Jump to content

Recommended Posts

It would depend if you're referring to two separate servings of the dish, in which case you'd ask the the waiter for "two-toad-in-the-holes, please," but if one was referring to the number of sausages one wanted in the dish one might ask for, for example, "Four toads in the hole please."


God I need to get out more.

No UG, done well it's a delight. But I must admit, it weights heavy on my belly when I do eat it. The batter needs to be lighter than light to succeed, else it's like a greasy sausage and onion on a bed of neoprene.


But boiled bacon and peas pudding is a good dish, as are eels themselves. But jellied is not my thing, I prefer cured and smoked like salmon. Or grilled, with a thick slice of smoked back and some mash potatoes. However, any dish in the wrong hands can be a disaster.


Ahhh...food glorious food!

Seabag Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Does it really matter?


Not in the slightest, but just as some of us like discussing the merits of 4-4-2 vs 5-4-1, some of us like discussing the nuances of language - just a bit of fun, as long as one's not judgemental about it.

Sue Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Like sheep. And Pokemon :)

>

> Why is sheep lamb when you eat it? And why is cow

> beef?


I know this one...it's because of the split between the Anglo-Saxon peasantry and the Norman aristocracy, so when the animal was alive it was referred to by its Anglo-Saxon name as it was they who looked after them, so cow and sheep, but when it was killed it was the Normans who got to eat it, so as prepared meat it was given its French name - bouef, mouton, and the distinction remained as the two languages merged into modern English.

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> 'Toad in the holes'. The collective noun is a

> bellywobbler of toad in the holes


I would have thought 'toads in the hole', in the same way we pluralise to governors general, poets laureate and mothers in law.

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I would have thought 'toads in the hole', in the

> same way we pluralise to governors general, poets

> laureate and mothers in law.


Not really the same though, is it? 'toads in the hole' seems to indicate multiple toads within a single hole, it is not really analogous to "mothers-in-law".


Conversely, "toad in the holes" suggests a single toad which has been split amongst several holes. Far from ideal.


I would suggest "toads in holes", or perhaps simply abbreviating it to "toads" if the context will allow.

Context is everything. Does it need to be pluralised in it's common everyday usage?

If at home, whether it's for one person or a large family, you'd say ''We're having/I'm cooking Toad in the Hole tonight.

Likewise in a restaurant, you would order 'Toad in the Hole in the singular.

If someone then asked you what you had to eat last night at the restaurant, you'd reply ''We both had Toad in the Hole'', again in the singular.

I think it's assumed there is no satisfactory plural so we construct our sentences around the singular...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • I mean I hold no portfolio to defend Gala,  but I suspect that is their office.  I am a company director,  my home address is also not registered with Companies House. Also guys this is Peckham not Royston Vasey.  Shoreditch is a mere 20 mins away by train, it's not an offshore bolt hole in Luxembourg.
    • While it is good that GALA have withdrawn their application for a second weekend, local people and councillors will likely have the same fight on their hands for next year's event. In reading the consultation report, I noted the Council were putting the GALA event in the same light as all the other events that use the park, like the Circus, the Fair and even the FOPR fete. ALL of those events use the common, not the park, and cause nothing like the level of noise and/or disruption of the GALA event. Even the two day Irish Festival (for those that remember that one) was never as noisy as GALA. So there is some disingenuity and hypocrisy from the Council on this, something I wll point out in my response to the report. The other point to note was that in past years branches were cut back for the fencing. Last year the council promised no trees would be cut after pushback, but they seem to now be reverting to a position of 'only in agreement with the council's arbourist'. Is this more hypocrisy from 'green' Southwark who seem to once again be ok with defacing trees for a fence that is up for just days? The people who now own GALA don't live in this area. GALA as an event began in Brockwell Park. It then lost its place there to bigger events (that pesumably could pay Lambeth Council more). One of the then company directors lived on the Rye Hill Estate next to the park and that is likely how Peckham Rye came to be the new choice for the event. That person is no longer involved. Today's GALA company is not the same as the 'We Are the Fair' company that held that first event, not the same in scope, aim or culture. And therein lies the problem. It's not a local community led enterprise, but a commercial one, underwritten by a venture capital company. The same company co-run the Rally Event each year in Southwark Park, which btw is licensed as a one day event only. That does seem to be truer to the original 'We Are the Fair' vision, but how much of that is down to GALA as opoosed to 'Bird on the Wire' (the other group organising it) is hard to say.  For local people, it's three days of not being able to open windows, As someone said above, if a resident set up a PA in their back garden and subjected the neighbours to 10 hours of hard dance music every day for three days, the Council would take action. Do not underestimate how distressing that is for many local residents, many of whom are elderly, frail, young, vulnerable. They deserve more respect than is being shown by those who think it's no big deal. And just to be clear, GALA and the council do not consider there to be a breach of db level if the level is corrected within 15 minutes of the breach. In other words, while db levels are set as part of the noise management plan, there is an acknowledgement that a breach is ok if corrected within 15 minutes. That is just not good enough. Local councillors objected to the proposed extension. 75% of those that responded to the consultation locally did not want GALA 26 to take place at all. For me personally, any goodwill that had been built up through the various consultations over recent years was erased with that application for a second weekend, and especially given that when asked if there were plans for that in post 2025 event feedback meetings (following rumours), GALA lied and said there were no plans to expand. I have come to the conclusion that all the effort to appease on some things is merely an exercise in show, to get past the council's threshold for the events licence. They couldn't give a hoot in reality for local people, and people that genuinely care about parkland, don't litter it with noisy festivals either.   
    • Aria is my go to plumber. Fixed a toilet leak for me at short notice. Reasonably priced and very professional. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...