1558

submitted 1 week ago by fossilesque@mander.xyz to c/science_memes@mander.xyz

151 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] ilinamorato@lemmy.world 139 points 1 week ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

The whole fruit/vegetable controversy only comes because we're trying to use two different domains of terms interchangeably: botanical terms and culinary terms.

Tomatoes (and squash, and pumpkins (which, side note, are a type of squash), and cucumbers) are botanically fruits, but culinarily they're most commonly used as vegetables because they tend to be less sweet, particularly when raw. Mushrooms are botanically...well, I guess they're botanically "n/a", as they're not a part of the plantae kingdom, but whatever--they're typically considered botanical, so they're "botanically" fungi, but culinarily they're most commonly used as vegetables (or, interestingly, as meat replacements).

We get into the same linguistic confusion when we start throwing around "peanuts aren't nuts, they're legumes!"--botanically, yes, peanuts are legumes, but culinarily they're most commonly used as nuts. See also: "green beans" are botanically pods, not beans, but we use them culinarily as vegetables; and many "berries" are botanically something else but we use them culinarily as berries; meaning they're often left whole, mixed with other berries in the same dish, and go well with cream in cold summer desserts.

The whole thing is a misguided exercise in pedantry; "technically burritos aren't sandwiches, they're meat-sacks!" They're both, and we instinctively understand that trying to compare the two terms is silly because "sandwich" is a culinary term and "sack" is not.

~~Another funny part of this is that pedants are trying to say that tomatoes are (botanically) fruits and not vegetables, but the closest thing to a definition we have for "vegetable" botanically is "literally all plant life and maybe also some fungi," so tomatoes are clearly both fruit and vegetable botanically.~~ Plus, they're culinarily used as vegetables, but can also be used as fruits in some cakes, pies, sorbets, and so forth (and isn't ketchup just a tomato smoothie?), so tomatoes are clearly both fruit and vegetable in culinary terms as well.

edit: Someone who actually knows what they're talking about (an ecologist) has corrected my botanical definition of "vegetable." Actually, they're “edible parts of a plant which are not fruit.” Which means that tomatoes are explicitly excluded as vegetables, being botanically a fruit. I don't think that ruins my overall point in any way, though.

[-] merc@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 week ago

It is a bit weird that we use some fruits as "vegetables", like tomatoes and cucumbers. But, other fruits like mango or raspberry are so different from your typical "culinary vegetable" that you have to be very careful in how you use it in a savoury dish. There isn't the same crossover for other edible plants. For example, I can't think of any tuber that could sneak into a fruit salad unnoticed.

I guess it comes down to there being a lot more variety among fruits than other edible plant parts. Plus, humans have been tweaking edible plants for millennia. So, who knows, maybe the original cucumber was more "fruity", but has been tuned over the years to be more "saladey".

[-] squaresinger@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago

For example, I can’t think of any tuber that could sneak into a fruit salad unnoticed.

Some sweet potatoes can be very sweet indeed, and they can be used in sweet dishes too (I've seen for example, sweet potato mash topped with marshmallows). They are just too porous to be used in a traditional fruit salad.

I guess it comes down to there being a lot more variety among fruits than other edible plant parts.

Pulses are incredibly variable too in their usage. You can use them as nuts, vegetables, grains, oil or pastes (sweet and savoury). You can use them in place of potatoes, you can bake bread from them, you can even use them to replace meat in many situations. Young sweet peas can be used almost in place of some fruit as well.

So, who knows, maybe the original cucumber was more “fruity”, but has been tuned over the years to be more “saladey”.

Cucumbers are a kind of pumpkin, same as melons. They are all variations of the same original fruit, and yes, some of them are clearly in fruit-salad territory, while others are more saladey and others again can be used in place of potatoes.

And lastly, the most crazy variable plant is Brassica. Different cultivars of this one plant provide swede, turnip, kohlrabi, cabbage, collard, kale, cauliflower, broccoli, romanesco, Brussels sprouts, mustard seed, rape seed and a lot of smaller, lesser known things too.

[-] merc@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 days ago

Some sweet potatoes can be very sweet

Yeah, there are sweet tubers. But, you can't put a raw piece of sweet potato in a fruit salad. If you cooked it to bring out the sweetness it would be as sweet as the fruit in the salad, but it would stand out for being very mushy.

Pulses are incredibly variable too in their usage.

I haven't heard the term "pulse" before, I've heard "legumes". But, yeah, that group has a lot of variety. Red beans are frequently used as a sweet filling in east Asian cooking, chickpeas as crunchy snacks, etc.

[-] squaresinger@lemmy.world 1 points 6 days ago

It's more an issue of consistency than of taste though with sweet potatoes. There are some fruits that also don't fit into a fruit salad for similar reasons, like e.g. passion fruit or very soft kinds of nectrarines.

But I have seen ginger in fruit salad before.