A Dictionary of Food & Nutrition
A Dictionary of Food & Nutrition Books
Product Description
This dictionary is proposed for anyone who enjoys food and would like a handy, non-technical guide to the terms they encounter on food marks, in advertising or in the media. Its broad coverage of food and nutrition makes it invaluable for consumers, cooks, and a range of students and practitioners in the fields of catering, home economies, food technology, and health care.
Buy Cheap A Dictionary of Food & Nutrition Online
Related posts:
- Food Politics: How the Food Industry Influences Nutrition, and Health, Revised and Expanded Edition
- Managing Food and Nutrition Services for Culinary, Hospitality, and Nutrition Professionals
- Food and Culture: A Nutrition Handbook
- Food and Culture in America: A Nutrition Handbook
- Canine Nutrition: Choosing the Best Food for Your Breed
If you are a foodie and you like to know some of the finer details, this is for you. Not a dictionary; more a trivia collection. But not really trivia as the info is solid and helpful.
Rating: 5 / 5
Oxford Dictionary of Food and Nutrition is probably the most terrible dictionary ever to come from Oxford University Press. In its second edition (2005) there was scarcely a page without a mistake and in its third edition (2009) there are still bounty of them: from misspelled entries and incorrect definitions to the chaotic use of capitalization!
The author failed to correctly spell even the simplest foreign words which can be checked in every run of the mill dictionary. For example: in the second edition he was trying to convince the readers, that the Roman word for starch was amulum*. Well, everybody who has some knowledge of the Latin language, and has ever heard for any of a flock of words beginning with amyl-, knows that the word was amylum. In the third edition this mistake is corrected, but tens of others, like the Italian word focaccia for a flat cake, which is misspelled foccacia*, are not.
Some of the mistakes from previous edition were ‘corrected’ in a very amusing (i.e. not serious!) way. Example: a kind of Russian dumplings is called tvorozhniki, but the author invented(?) the spelling tvoroinki*, which is still an entry (now with the right one in brackets) despite the fact, that as far as I know it exists in Oxford Dictionary of Food and Nutrition only.
Another ‘gem’ are definitions like that of nioigome: “sweet smelling rice”. The dictionary does not tell us neither whose it is (probably Japanese) nor what just so does it mean (sweet smelling with what?).
Besides, the author plays at hide-and-seek much too often for a clad dictionary. For example: 1) at soonf he says “see fennel”, but at fennel there is no mention of soonf; 2) at soondth he says “see ginger”, but at ginger there is no mention of soondth.
My advice is: avoid this dictionary! Alan Davidson’s The Oxford Companion to Food is supremely better choise (though it lacks in rank on nutrition).
Rating: 2 / 5
The book is a small outdated, but the in rank surrounded by it fantastic. It is reader friendly and simple to find what you are looking for. I am studying to be a nutritionist and I have used this book many times. Every house should have one of these books on their bookshelf.
Rating: 5 / 5