Here are 3 examples:
Fried egg, fried rice, fried chicken

All these “fry” are different. If you were to use the “fry” in fried rice to fry an egg, you’d get scrambled egg. Fried chicken is done by submerging it in oil, which you won’t do with fried egg or fried rice.

This post is made from the perspective of a Cantonese/Chinese speaker. We have different words for these different types of “fry” (煎, 炒, 炸 respectively)

(Turns out I did post it in the wrong sub and I didn’t realize, and now I feel very stupid. Photon UI has once again screwed me over. Got mad for no reason.)

  • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Fry means to cook with oil.

    You have pan frying, deep frying, shallow frying, they all have additional descriptors, and you can usually infer the type from the product. You can always say deep fried chicken, but that’s also assumed when you say “fried chicken” already. If it’s fried different you would maybe say “pan fried chicken” instead.

      • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 months ago

        Usually you need to spray or toss the stuff with a small amount of oil first, or stuff has natural oils. The term is usually for using “another oil” so I would say adding oil would be a must instead of its own oils myself.

      • snooggums@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        I thought pan fried was with a lot of oil, like pan fried chicken, and sautéed was with a small amount of oil.

        • I'm back on my BS 🤪@lemmy.autism.place
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Ok, so they are different??

          Let’s say I want use a a small amount of olive oil to lightly fry pressed garlic, chopped onions and green bell pepper enough to make the onion translucent and release the oil from the garlic into the olive oil. The amount of olive oil used is a little more than enough to wet the mix in oil. That would be considered sautéing, not pan frying, correct?

          • SchmidtGenetics@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            3 months ago

            You sauté to soften and pan fry to crispen would be the difference I guess. So starting from a “soft” or “hard” ingredient, but both require same amount of oil and heat. I’ve never thought of them differently, since they’re the same action.

  • I think y’all are missing the point. OP points out that in their native language, Cantonese, they have different words for each of these kinds of cooking. In English, we apply modifiers, if anything; “deep fry”, “air fry”, but we don’t have different words for the different types of frying.

    That’s all they’re saying. Eskimo words for snow. Oregonian words for rain. Georgian words for “you’re an idiot.” Apparently, in Cantonese, they have a lot of different words for different types of frying.

  • TheAlbatross@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    We have some oddly obtuse language for cooking in English.

    We use the same phrase to describe foods that are high in temperature and contain lots of capsaicin (hot). We can use spicy, I suppose, but it gets a little odd describing foods with lots of spices that aren’t chili pepper. I generally say “well-spiced” and that gets the message across. We hardly have a way to distinguish “types of spicy” flavoring, such as that from chili, horseradish or peppercorns. I’ve seen some people start to say mala (loan word, 麻辣) for numbing spice, but that’s uncommon and new.

    That’s just a few examples.

    Most of our more precise language for cooking comes from other languages, like French. To saute, to braise, bain-marie, julienne, sous vide, etc. I’m not sure why English has so many lexical gaps specifically around cooking.

    It’s gotten WAY better. Some recipes from, like, the colonial era, have instructions like “cook well in a cold oven until done”, so progress has been made, it’s still often imprecise and clumsy.

    • almost1337@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      “cook well in a cold oven” at least makes sense in the context of the time. Ovens then were not supplied continuous heat - instead, they were fired up to a high heat, and then as it slowly cooled food was baked in them according to the current temperature. A cold or slow oven would be at the low end, and a hot or quick oven would be shortly after it was first heated.

      • TheAlbatross@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        This is a great point. It wasn’t like every home had a thermometer in the oven and therefore they had to use different terminology and identifiers for indicating oven temperature. Similarly, this is why American recipes measure in volume vs weight, most homes didn’t have scales, they had cups and spoons.

        These were also “precise enough” for the era. Perhaps these lexical gaps form as more styles of cuisine become more common and other cooking methods are used.

        I’ve noticed this with some Indian recipes. The instruction “to grind” specifically refers to using grinders, either mill or wet grinders, that just aren’t common in the US and that can create some ambiguity in how finely to chop or grind something.