Only 68 ml difference you'd lose. They'd just have to mark it down a tad to compensate. On our side, we'd gain a few ml. (That'd probably boost the price at the pub by a buck, with the way things are going here.)

Bruv;1504133 wrote: No only 3........America Liberia and Myanmar........and it's a litre.........despite what the American spell checker's telling me.


Well, once we finally sort out the metric mess, suppose we could begin working on a standardized spelling for English?

That could keep them standards folk busy another half a century.

LarsMac;1504139 wrote: Only 68 ml difference you'd lose. They'd just have to mark it down a tad to compensate. On our side, we'd gain a few ml. (That'd probably boost the price at the pub by a buck, with the way things are going here.)


That's more than a tenth of a pint - and then there's the froth. There'll be nothing left in the jug at this rate!

And as for them dropping the price to compensate ...

LarsMac;1504140 wrote: Well, once we finally sort out the metric mess, suppose we could begin working on a standardized spelling for English?

That could keep them standards folk busy another half a century.


I always liked this proposal :-

Spelling reform - a satirical proposal for phonetic spelling Mantex

It is interesting to note that Gene Rodenberry, in his creation of Star Trek, has been extremely prophetic about all sorts of things regarding the development of science. It is also interesting to note that despite being American, from the start Star Trek always referred to standardised Metric measurements.

FourPart;1504175 wrote: It is interesting to note that Gene Rodenberry, in his creation of Star Trek, has been extremely prophetic about all sorts of things regarding the development of science. It is also interesting to note that despite being American, from the start Star Trek always referred to standardised Metric measurements.


That's why I'm a Trekkie....

FourPart;1504175 wrote: It is interesting to note that Gene Rodenberry, in his creation of Star Trek, has been extremely prophetic about all sorts of things regarding the development of science. It is also interesting to note that despite being American, from the start Star Trek always referred to standardised Metric measurements.


Well, at the time it made sense. The US Bureau of Standards had begun the transition, and we actually thought that by the 1980s we would be well on the way to a full Global Metric conversion. So, by the first star-date in Kirk's log that would be the galactic standard.

I may have missed something back when Star Trek was around but hadn't the United States of America blinked out of existence as a political entity before time in which the original series was set?

spot;1504192 wrote: I may have missed something back when Star Trek was around but hadn't the United States of America blinked out of existence as a political entity before time in which the original series was set?


Perhaps, but the writers were still very much alive and kicking in the mid 20th Century when it seemed that the Metric System was the Wave of the Future.

In their world the US of A was going to be the leader of the Free Galaxy in a few Centuries.

And it was recognised that the inevitable way of the future was going to be metrication. After all, the American did Decimalise their currency (although they do still cling to the old "Pieces of Eight", as in the 2 bits.