A Dictionary of Food and Nutrition (Oxford Paperback Reference)

BUY FROM AMAZON.CO.UK
Price: £7.18

Usually dispatched within 24 hours

By: David A. Bender
(2 customer reviews)
Buy New: £7.18


Availability: Usually dispatched within 24 hours

PRODUCT DETAILS

Publisher: OUP Oxford
Pub. Date: 29th January 2009
Catalog: Book
Media: Paperback
Number Of Pages: 608
Ean: 9780199234875
Isbn: 0199234876

ABOUT THIS BOOK

USER REVIEWS

Probably the worst Oxford dictionary ever
~ Written on Nov 22, 2009. 1 out of 1 users found this review helpful.

Oxford Dictionary of Food and Nutrition is probably the worst 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 plenty of them: from misspelled entries and wrong definitions to the chaotic use of capitalization!

The author failed to correctly spell even the simplest foreign words which can be checked in every ordinary 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 funny (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 correct 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: "perfumed rice". The dictionary does not tell us neither whose it is (probably Japanese) nor what exactly does it mean (perfumed with what?).

Besides, the author plays at hide-and-seek much too often for a decent 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 incomparably better choise (though it lacks information on nutrition).

Informative but very academic, and traditional
~ Written on Dec 7, 2003. 5 out of 6 users found this review helpful.

I expected this book to be more of nutrition data book, but unfortunately it was not. As the title of this book said that it is a dictionary of food. If you are a teacher of home economics, you might need this, but otherwise , a little bit boring.
But it is informative, if you love to read cooking books and find some words which you do not know often, this is the book to have with you.

SIMILAR ITEMS:

Search:
International
UK US
Browse Categories