Talk:Recipe

masochist?

That's fer sure! I'll see tomorrow if I can put any of my own fairly dogmatic ideas into it.... Hayford Peirce 21:46, 2 March 2008 (CST)

Hayford, do Brits really call recipes "receipts"? I've never heard that before. --Larry Sanger 15:35, 3 March 2008 (CST)

I spent 8 months in London in 1968 and never heard it. I have a couple of British "cookery" books and I'm pretty sure that they don't either. It wuz Aleta who wrote the article -- maybe it's a Digger thing.... Hayford Peirce 16:30, 3 March 2008 (CST)

Maybe, but my Oxford Dictionary just says it's 'arch.' Ro Thorpe 16:36, 3 March 2008 (CST)

Was that "archaic", Ro, or "archetypal"? ;)

Haven't you read any British literature, Sanger? And the rest of you? P)

You can put "formerly" if you want, because I haven't lived in England in...mumble...mumble...years, but older folks of a certain class always said "receipt" back in the day.

AND, FYI, I just checked my American dictionary. Definition no. 1 for 'receipt'=(drum roll) "RECIPE"!

Aleta Curry 20:33, 3 March 2008 (CST)

Even a geezer can learn new tricks -- I just checked the only 2 dictionaries I could reach (I'm rebuilding my office and my reference books are scattered around 4 rooms in hard-to-access places) and, to my astonishment, receipt actually means...RECIPE! Even the really majestrial M-W International Unabridged of 1932, second edition, says so. And that's the only book in the world that I actually trust.... So I'll do a rewrite. Mille pardons, chere demoiselle! Hayford Peirce 21:05, 3 March 2008 (CST)

Can I hire you a cleaning lady to destroy those? --Robert W King 21:13, 3 March 2008 (CST)

Perhaps a reference to receipt may be included? The stub receipt doesn't have any citations either! Supten Sarbadhikari 22:15, 3 March 2008 (CST)