Dear John, on 2002-08-26 02.16, kilopascal at [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: <snip> > For example, if an Australian asks for a pound of ham at the > deli counter, the attendant will weigh out 500 g on a pure metric scale, > price it at 500 g and as far as the store is concerned only a metric amount > was vended. The customer who has no clue as to what a pound is, just the > use of the name, does not feel cheated if he/she did not get exactly what he > asked for based on the American concept of a pound, that is 454 g. <snip>
What you say here is not strictly so. I will use your example to explain. if an Australian asks for a pound of ham at the deli counter, the attendant will weigh out 450 g on a pure metric scale, price it at the 'per kilogram' or at the 'per 100 gram rate', and as far as the store is concerned only a metric amount was vended. The customer wants a pound. She is probably old and she knows that for her particular recipe (which her grandmother inherited from her grandmother) a pound is required. [It may also be true that she is young and that she has no clue as to what a pound is � but this is a digression]. Australian butchers have no tradition that a pound is 500 grams, so they serve about 450 grams to those who ask for a pound. They know that they are serving to a recipe size and not to an ignorant person. No doubt, in nations (say France and Germany) where 500 grams to a pound has been common argot for a century or two, the recipes passed from generation to generation have been quietly adjusted to suit the fatter pound. This transition has yet to take place in Australia, but I suppose it could. Cheers, Pat Naughtin CAMS Geelong, Australia
